"Veteran" Status Discussion

[Elite Ninja]

Re: "Veteran" Status Discussion

Make it more than one way to earn it then. Be a member for X years, reach X GT, have X forum posts, etc. When you reach one of those you gain vet status. Your choice on which one you want to go for.

[Frank Munoz]

Re: "Veteran" Status Discussion

2,000 forum posts? Really?
Really?
Forum posts are kind of important, but fuccing the number up to something so high that members are tempted to give crappy replies and spam isn't beneficial to anyone.
I'm not saying it can not be done, but it encourages people to want to post just to post.

[Izzy]

Re: "Veteran" Status Discussion

Should add a 4th bar under the tier point bar that indicates your ffr level and your level is increased by posting, playing and waiting. Once you get to a certain ffr level, lets say 10, then you turn into a veteran.



1 year could be 1 level and 1 billion points could be 1 level, and 1,000 posts could be 1 level.

Although it would increment in smaller portions, so like 1/10th of a year would be 1/10th of a level.

[blindreper1179]

Re: "Veteran" Status Discussion

I would say being top 1000 on any thing would be an ok requirement. 1000 for gt, or level rank, or top 100 for forum posts. You only have to GET on the list once. Though, it'll become harder over the years, but it's VETERAN for a reason.

[justin_ator]

Re: "Veteran" Status Discussion

You're right, I just threw out a number, 500 is probably plenty.

[xXAll-ProXx]

Re: "Veteran" Status Discussion

A lot of really good suggestions here.

Also I actually like the idea of having an "elitist" status. It gives the good players a little prestige.

and we can give the newcomers a "noob" status. jk

[Frank Munoz]

Re: "Veteran" Status Discussion

You're right, I just threw out a number, 500 is probably plenty.

I was thinking more of the lines of 300.
Go with the 3's ya' know?

Also, izzy's idea of the 4th bar is very interesting.
But, what happens when you reach the vet. get point requirement? Will the ffr point system keep elevating and there will be even greater things to come with more ffr points? Or will it just poof! with the vet get?

A lot of really good suggestions here.

Also I actually like the idea of having an "elitist" status. It gives the good players a little prestige.

and we can give the newcomers a "noob" status. jk

<3
lul... what if a newcomer(alt) just wrecks ffr and aaa's fgo? "Not a noob" title?

[Kibblre]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

Read Justin_Ator and my posts. That solves that issue.

Yay. I just want to stay a veteran user =P.

[Ninty64]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

I was bored and intrigued, so I did some math, woo!
I based my math off two things
1. Veteran status requires 3 years and 3Bil GT with 0 posts
2. Requirement for veteran status decreases with posts

dQ/dt = -kQ-f(m), Q = Grandtotal needed for Vet, k is the decrease in Q over time (t in years), f(m) is the decrease in Q per forum post.

=>dQ/dt + kQ = f(m)
->integrating factor: e^(kt)
->general solution: Q = (int(-f(m)*e^(kt)dt + c)/e^(kt)
..........................Q = -f(m)/k + ce^(-kt)
->initial condition: Q(m=0,t=3) = 3 Bill
..........................3 = -0/k + ce^(-k3)
..........................c = 3e^(3k)

->final solution: Q(m,t) = -f(m)/k + 3e^(-kt+3k)
just pick an equation f(m) that shows that rate at which forum posts decrease your veteran GT requirement, and choose a constant k that shows the rate of how your GT requirement decreases with time.

I chose f(m)=ln(m+1) and k = 0.75 as an example.
0 forum posts:
->0 years: 28.46 GT required
->1 year: 13.44 GT required
->2 years: 6.351 GT required
->3 years: 3 GT required

1000 forum posts:
->0 years: 19.25 GT required
->1 year: 4.23 GT required
->~1.5 years: 0 GT required

lol my math is probably too simple though

[Frank Munoz]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

I was bored and intrigued, so I did some math, woo!
I based my math off two things
1. Veteran status requires 3 years and 3Bil GT with 0 posts
2. Requirement for veteran status decreases with posts

dQ/dt = -kQ-f(m), Q = Grandtotal needed for Vet, k is the decrease in Q over time (t in years), f(m) is the decrease in Q per forum post.

=>dQ/dt + kQ = f(m)
->integrating factor: e^(kt)
->general solution: Q = (int(-f(m)*e^(kt)dt + c)/e^(kt)
..........................Q = -f(m)/k + ce^(-kt)
->initial condition: Q(m=0,t=3) = 3 Bill
..........................3 = -0/k + ce^(-k3)
..........................c = 3e^(3k)

->final solution: Q(m,t) = -f(m)/k + 3e^(-kt+3k)
just pick an equation f(m) that shows that rate at which forum posts decrease your veteran GT requirement, and choose a constant k that shows the rate of how your GT requirement decreases with time.

I chose f(m)=ln(m+1) and k = 0.75 as an example.
0 forum posts:
->0 years: 28.46 GT required
->1 year: 13.44 GT required
->2 years: 6.351 GT required
->3 years: 3 GT required

1000 forum posts:
->0 years: 19.25 GT required
->1 year: 4.23 GT required
->~1.5 years: 0 GT required

lol my math is probably too simple though

Can you reconstruct this equation into a system that determines how ffr points will be accumulated?

Just wondering.

[Ninty64]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

Can you reconstruct this equation into a system that determines how ffr points will be accumulated?

You mean the FFR points that Izzy referred to?

[hi19hi19]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

vet·er·an
n.
1. A person who is long experienced or practiced in an activity or capacity

Veteran status is for people who are long experienced with the way the FFR community works. This has been arbitrarily pegged at three years. I don't care how many billion points you got in the three days after you signed up or whatever, veteran status is for people who have been part of the community for a long time. If you joined in 2011, you haven't been part of the FFR community for a long time.
If it were called "people who contribute a lot to FFR" status or something then I can understand the argument. But it's not. It's for veterans. People who have been around FFR for a long time. End of story.

The only people I can see this argument being made for are the people who have lurked for three years and only recently signed up. Except those people don't deserve veteran status either because they're stupid for not registering earlier.


tldr; current system is fine, veteran status doesn't really mean anything anyway. it shouldn't become something that means a lot. it should mean you've been registered for 3 years and nothing more. my 2c

[Frank Munoz]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

You mean the FFR points that Izzy referred to?

Yes.

If it were called "people who contribute a lot to FFR" status or something then I can understand the argument. But it's not. It's for veterans. People who have been around FFR for a long time. End of story.

Basically this^.


The FFR point idea does have potential in the, "people who contribute alot to FFR" group, though; maybe.

[Ninty64]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

I can try. Give me a few minutes.

[shervinbmgv]

Re: &quot;Veteran&quot; Status Discussion

lol
"shervinbmgv"

Screw the ideas, im a vet now. pce.

I used this account for a few weeks then quit hahaha. this is what it means to be a vet.