Pillorian

Perhaps you could elaborate on this more. Certainly there is a significant difference between a clan and and esports organization (Cloud9, Fnatic, coL, etc). Orgs' goal is to make money and gain sponsors to fund their teams. Also in more mature leagues (like LCS) there are professional type league rules that you would expect to see in NBA/NFL. But when it comes to playing the game, there is not much difference. They play in tournaments, brackets, etc in games that support team v team lobbies/private matches. Additionally, there are hundreds of thousands of people watching esports who also play these games with their friends. Aren't these the people that should be targeted for participation in events/tournaments? Actually COD is strictly designed for public mm in mind. So much of the game has to be taken out (weapons, killstreaks, incompatible map/modes) or modified the MLG ruleset which is much different than public rules. I haven't followed it of late but heard that MLG rules have shifted towards mm rules. Over the years one thing that has shifted from map designs built for SnD (corridor) to area based maps built for Hardpoint/Dom.

Follow up questions. You mention that UF's target audience has essentially expanded to include new areas. Assuming I am correct in my understanding that the purpose of this site is to host forum based tournaments, what statistics are indicating that this is benefiting the goal/purpose of the site? Is there a raised awareness of what UF does in that new clans are starting up, are old clans are finding interested recruits who originate from the new audience, is there an increase in number of registered clans, etc? Outside of what UF is actively currently involved in (Twitch, Sweepstakes, Conventions), what can clans who previously participated in tournaments here who are not interested in participating in those things, do at UF? Especially given that the perfect game does/is not exist/active at this time. What happens if this hypothetical game never comes out? Will there ever be tournaments? You mention that the industry has gone in the worst direction, how can you explain esports getting so big that it is reaching main stream news? The Season 3 World Championships for League of Legends had 32 million world wide viewers. CSGO just beat the EU LCS in head to head viewers with a record setting 409K concurrent viewers for CS. It just doesn't make sense that it can not be tapped into in its current state. DOTA2 just held a $10M tournament. Tid bits. Just statements. We are in agreement that games have changed. I mentioned previously in this thread that the shift from Server Browsers to Match Making had a strong negative effect on clans and sites like UF. I don't understand why COD (besides being a poor game) is not capable of tournament play. It is currently the only game being played competitively on the console platform. It supports modified match rules (weapon restrictions, custom mode settings, etc), things needed for all the variety of tournaments hosted here. It's fairly obvious that a site change just days ago is not responsible for the decline. However the gradual change from /aboutold.html to current day, could play a part. I'm actually in favor of things like Hell Week or entrance tournaments as they tend to weed out the week/month-longers. Not familiar with what Starhawk brought to the table. I am aware of what Socom did. Like I said, I don't see how games like COD don't offer what Starhawk does. By this, MW3 and BO2 had clan support in through the Elite program. Thanks.

Continued: http://www.urgentfury.com/topic/27360-summer-summit-2014/?do=findComment&comment=210027

Let's try distilling this down a bit. Here are the UF related talking points I want to discuss, which originally were points to bring up in the summit. Many topics come from members of the community abroad when talking about why the overall community declined and some things I witnessed when I volunteered my time here (end of S4/BO1 to start of MW3). Noticed a strong shift from the former "Military Shooter Scenario-Based Tournaments" site to the current "Sony Exclusive" site which is a significant deviation from where UF started. A lack of identity on the front page (logos, content, etc). With websites, you have to tell viewers why they should be here (coming from 15+ years of website dev experience). Issues with how sweepstakes and prizes are handled. Would prefer clans/community on/at UF being rewarded for supporting the website instead of nonmembers. More public (and private) interfacing with community in regards to input and direction for UF as well as game related things. Improved efforts to interface with all clans and leaders. Issues with where time and resources have been focused into. More effort in terms of community related items instead of PR, advertising, and industry relations would allow a solid foundation for the community which the latter then can be built from (one foot before the other).

Noticed a overlap for the pagination container. This showed up on the Online List page.

I tend to think we need to remove petty things from the courts to stop wasting money. Unless someone gets hurt physically or financially just slap a significant fine on the kid and move on.

