Avatar

Fire Team Reservation Etiquette - builder changes? (Destiny)

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Friday, January 30, 2015, 13:31 (3345 days ago) @ Earendil

Do we have anything like etiquette yet? It seems to me that the etiquette I envision being the norm, is at conflict with the way the builder works. I was going to write this post as a change request to the builder, and decided I might want to check my worldview against the communities before doing so :)

Example, Let's say you have the following for a 3 person strike:

1. Committed
2. Tentative
3. Committed
4. Committed

If everyone ends up showing up, who does etiquette dictate should play? Does #2 get to play, or does #4?

How about this one:

1. Committed
2. Tentative
3. Tentative
4. Tentative
5. Tentative
6. Tentative
7. Committed

Should #7 expect to play, or not?

If #7 isn't guaranteed a spot, what's his/her motivation for showing up? My feeling is that the first committed players should get first dibs. But I don't know if that matches everyone else's idea.

Currently the builder lists players in the order that they RSVP. This is helpful, since I believe etiquette rule #1 is first come first serve. Where it gets tricky is that the Tentative players aren't ordered differently. On top of that, a person can change from Tentative to Committed. So in the 7 person example above, all those players could change to Committed 5 minutes before the event starts.

In conclusion, do we believe that a tentative RSVP holds the same place and value as a committed RSVP? Depending on what people think, I'll ask Beorn to oh-so-kindly change it to match etiquette. i.e. have all committed players listed first, in the order they RSVP, and all tentative players listed last, in the order they RSVP.

As an aside, I'm not looking for a rule that trumps players ability to be decent human beings, allow friends to play together, or allows someone to demand a spot when no one wants them. We're all grown ups here, and some of us even act like it, so don't take this conversation as an attempt to implement a rule :)

I like how it works now, and prefer not to think too much about it or define an etiquette explicitly, although I generally agree with the first come, first serve model. As is we get to see who expressed interest first [full stop].

I see a problem in that players who have little intention of playing saving spots they don't really need, but they could circumvent that by just not using the tentative check box if they don't want to get bumped to the end of the line.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread