Dear forum visitor,
It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.
ajqtrz
Chef - loquacious Old Dog
Like all good things Fellowships can be classified. Of course the classes aren't exactly scientific, but they are useful when considering joining a fellowship.
In my book there are six types of fellowships.
The Team Sport Fellowship
The Friendly Competition Fellowship
The Gardening Club Fellowship
The Training Fellowship
The One-Shot Fellowship
The Friends with Benefits Fellowship
The Team thrives and lives for the thrill of defeating other fellowships. Being number 1 is the goal and anything that can be legally done is usually done. These clubs pride themselves on organization, discipline and focus. People who join these fellowships aren't afraid to buy the resources needed to win and the leaders aren't afraid to replace the non-performers. They have strict rules, strict discipline, and a "no hold barred" to winning attitude. And they are usually at the top of the ranks. In addition they have standards. Size, level of activity, and participation are the three things they look for. That and an overwhelming drive to win. The stress level can be quite high as the pressure to succeed is constant. I have not looked, but I suspect these types of fellowships are male dominated.
The Friendly Competition Fellowship has competition but it's focus is within the fellowship. Players enter into friendly competitions over who is above whom and the like. Leadership here doesn't may care about the overall score or performance but emphasize being active above everything else. Consistently active players are sought out and their size is usually a secondary consideration. What is important is a friendly attitude toward intra-fellowship competition and a willingness to laugh if you "lose." These groups can become quite dramatic if they are not managed well. I suspect that these groups have a higher turn over rate and more drama, but also that they attract people who don't have the desire to spend a lot of real world money on the game but still want the spirit of competition. In these there is a balance of pressure and cooperation, but in the end, each player si pretty much on their own as to what their goals might be.
The Gardening Club Fellowship is about low pressure independent players who just want to build their city and progress at a comfortable pace. There is little to no pressure as each person manages their "garden," receiving tips and support from the fellowship when they need it and offering the same as they are able and willing. The casual nature of this type of fellowship lowers the drama and makes the successful fellowship more stable, as long as nobody puts any pressure on the players to do anything that asks them to experience pressure. Typically they say, "I just want to chill".
The Training Fellowship is, as the name implies, run by a relatively experienced player who loves helping others grow and succeed. This type of fellowship is leader dominated and usually the project of one or two individuals. Turnover is high as new players join and, finding the game not to their liking, leave. This does not bother the leadership much as they aren't in it to be big and strong, but to assist others in their growth. They love advising, teaching and supporting those lower than themselves. When this fellowship loses players it's usually because they've left the game or have become large enough and experienced enough that they wish to move into a larger and more focused fellowship.
The Friends with Benefits Fellowship is a few friends banding together in a more or less private fellowship. Here they quietly play together with a lot of banter and chat. They aren't interested in competing with other fellowships or with each other much, but are here for the social interaction. The game is just an excuse to be together.
The One-Shot Fellowship is started by a new player with the idea the he/she wants to be a leader. His or her vision is to start something and build it (quickly) and, in some ways, to make a name for themselves. These fellowships rarely amount to much and usually end up abandoned or perhaps taken over by a more experienced player willing to take the time to grow them.
The first two or three fellowship types probably account for the top 100 fellowships. The first probably accounts for the top 10 or so. No fellowship is probably 100% purely one type, but the more competitive it is the more likely it is to become 100% a Team Sport Fellowship since the focus is entirely on inter-fellowship competition. The last three fellowships are probably the majority of fellowships in the game, with the last one accounting for most of the inactive fellowships.
In any case, most fellowships, except the Team Sport Fellowship do not recruit by the playing style of the player, though there is naturally some things which naturally enforce the style to some degree, like size, newness of the player and the like. For this reason most fellowships have a steady turn-over rate. Players, joining and finding the style of the fellowship unclear or not what they want, leave, join another, remain independent, or leave the game entirely.
Most fellowships in the top couple hundred in rank are between the second and third fellowship types with players stretched out along the continuum between friendly competition and gardening alone. And it is in this mixture that you see the drama as leaders with a friendly competition or even team sport mentality try to motivate or inspire their fellowship to be more competitive. And, let's face it, if you are a leader you probably wish your fellowship would work together more and with more focus. Leadership tends to compete outside the fellowship, members often within it.
Finally, this isn't the only way to split the "fellowship pie" but it is useful, I think, to think about what type of fellowship you have and, if possible, to try to attract players who share your style. The more the members have the same style the less drama there is I suspect, and the less drama the happier and more fun the game.