Actually I already did that, successfully running, to completion, several simultaneous multiplatform tournaments. I'm looking for greater challenges in my life at this time, but thanks for the suggestion. In general response: I have never understood why when someone is critical of the site or individuals here that its met with strife. There are things I don't agree with, I've stated those many times here in the past 5 years. I have my own opinions, is everyone going to agree with 100% of what I share? No. Because that's what they are, opinion, and everyone's got one. Certainly not. So what has allowed people to move past that stage and find common ground, then to go on and improve each others' experience? Humility. I made that statement about your clan, because I knew what response I would get. You delivered as expected and this will help me explain my point. My opinion of you is that you were in a average clan that never won tournaments. My opinion of your 33 week streak is that holding onto the most one sided map in Socom III, Antenora(?), can be done by any clan that has ever played here. My opinion is if that is at the top of your list, then my opinion is that it is moot. For the sake of my argument, do you know what I'm proud of? Being the only clan to sweep hell week, winning the first tournament my clan signed up for, being one of the of the only/few to win a tournament without taking a loss, owning the highest percent of territories at the half way point of a set duration tac map while also being the clan responsible for eliminating the most clans by that time as well, and having one of the in the top all-time win pct and win streaks. Does it really matter that my opinion is that I value the weight of your accomplishments less than the weight of my own? No. Do you value yours over mine, I don't know, but does that even matter, absolutely not. So why is it when myself or others engage in critical discussion with you (either) you immediately respond with your chest out, flying your NDA flag, and "super secret, can't tell, coming soon". Why is it so hard for the words "well, what do you recommend we do to improve this" or "at this time we think this is the best solution, what is your thoughts? Is there a better solution?" to come off your fingers? The problem is the discussions here never gets to that point. Even if you were to listen to members of the community, suddenly things become totalitarian and you only even listen until the NDA is signed and things are on lock down. "There are two kinds of people in the world, ones that make it happen and ones that are waiting for someone to make it happen for them" Shane Bell - 2011 Actually there are many kinds of people in this world. There are visionaries, big picture types, detail-oriented persons, there are hard workers and lazy workers, there are people who help others and people are self centered, people who can rally and people who can demoralize. You see, there is a broad spectrum of people. What actually makes a clan successful is the proper blend of those things. You need long term visionaries so you know where to go, detail oriented people to make sure things get done, you need people to rally the workers to put in the man power to accomplish your goals. This is what a clan needs to be successful. Was my clan successful? No. We had too much of the lead/rally people and not enough visionaries or workers. That's what makes the active clans today a success. I became a Ranger in '11 to lead and make change in an environment that was broken. It was an interesting experience going back to the archives in the Staff forums to find them filled with drama from literally YEARS before me. Threads chalk full of "oh we think so-n-so is cheating" is literally all that is in there. Going into it, I figured they would have been full of great ideas and action plans for recruiting clans and tournament plans. Not once did I read a post from Directors, Staff, Rangers (people who should fall into those categories) saying either of those two statement mentioned above. Who was leading? Who was rallying? I figured something like that would have been there. In fact, I was met with a brick wall drill instructor as "head ranger" who wouldn't allow me to do my job as a Ranger. I reached out to you Shane on several occasions about this and was basically told to sit down, so I said fuck it and left. By your drama statement and what others have told me about your opinion of me, is that somehow me trying to break a few walls and begin installing those qualities was causing drama? As I said you are free to your opinion, but failing to see reality because of stubbornness is simply asinine. It's been a while since I perused those forums, but I recall roughly two people before me that I found out were trying to what I was striving for. Mets and I want to say either RedOctober or Rooster (not sure, it may be neither). Both running into similar issues and ended up leaving or abandoning their efforts. It then became clear to me that everyone else in the Ranger program was there to either A) secure their position for the benefit of tournament rulings or to prevent the entrance of clans they did not like. My opinion is that this further exemplifies your lack of understanding of how people can come together and be successful as literally anyone who was in the club was allowed in. I know at many times you had a plethora of people from various communities to choose from. Why those people were never collected to put together a group of functional people is beyond me. My opinion is that because you never had any relationship with most of the communities supporting the site, you had no idea about what anyone brought to the table. Lets say that a member of a clan left a UF clan was able to form from another clan. In the span of 2 months they held rigorous 3-week tryouts, to find only the proper players for their clan, coming out with 30+ members, complete hell week with flying colors and successfully complete their first tournament. Wouldn't the smart thing to be to keep tabs on communities doing great things like that and find out what makes them successful? Perhaps touch base with them to see if any of them would like to help promote the community they support? If trying to have a conversation on these ground is so off base that it triggers a ban hammer, then I don't know what to say. I would at least hope for some potential intellectual discussion but at this point my expectations are fairly low.

You forgot to save this part, Shane.

