Possible Forum Layout?

As I alluded to earlier, voting is messy and dangerous. I would prefer to avoid it if possible.

As for the feedback thread, even having one will encourage people to nitpick and disagree. I would prefer to see TDs PM primary theory generators for feedback, rather than encouraging people to find something wrong.

My 2 cents, you can melt them down for the copper if you'd lke

You're right. Having a feedback thread will push people to look for something wrong.

I like the idea to communicate with primary theory generators. In other words other people that know what they're doing. And if everything else breaks down and you want to suggest changes you can still send a PM.

azarhal wrote:

Quote :

In that case those "foreign" threads could be linked in; but what if these threads are not very well explained etc. Should the Theory Doctor write them up again? Don't know...

Maybe once a theory is "agreeable", the original poster could clean up the OP so it is well explained. Also, if TDoc have mod rights, they might be able to clean the OP. Or we could propose a guideline for theory posting.

We can always inspire ourselves from Guild Wars build wiki

Ok, just got caught up looking at the GW Wiki. It is very nice... but I'm not sure how to implement that in a forum?

With regards to the possible one-word description element of the title, here's a reminder:

Quote :

Guild Focus (optional): You may add the adjective below that best describes your guild.

• Social
  
• Progressive
  
• Competitive

As regards the suggestion of using only the word "casual" and making it entirely optional:

• There will be an inherent implication that those guilds which don't use it are SOMETHING else, many will immediately assume the others are "hardcore".
  
• Also, having a non-uniform field IMHO is more likely to cause confusion for potential recruits learning how to read the titles.

Ignoring word-smithing details for a moment, here then is a summary of the architectural issues:

• Some words can be inherently offensive
  
• Easily understood phrases are too long for a title
  
• Option to insert only the word "casual" is likely to cause confusion and misunderstandings
  
• Factions are already in separate forums and need no tag in the title

Assuming my best Committee Chairman voice; I propose "casual+ descriptor" motion be dismissed in it's entirety. In the end we can't put everything necessary to making a decision in the top, we can only cover the broad strokes and let the guilds themselves do their own work.

For thread titles this would leave us with (please let me know if I've forgotten something):
Server [Guild Type] Guild Name

Possible guild types are simple and generic:

• [PvE]
  
• [PvP]
  
• [RP]
  
• [PvE&RP]
  
• [PvE&PvP]
  
• [PvP&RP]
  
• [ALL]

As far as I know there is only one requirement still under consideration for the top of the post:
At the top of the initial post please write what restrictions there are on recruits. These might include (but are not limited to) age 17+, level 50+, must wear fluffy pink bunny slippers while playing...

Aldemarran wrote:

azarhal wrote:

Quote :

In that case those "foreign" threads could be linked in; but what if these threads are not very well explained etc. Should the Theory Doctor write them up again? Don't know...

Maybe once a theory is "agreeable", the original poster could clean up the OP so it is well explained. Also, if TDoc have mod rights, they might be able to clean the OP. Or we could propose a guideline for theory posting.

We can always inspire ourselves from Guild Wars build wiki

Ok, just got caught up looking at the GW Wiki. It is very nice... but I'm not sure how to implement that in a forum?

We don't need a wiki.

I was more thinking getting inspiration about how to "format" the build/tactics posts.

Quote :

• Character Optimization = "The place to discuss how to get the most out of the classes."
  These forums are for performance optimization discussion and resources for each character class. (I)
  
  Theory Doctors are here to help sort through the discussions and present established theories in a readily accessible and understandable format. Like a personal physician, they are here to give you the best advice they have to offer. They also cannot force the reader to do anything. Their singular goal is to provide the reader clear and concise information so that the reader may make an informed decision. (II)
  
  Character Optimization Moderators enforce the following rules on readers, posters, and Theory Doctors alike:
  THOU SHALT feel free to disagree RESPECTFULLY. (This is the "Respect in Gaming" forum after all. )
  THOU SHALT NOT pass judgement on other people's choices.
  THOU SHALT NOT be uncivil in these discussions. (III)
  
