Vox Contribution Points - How did it work out?

[mcdubjr]

Hi guys. I've been looking for some kind of way to manage my raid invites and stumbled across your site. I was thinking about doing something similar to VCP. As your original post on VCP is over a year old I was just curious how it worked for you and if you were still using it. Were there any things to look out for?

One thing that has me worried is the penalties for even announced absences. Let's say someone has a week off for a vacation, it's usually going to push them to the bottom of priority for the next week. Is that fair? Hmmm... Maybe, but I just hate having someone away from the team for that long.

Anyways, I'd be grateful for any extra info you could share about how VCP worked. Thanks!

[Kulldam]

VCP has worked surprisingly well for us I would say. In fact, over the years I've often found it necessary to try new methods for managing the guild/raid roster for one reason or another, but VCP has been successful and positive enough that I plan to continue using it come MoP.

Regarding the penalty for absence, there are two counterarguments I would make:

1. Mathematically, when the raid group is altered for a period (knowingly or otherwise), there must exist a penalty equivalent or greater than the "cost" incurred by both the raid group and the player in question.

In other words, if a player is absent on vacation the cost to that player for doing so must be at least the same value as they would earn for "sitting out" while available for a raid, which in the case of VCP is an arbitrary value of 1 point.

The reason is that, simply put, a player must "repay their debt" to the raid group for being absent. In the case of a player on vacation (and in 99% of all absences), he or she is actively choosing to be absent from his or her scheduled raid duties to be elsewhere. That is fine of course, but if there is no tangible penalty to the player for being unavailable to the raid group, then the player is effectively having their cake and eating it too -- putting out the raid group with his or her absence and enjoying the weekend at the beach (or what have you) simultaneously with no incurred debt.

Now the actual cost of absence of 1 VCP could of course be altered, but my belief is that any less cost would be a net gain to the absentee: A penalty of 0.5 VCP for missing a raid, for example, means the player effectively gains a raid by being gone two days of his choosing but then only sitting out one raid to make up for it, which does not seem fair to the rest of the group.

Finally I would add that it is one thing if one player of an 11-man roster is absent and you simply have the player who would have normally sat out for a raid to step in, but imagine a scenario where two players were both absent the same day (rare, but it will eventually happen). Now this places a burden on the remaining 9 players who did make the effort to show up and be available to not only find a substitute player if they want to raid, but to carry the incurred penalty of raiding with a non-core player for that given raid. I would argue that it would be unfair to the remaining 9 players to take on this burden while the two absent players are incurring no penalty and in fact are frolicking in the ocean waves, an activity they chose to do over attend the raid.

2. The entire point of a roster management system is to fairly and systematically manage the roster for the benefit of the group as a whole.

VCP, like any good management system in my opinion, tries to handle things fairly by making it very clear what the costs and benefits of both attending a raid and missing a raid are, and perhaps even more importantly, that these costs and benefits are static and therefore not susceptible to any sort of exploitation.

Moreover, when players are well aware of the penalties for absence and the rewards for a raid spent sitting out, they are much more empowered and it removes the burden of guilt on both the part of the absentee as well as the other raid members. It is absolutely understandable that a player presented with an opportunity to attend a rare concert or visit Paris would wish to do so, even at the cost of missing a raid. With VCP, both the player and the rest of the raid fully understand this is a freedom-of-choice available and therefore understand both the benefits and penalties therein.

Another positive aspect we've seen is that players can and do, on occasion, actively choose to sit out for a particular raid even if they are available to raid by swapping places with the lowest VCP player for that given date, benefiting the lowest VCP player with the ability to raid and benefiting the initiate with the ability to sit out on their own accord for one reason or another, earning themselves the bonus of 1 VCP for doing so. This can be very freeing for a player if he or she can in fact raid a particular night, but doing so would be somewhat harmful to them, such as the night before a big college exam or a potential date night with the wife.

All that said, I would strongly advise that like any system, it is only as good as the people utilizing it. Others can of course chime in with their own opinions, but as I said I think VCP has worked well for us, but that credit goes almost entirely to the people I play with and not inherently the system we use. Everyone seems to abide by two basic rules that keep it going strong: A) Raiding in this group is a privilege and something enjoyed at most times, and B) the other raiders around you are worthy of your time, effort, and respect. VCP was specifically designed to fit the needs of our particular raid and guild, and I do not pretend it to be a solution for others, though of course you may do with it as you please.

One word of caution I would offer that is not an issue with the VCP system itself, but instead simply that of my own implementation of it: I think it is important to ensure the system offers full transparency when VCP values are changed, so that players can see historically when they gained or lost VCP, on what date, and for what reason. Our current implementation unfortunately does not follow this guideline and is therefore a blind system to outsiders (anyone but me since I manage it), and while I follow the strict and clear rules as outlined in the VCP system documentation and it has worked well for us, I feel it asks a bit too much trust of the others involved of one individual in this manner, and therefore I hope to add historical changes to our own implementation for MoP.

Again, that is just my own mistake in how we display the VCP values, and isn't tied to how the system itself works.

Anyway, hope that helps...

[mcdubjr]

Thanks for the info Kulldam. Good to know it's something you've decided to stick with. I've actually gone ahead and pretty much copied your system. I don't have tardy penalties (yet...) but other than that its all the same. Our team seemed receptive so I'm optimistic.

I'm tracking everything with a publicly view-able google spreadsheet. Crude, but it does track history for each day.

Thanks for your sharing your thoughts on penalties. It does sound reasonable to me.