Just a reflection on fellowship styles.
AJ
In my book there are six types of fellowships.
The Team Sport Fellowship
The Friendly Competition Fellowship
The Gardening Club Fellowship
The Training Fellowship
The One-Shot Fellowship
The Friends with Benefits Fellowship
The Team thrives and lives for the thrill of defeating other fellowships. Being number 1 is the goal and anything that can be legally done is usually done. These clubs pride themselves on organization, discipline and focus. People who join these fellowships aren't afraid to buy the resources needed to win and the leaders aren't afraid to replace the non-performers. They have strict rules, strict discipline, and a "no hold barred" to winning attitude. And they are usually at the top of the ranks. In addition they have standards. Size, level of activity, and participation are the three things they look for. That and an overwhelming drive to win. The stress level can be quite high as the pressure to succeed is constant. I have not looked, but I suspect these types of fellowships are male dominated.
The Friendly Competition Fellowship has competition but it's focus is within the fellowship. Players enter into friendly competitions over who is above whom and the like. Leadership here doesn't may care about the overall score or performance but emphasize being active above everything else. Consistently active players are sought out and their size is usually a secondary consideration. What is important is a friendly attitude toward intra-fellowship competition and a willingness to laugh if you "lose." These groups can become quite dramatic if they are not managed well. I suspect that these groups have a higher turn over rate and more drama, but also that they attract people who don't have the desire to spend a lot of real world money on the game but still want the spirit of competition. In these there is a balance of pressure and cooperation, but in the end, each player si pretty much on their own as to what their goals might be.
The Gardening Club Fellowship is about low pressure independent players who just want to build their city and progress at a comfortable pace. There is little to no pressure as each person manages their "garden," receiving tips and support from the fellowship when they need it and offering the same as they are able and willing. The casual nature of this type of fellowship lowers the drama and makes the successful fellowship more stable, as long as nobody puts any pressure on the players to do anything that asks them to experience pressure. Typically they say, "I just want to chill".
The Training Fellowship is, as the name implies, run by a relatively experienced player who loves helping others grow and succeed. This type of fellowship is leader dominated and usually the project of one or two individuals. Turnover is high as new players join and, finding the game not to their liking, leave. This does not bother the leadership much as they aren't in it to be big and strong, but to assist others in their growth. They love advising, teaching and supporting those lower than themselves. When this fellowship loses players it's usually because they've left the game or have become large enough and experienced enough that they wish to move into a larger and more focused fellowship.
The Friends with Benefits Fellowship is a few friends banding together in a more or less private fellowship. Here they quietly play together with a lot of banter and chat. They aren't interested in competing with other fellowships or with each other much, but are here for the social interaction. The game is just an excuse to be together.
The One-Shot Fellowship is started by a new player with the idea the he/she wants to be a leader. His or her vision is to start something and build it (quickly) and, in some ways, to make a name for themselves. These fellowships rarely amount to much and usually end up abandoned or perhaps taken over by a more experienced player willing to take the time to grow them.
The first two or three fellowship types probably account for the top 100 fellowships. The first probably accounts for the top 10 or so. No fellowship is probably 100% purely one type, but the more competitive it is the more likely it is to become 100% a Team Sport Fellowship since the focus is entirely on inter-fellowship competition. The last three fellowships are probably the majority of fellowships in the game, with the last one accounting for most of the inactive fellowships.
In any case, most fellowships, except the Team Sport Fellowship do not recruit by the playing style of the player, though there is naturally some things which naturally enforce the style to some degree, like size, newness of the player and the like. For this reason most fellowships have a steady turn-over rate. Players, joining and finding the style of the fellowship unclear or not what they want, leave, join another, remain independent, or leave the game entirely.
Most fellowships in the top couple hundred in rank are between the second and third fellowship types with players stretched out along the continuum between friendly competition and gardening alone. And it is in this mixture that you see the drama as leaders with a friendly competition or even team sport mentality try to motivate or inspire their fellowship to be more competitive. And, let's face it, if you are a leader you probably wish your fellowship would work together more and with more focus. Leadership tends to compete outside the fellowship, members often within it.
Finally, this isn't the only way to split the "fellowship pie" but it is useful, I think, to think about what type of fellowship you have and, if possible, to try to attract players who share your style. The more the members have the same style the less drama there is I suspect, and the less drama the happier and more fun the game.
Just a reflection on fellowship styles.
AJ