  
  • Character Optimization: {Class} = "The place to discuss how to get the most out of the {Class}."
    This forum is for {Class} performance optimization discussion and resources. In addition to the typical discussion threads there are several threads that have been sticked for ease of access and reference:
    - - Currently Established Tactics and Builds (closed thread, maintained by Theory Doctors)
    - - Frequently Asked Questions (closed thread, maintained by Theory Doctors)
    - - Simple Questions & Simple Answers (Open thread, all are welcome to participate. Please limit yourself to questions and answers that require no more than 1 or 2 sentences. "Walls of Text" and other complex questions should be given threads of their own.) (IV)
    
    PLEASE REMEMBER: Character Optimization Moderators enforce the following rules on readers, posters, and Theory Doctors alike:
    THOU SHALT feel free to disagree RESPECTFULLY. (This is the "Respect in Gaming" forum after all. )
    THOU SHALT NOT pass judgement on other people's choices.
    THOU SHALT NOT be uncivil in these discussions. (III)
    
    
  • Iterate for all classes...

I'm backtracking a little to put together our changes. Please mention anything you think is wrong. For better reference I have given each paragraph a number.

I) Az suggested it earlier, so now I'm resuggesting it. I like the wording "to get the most out of your class".
In the second line we still have performance, which we were not entirely happy with, but I can't come up with anything better right now, so there it is.

II) I think we were all good with the "established". I suggest removing that other sentence though as it's just stating the obvious. No one would ever think that we would force people to take on builds in that forum.

III) By establishing that you have to be respectful (aka disagree respectfully) you already take care of the "don't be uncivil". Therefore I deem this point unnecessary.

IV) The first part is pretty much a copy of the first few lines and I think we all agree on CETB.

Aldemarran wrote:

For thread titles this would leave us with (please let me know if I've forgotten something):
Server [Guild Type] Guild Name

Possible guild types are simple and generic:

• [PvE]
  
• [PvP]
  
• [RP]
  
• [PvE&RP]
  
• [PvE&PvP]
  
• [PvP&RP]
  
• [ALL]

As far as I know there is only one requirement still under consideration for the top of the post:
At the top of the initial post please write what restrictions there are on recruits. These might include (but are not limited to) age 17+, level 50+, must wear fluffy pink bunny slippers while playing...

Just to have an idea, I put together a list of how it would all look like in the forums. I understand how one might be determined to think "no casual = hardcore" but when put together with the category I don't feel that it suggests that:

Quote :

Skywalker [Casual PvE] Destructor
Skywalker [PvP & RP] Cat Frenzy
Kenobi [Casual ALL] Monster Mappers
Kenobi [PvP] Stone Crush
Skywalker [PvE & PvP] Minions
Jinn [Casual PvP & RP] Make the Move
Jinn [ALL] Fudging Awe

EDIT: You know, on second thought, the thought creeps in, so I second the removal of that information in the title. A simple "Server [Type] Guild Name" will do!


As for the rest, yes that is it.


Restrictions can be just about everything. Most notably however we will probably see level restrictions.
Anyhow, I argue an extra field is not necessary for it, because the whole thing including the description is supposed to be an overview, a thing you can go over in a minute. So why not put it in the description instead of making a field that might not cut it.
EDIT: Yeah, sorry, got confused with the server event form for a minute there.
So, for guild recruitment I certainly think we should have a Restrictions line, which will often be age, or level, or maybe equipment level or whatnot.

azarhal wrote:

We don't need a wiki.

I was more thinking getting inspiration about how to "format" the build/tactics posts.

I think the last approach we talked about I like better. Not having a form for people to post their theories, the TD then picks them up if they are good, rewrites them in an understandable way and puts them in the respective AC thread (with link to the original theory thread).

TD don't have to pick theories just from within the forums btw. They can just add whatever they find useful and they somehow know from somewhere. After all the goal is to have a meaningful compilation of information.

Grome wrote:

azarhal wrote:

We don't need a wiki.

I was more thinking getting inspiration about how to "format" the build/tactics posts.

I think the last approach we talked about I like better. Not having a form for people to post their theories, the TD then picks them up if they are good, rewrites them in an understandable way and puts them in the respective AC thread (with link to the original theory thread).

TD don't have to pick theories just from within the forums btw. They can just add whatever they find useful and they somehow know from somewhere. After all the goal is to have a meaningful compilation of information.

The TDoc still need a format to use no? Although we can always wait after release to come up with one.

azarhal wrote:

The TDoc still need a format to use no? Although we can always wait after release to come up with one.

I wouldn't impose a form and leave it for the TD to come up with one. He knows his class best and he can talk with the other TD's for advice as well. They should be able to organize this, I hope.

Advice from our side would be merely vague. One thing we have already mentioned is to have them look at builds and examine what is in that build more flexible to take away for instance, to keep it open and flexible in other words.. bah, I say we'll see that later...

Thank you Grome! That compilation was next on my last. I've been clearing out the smaller problems first to "make room in my head" for it I over-slept this morning and don't have time to respond until this afternoon, but I'll at least have it rolling around in the back of my head.

As for the GW build wiki, what I was getting at was that I wouldn't know how to do that format in a forum, much less tell other Theory Doctors how to do it. (other TDs = I'm pretty sure I'll end up being TD for at least one sub-forum) If you meant the organization more than the format, then that matches pretty well with what I had envisioned, it just would be spread across several forum posts instead of linked into a wiki format.

I think we're making great progress by the way! :3

"Cat Frenzy" certainly is a cool guild name haha


You work on saturdays?

Now, I was gonna wait to get back to this matter but lest I forget it I'm just gonna do it now. (Sorry, it's gonna get really messy in here again)

We learned that header forums (forums with subforums) cannot have threads of their own, so we're gonna have to tune a few things.

Currently all our header forums are being used as forums, and we'll need to see how we move things around.

Here's the layout/order so far:

Welcome (contains outline and charter, locked)
¬ Introduce Yourself (self introductions)

General Game Disc (for every piece of game discussion that doesn't go in any of the sub-forums)
¬ Class Discussion (for mixed class discussion, that doesn't concern just one class)
¬ ¬ Class sub-forums (self-explanatory)
¬ Other game disc sub-forums (self-explanatory)

Char Optimization (for mixed class optimization discussion)
¬ Class sub-forums (self-explanatory)

Server Events {THIS I WOULD LIKE DISCUSSED, see below}

Trade (self-explanatory)

Guilds (for discussion of guild structures and mechanics and the likes)
¬ Recruitment Empire (self-explanatory)
¬ Recruitment Republic (self-explanatory)
¬ Seeking (self-explanatory) {NO EMPIRE/REP DIFFERENTIATION?}

RP/Lore (for general RP topics, planning RP, help with RP, etc)
¬ SW Lore Discussion (self-explanatory)
¬ Char Backgrounds (for the background stories of your ingame characters)
¬ Open RP (for forum role-playing)
¬ Fan Stories (for stories that take place in the SW universe you wrote)

General Disc (for general discussion that doesn't fit in any of the sub-forums)
¬ Art Display and Discussion (self-explanatory)
¬ Other Games (self-explanatory)
¬ Off Topic (self-explanatory)
¬ Aid and Assistance (for out-of-game help)

Rigger's (discuss the community, things like this thread here)
¬ Restricted Rigger's Forum (for the mods, etc)


Alright, I'll go on in the next post. This just for reference.

Basically, the big difference is that now we'll have every forum we need split in "groups" (the header forums). Indeed, header forums act now as groups in which we will put forums. The approach is different than before so we might have to switch a few things around.


Welcome (contains outline and charter, locked)
¬ Introduce Yourself (self introductions)

Solution: I'd suggest to rip this apart. I'll call this solution "merge". In other words, put it together with other things in a new group.
Please read on for now, you'll understand later on what I have planned.

______________________________

General Game Disc (for every piece of game discussion that doesn't go in any of the sub-forums)
¬ Class Discussion (for mixed class discussion, that doesn't concern just one class)
¬ ¬ Class sub-forums (self-explanatory)
¬ Other game disc sub-forums (self-explanatory)

Solution: This one seems easy to me. We create a "Game Discussion" group and we put all previous forums in it and add a "General Game Discussion" forum to it. For the "Class Discussion" group we add a "General Class Discussion" forum to it.

______________________________

Char Optimization (for mixed class optimization discussion)
¬ Class sub-forums (self-explanatory)

Solution: Easy solution here as well, as we create a "Character Optimization" group, in which we put all CO class forums and add a new one, "General Character Optimization". I think we can come up with a better name for that however. Maybe "Group Optimization" or "Team Optimization" - this is what we will mostly have in that forum, right? Please come up with better names

______________________________

Server Events {THIS I WOULD LIKE DISCUSSED, see below}

Solution: This is essentially a bigger discussion. On page 8 we had something planned but many things have changed since then, most notably we now have a event entry form on the website itself.
In my opinion, there should be two forums:
[1] a forum for the elaborate descriptions of already planned and confirmed events (that are already in the calendar). This is what the link field in the event entry form would be for. These can also be used as sign-up thread, if needed.
[2] a forum for discussing event ideas, and possibly planning them.
In other words, no segregation by type of event, but we should strongly consider tags ([PvE],...) for these forums.
SO, the solution here could be as simple as before: Just create a group called "Server Events" (you know what I'm just asking myself now? Why exactly is it called server events?) and put the two mentioned forums in there.
But I'm wondering if that is an effective way to deal with this. This is not the only group that would end up very small. I therefore suggest solution "merge" (as opposed to solution "separated"). This means take these forums that would create very small groups and put them in a group together. I'll come back to this later.

______________________________

Trade (self-explanatory)

Solution: This is a forum that would end up all alone in a group, similar to events. I suggest for this one "merge" be applied as well, lest we end up with many almost empty groups that seemingly crowd the forum. More information on solution "merge" is below.

______________________________

Guilds (for discussion of guild structures and mechanics and the likes)
¬ Recruitment Empire (self-explanatory)
¬ Recruitment Republic (self-explanatory)
¬ Seeking (self-explanatory) {NO EMPIRE/REP DIFFERENTIATION?}

Solution: I suggest solution "separated". Create a group, "Guild Hall" (or something like that), put the current sub-forums in it.
There are two things I would like you to help me evaluate:
1) I'm looking at the official tor forums now. They don't have a "seeking" sub-forum, but instead have a sticky in each recruitment forum for people to seek for a guild. Please discuss which way we should go. Another possibility is to have within the group "Guild Hall" two sub-groups: "Empire" and "Republic", which each have two forums: "Recruitment" and "Seeking". This is the model I personally favor.
2) Concerning the "General Guild Discussion" forum. It would certainly be no problem to add it, but I wonder if that forum is necessary or not. Maybe you can help me determine that. I get the feeling that this wouldn't get a lot of attention. When do you ever really discuss guild mechanics and structures? And if it's just for a couple of threads you might as well do it in the "General Game Discussion" forum. What is your opinion?

______________________________

RP/Lore (for general RP topics, planning RP, help with RP, etc)
¬ SW Lore Discussion (self-explanatory)
¬ Char Backgrounds (for the background stories of your ingame characters)
¬ Open RP (for forum role-playing)
¬ Fan Stories (for stories that take place in the SW universe you wrote)

Solution: Generally I'm going for solution "separate" here. Create a group, "RP and Lore", and put all of the current sub-forums in it. Again, I have to wonder whether the current header forum (for general RP topics, planning, questions, help) would, as a forum, be used very much. But then again, if you have a topic, a question or whatever, in this case I see no other forum that could fill the role. Or maybe put it together with the "Open RP" forum, this is what I'm considering. What do you think?

______________________________

General Disc (for general discussion that doesn't fit in any of the sub-forums)
¬ Art Display and Discussion (self-explanatory)
¬ Other Games (self-explanatory)
¬ Off Topic (self-explanatory)
¬ Aid and Assistance (for out-of-game help)

Solution: Solution "separate". Create a group called "General" (or other), put all current sub-forums in it. I suggest not carrying over the current header forum, because it feels identical with "Off Topic" (which is, by definition, everything that doesn't fit somewhere else).

______________________________

Rigger's (discuss the community, things like this thread here)
¬ Restricted Rigger's Forum (for the mods, etc)

Solution: I'd go for solution "merge" here, as this would again be a very small group. Read on for more on it.

______________________________
______________________________

Solution "merge":

The parts I have suggested for solution "merge" are these:
- Welcome
- Server Events
- Trade
- Rigger's

I'd create for these a new group, called maybe "Community" or simply "RIG" in which all these forums would find their place.
I would move this group to the top.

Now, unfortunately I find myself in a hurry after all this writing and I'll have to go. I'll explain "merge" more closely and make a visual form of my envision of the new layout for better understanding later. For now you'll have to do with this mess

Grome wrote:

Basically, the big difference is that now we'll have every forum we need split in "groups" (the header forums). Indeed, header forums act now as groups in which we will put forums. The approach is different than before so we might have to switch a few things around.

The top level forums that we lost should have been catch-all type forums. When I said that this was easy to work around I was thinking that all we need to do was re-add a General Discussion type of forum to each section to replace the lost top-level forum.

Haven't had time to go through your list yet and verify that though.

Grome wrote:

I think we're making great progress by the way! :3

"Cat Frenzy" certainly is a cool guild name haha


You work on saturdays?

Yeah, I was worried for a bit there when we started cycling arguments back into the conversation, but I think the reset (painful though it was) has got things moving forwards again.

I also like Feline Shenanigans, Feline Sanity, and few others along those lines...

No, I don't work Saturdays but I spend 3-5 hours training / assisting with classes in a survival based martial art. I train Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday as well which is why I don't get a lot of time to spend here in the middle of the week. Then there are the events which eat 6-8 hours of active training + setup time which happen about once a month. That can be either Saturday or Sunday. If I then go hang out with real-life friends (some geeks have them, who knew? ) time can be a very precious commodity...

Quote :

• Character Optimization = "The place to discuss how to get the most out of your class."
  These forums are for performance discussion and resources for each character class. (I)
  
  Theory Doctors are here to help sort through the discussions and present established theories in a readily accessible and understandable format. Like a personal physician, they are here to give you the best advice they have to offer. Their singular goal is to provide the reader clear and concise information so that the reader may make an informed decision. (II)
  
  Character Optimization Moderators enforce the following rules on readers, posters, and Theory Doctors alike:
  THOU SHALT feel free to disagree RESPECTFULLY. (This is the "Respect in Gaming" forum after all. )
  THOU SHALT NOT pass judgement on other people's choices. (III)
  
  
  • [b]Character Optimization: {Class} = "The place to discuss how to get the most out of the {Class}."
    This forum is for {Class} performance optimization discussion and resources. In addition to the typical discussion threads there are several threads that have been sticked for ease of access and reference:
    - - Currently Established Tactics and Builds (closed thread, maintained by Theory Doctors)
    - - Frequently Asked Questions (closed thread, maintained by Theory Doctors)
    - - Simple Questions & Simple Answers (Open thread, all are welcome to participate. Please limit yourself to questions and answers that require no more than 1 or 2 sentences. "Walls of Text" and other complex questions should be given threads of their own.) (IV)
    
    [b]PLEASE REMEMBER: Character Optimization Moderators enforce the following rules on readers, posters, and Theory Doctors alike:
    THOU SHALT feel free to disagree RESPECTFULLY. (This is the "Respect in Gaming" forum after all. )
    THOU SHALT NOT pass judgement on other people's choices. (V)
    
    
  • Iterate for all classes...

I) Overall I like it, just a couple of minor refinements suggested:

• I changed "the classes" to "your class", how does it sound to you folks? It might imply that you are limited to talking about "your class" only, but I don't think that people will limit themselves even if they pick up on that implication. So I think its a non-issue.
  
• I think we could get away with just killing the word performance there and just call it optimization.

II) Agreed.

III) Agreed.

IV) Agreed.

I've also colored all the paragraph numbers in red for future removal.

I think the form interrupted the visual flow making it hard to realize there were a large number of related forums. Here's a simplified reminder of what we had planned for events forums.

• Server Events Summary = "A summary listing of events. Please use the form provided. Sub-forums by event type for details."
  Planned events of all types should have a summary listing posted here with a link to the full description and any signup thread in the appropriate sub-forum. PLEASE USE THE FORM PROVIDED BELOW. Moderators will enforce reasonable usage of the form. This is NOT the place for event details or discussions.
  
  • RP Server Events = "The place for RP related event announcements, signups, and discussion."
    The place for RP related event announcements, signups, and discussion. Announce your RP events here and create links in the summary thread back to these announcements.
    
  • PvE Server Events = "The place for PvE related event announcements, signups, and discussion."
    The place for PvE related event announcements, signups, and discussion. Announce your PvE events here and create links in the summary thread back to these announcements.
    
  • PvP Server Events = "The place for PvP related event announcements, signups, and discussion."
    The place for PvP related event announcements, signups, and discussion. Announce your PvP events here and create links in the summary thread back to these announcements.
    
  • Crafting Server Events = "The place for Crafting related event announcements, signups, and discussion."
    The place for Crafting related event announcements, signups, and discussion. Announce your Crafting events here and create links in the summary thread back to these announcements.
    
  • Leveling Server Events = "The place for Leveling related event announcements, signups, and discussion."
    The place for Leveling related event announcements, signups, and discussion. Announce your Leveling events here and create links in the summary thread back to these announcements.
    
  • Community Aid Events = "The place for event announcements, signups, and discussion for helping the Community."The place for Community related event announcements, signups, and discussion. Announce your Community events here and create links in the summary thread back to these announcements.
    

As to why it is "Server Events"... mostly because the title never got any discussion and things have evolved a bit since I originally thought about it. At this stage I think I would recommend "Calendar Events".

Aldemarran wrote:

• I changed "the classes" to "your class", how does it sound to you folks? It might imply that you are limited to talking about "your class" only, but I don't think that people will limit themselves even if they pick up on that implication. So I think its a non-issue.
  
• I think we could get away with just killing the word performance there and just call it optimization.

* I think "your class" works very well here.

* Surprisingly, that works. So instead of anything with "performance" we simply call it "optimization" in paragraph 1 and 4.

Aldemarran wrote:

Grome wrote:

Basically, the big difference is that now we'll have every forum we need split in "groups" (the header forums). Indeed, header forums act now as groups in which we will put forums. The approach is different than before so we might have to switch a few things around.

The top level forums that we lost should have been catch-all type forums. When I said that this was easy to work around I was thinking that all we need to do was re-add a General Discussion type of forum to each section to replace the lost top-level forum.

Haven't had time to go through your list yet and verify that though.

I realize we could do just that. But that would not be very visually appealing, as it would create a very overloaded looking forum. For instance the trade forum would instead of occupying just one "line" occupy two, one being a "header" which sort of cuts off things. I'm trying hard to make a point here but the bottom line is probably that it is not very effective and quite room consuming.

Grome wrote:

...
I realize we could do just that. But that would not be very visually appealing, as it would create a very overloaded looking forum. For instance the trade forum would instead of occupying just one "line" occupy two, one being a "header" which sort of cuts off things. I'm trying hard to make a point here but the bottom line is probably that it is not very effective and quite room consuming.

Valid points on the overwhelming nature of so many sections. A brief look at your "merge solution" seemed pretty good.

Aldemarran wrote:

I think the form interrupted the visual flow making it hard to realize there were a large number of related forums. Here's a simplified reminder of what we had planned for events forums.

(...)

I'm very aware there was such a sub-layout idea. However, I expressed that I feel that is not appropriate (anymore) for what we need. I'm not sure if you had the time to go through my wall of text yet? I'll just quote the part...

Quote :

Solution: This is essentially a bigger discussion. On page 8 we had something planned but many things have changed since then, most notably we now have a event entry form on the website itself.
In my opinion, there should be two forums:
[1] a forum for the elaborate descriptions of already planned and confirmed events (that are already in the calendar). This is what the link field in the event entry form would be for. These can also be used as sign-up thread, if needed.
[2] a forum for discussing event ideas, and possibly planning them.
In other words, no segregation by type of event, but we should strongly consider tags ([PvE],...) for these forums.
SO, the solution here could be as simple as before: Just create a group called "Server Events" (you know what I'm just asking myself now? Why exactly is it called server events?) and put the two mentioned forums in there.
But I'm wondering if that is an effective way to deal with this. This is not the only group that would end up very small. I therefore suggest solution "merge" (as opposed to solution "separated"). This means take these forums that would create very small groups and put them in a group together. I'll come back to this later.

I'm going to try to make my "vision" more visual now...
I'll write down the layout as it would look like.

Character Optimization
Multiplayer Optimization perhaps?

Grome wrote:

Guilds...
Solution: I suggest solution "separated". Create a group, "Guild Hall" (or something like that), put the current sub-forums in it.
There are two things I would like you to help me evaluate:
1) I'm looking at the official tor forums now. They don't have a "seeking" sub-forum, but instead have a sticky in each recruitment forum for people to seek for a guild. Please discuss which way we should go. Another possibility is to have within the group "Guild Hall" two sub-groups: "Empire" and "Republic", which each have two forums: "Recruitment" and "Seeking". This is the model I personally favor.
2) Concerning the "General Guild Discussion" forum. It would certainly be no problem to add it, but I wonder if that forum is necessary or not. Maybe you can help me determine that. I get the feeling that this wouldn't get a lot of attention. When do you ever really discuss guild mechanics and structures? And if it's just for a couple of threads you might as well do it in the "General Game Discussion" forum. What is your opinion?

1) I can see using the stickies for people seeking guilds. It would certainly save on forum space. And I really don't see there being that many "seekers" as I expect them to simply use the recruitment forums. The one concern I have is that a seeker might want to look at both factions and not have a common forum to post in. I suppose they could just post in both.
2) The General Guild Discussion Forum is for discussing things like guild creation, guild management, guild resources, and the general discussion of guilds, rather than recruitment.

Separate Solution:
I believe I agree with all the forums groups you called for separate catagories.

As for the Events forums: We can certainly have sub-forums for each type of event. I'll just throw in the idea of no sub-forums and instead just tags for the type instead. Which way is better really depends on how much activity we expect there.


Alright, here's the envisioned layout I was talking about.
Top layer is the "groups" (bold and underlined).


RIG {this is the merge solution, first draft}
¬ Forum Guidelines
¬ Introduce yourself
¬ Events (group)
¬ ¬ Events forums (whatever we finally agree on)
¬ Trade
¬ Rigger's
¬ Restricted

Game Discussion
¬ General Game Discussion
¬ Game Story Discussion
¬ PvE Discussion
¬ PvP Discussion
¬ Class Discussion (group)
¬ ¬ General Class Discussion
¬ ¬ {Class} (for each class a forum)
¬ Crafting Discussion
¬ Leveling Discussion
¬ UI & Add-On Discussion

Character Optimization
¬ General Character Optimization
¬ {Class} Optimization (for each class a forum)

Guild Hall
¬ Empire (group)
¬ ¬ Recruitment
¬ ¬ Seeking
¬ Republic (group)
¬ ¬ Recruitment
¬ ¬ Seeking

RP & Lore
¬ Star Wars Lore Discussion
¬ Character Backgrounds
¬ Fan Stories
¬ Open RP and General RP Discussion

General Discussion
¬ Aid & Assistance
¬ Off-Topic
¬ Other Games
¬ Art Display

Aldemarran wrote:

Character Optimization
Multiplayer Optimization perhaps?

Let's see, it is character optimization that concerns more than one class, so yes, multiplayer (character) optimization makes good sense. For now it's certainly the best I've heard!
What about "General Optimization Discussion"?

Aldemarran wrote:

1) I can see using the stickies for people seeking guilds. It would certainly save on forum space. And I really don't see there being that many "seekers" as I expect them to simply use the recruitment forums. The one concern I have is that a seeker might want to look at both factions and not have a common forum to post in. I suppose they could just post in both.
2) The General Guild Discussion Forum is for discussing things like guild creation, guild management, guild resources, and the general discussion of guilds, rather than recruitment.

1) As for the issue of people wanting to seek across the two factions. I think this is really a very small minority, which in the case it was really needed could still post on both sides.
In my post above I have "seeking" as an own forum but I'm certain these would not get a lot of attention. Question is therefore: Just a sticky instead? My fear is that this would get a little in the way of a good overview. If you're looking for members (as a guild) you'll want some overview too, right?
2) I pretty much know what that General Guild Discussion Forum is for. I'm just pondering over its use. I reckon it would not be used a great deal, so should we keep it, or should discussions of that kind be moved into the "General Game Discussion" Forum up in the "Game Discussion" group? I have no clue, help me figure it out.