Out of the darkness comes Darth Sidious played by John. Would it be possible to add a redirect in nginx for the URL: urgentfury.com/forum.php to /index ? Also, it may be possible to get the same look without breaking the image/java render with something in css like this: http://css-tricks.com/frosting-glass-css-filters/ . I would imagine this would reduce server load as well (unless you are caching those rendered images). I'm not sure post organization matters at this point so I'd like to reply to a few things you said, Shane. As I said, there is a vast difference between DSy and clans like 101, etc. You know, perennial clans that weren't bottom feeders in tournaments. Not only did those clans have great players, they had real leadership with passionate people. I could go into more detail for you but I'm not sure you would understand those concepts. If these "benefits" from Sony/Brady were really to benefit the community why are (for example) the giveaways not exclusive to members of the forum? Seems to me that you are using these giveaways more as a publicity tool as opposed to providing something for the people who actually support the community. Also, since I have been here I have never seen you reach out to the community for design input on games. Rangers were never offered financial benefits, I know this. But when I have multiple former staff telling me you promised them this, it is really hard to discount. Finally, if you are no longer going for the military shooter based site, why call the site Urgent Fury when Operation Urgent Fury was a military invasion/op? Great to see you and your 6 posts supporting this site and community, Doc (SamC3). Curious as to what your thoughts are of the staff sections of the site and how they are full of drama as opposed to action plans and go-getters. Sorry, forgot, NDA

It's great that the change to IBP was made, the previous install of vB was fairly broken. Granted website design has changed quite a bit over the years, what made the old site look great was the military theme. Even though it was made in a Macromedia image table-ified structure, it still looks great, given its function, even today. http://web.archive.org/web/20070716033920/http://www.urgentfury.com/ On the old version for example you have the Socom/military dude front and center, there are tanks, a slider with content that is relevant to what was going on at that time but and provided further explaination of what was on the site. With the colors you have UF orange and 3 shades of military green. You felt like you are in a military command center. This current iteration to be frank looks like a theme off of a free site. The shade of green being used on the main forum post boxes is good along with the darker shade on the post footers, but the header green on the boxes and button color looks way out of place. Way too much of a mint green in comparsion. This really is an eye sore on the profile/avatar box as the entire box is that mint color. I understand times are tough, but... Structurally there are several issues. You have the main content width for the posts and then the width for the side bar, then out of nowhere the largest breadcrum and search bar I have ever seen break the flow of the page. Also there padding inconsistencies between this and the profile area is much greater than the padding between the main content and side bar. Additionally, the frosted background image on the page header does not align with the actual page background unless you are full screen at 1080. That image needs to be centered inside the div like the page background is (using background-position: center; css property). Finally as I mentioned with the old site; I have no idea what this site is about when I'm on the front page. All I see is a orange and black logo, some basic generic links, a TON of text, what at first glance appears to be duplicate side bar contents (do you really need a box for channels and previous streams in this area?). The only hint of what UF actually is comes from the background image. And the only way you know who those characters are is if you have played those games. Yes I understand you are striving to be a Sony Playstation site with your 'partnership' but I don't even see Sony or PS logos!? Sorry for the upcoming rant, but this needs to be said given UF's new direction. From what I gather from this design, what you have stated publically and privately to myself and others on these forums, what I've seen you put your time and effort into on this site in the past and present its fairly clear to me that you have no understanding of what actually made UF great before. I really don't think you actually understand what made UF successful and brought gamers from around the world here. This is pretty evident by the fact that you never ran an actual clan--not one that is just some friends playing under a tag. I think an interesting thing I noticed was the shift from "military shooter scenario-based tournaments" to "Sony Partners" since I've been here. UF didn't need a partnership with Sony to have hundreds of people visiting this site to the point where clans had to be turned away due to physical constrains of tac map formats. It didn't need a produced show that was played to an audience of the most casual gamers (which is not the type of people that were frequenting this site). What UF had was great leadership, direction, and plenty of "do-ers" who did it for the experience not the possibility of greater financial success. Now don't confuse me with saying striving for that is a bad thing. Only that their decisions and direction were based upon what would provide the best experience. If you look at any successful businesses that have risen, they were run by people who were passionate about what they were doing. I mean, considering what you were looking at when you purchased this site. A site with tons of activity and endless amounts of clans and communities, being operated by those communities. If not for poor releases it is not unreasonable to think that this model could continue on its own, and would basically mean profits for you and your business partners. But then your workers started to get older and began loosing interest. Staff member after staff member became inactive or left until you were left with J30, Puddy, and Wolf Dog. During that time the only thing you did was keep the lights on and continue to do so, thanks for that, I suppose. I know I said to you and the other people in the staff areas that the addage "If you build it they will come" does not work here. Sure you may have agreed, but as things were falling apart you either didn't care to do anything because you didn't want to put in the effort, or, the more likely, you didn't know what needed to be done. I saw many offer their opinions and thoughts about the state of what was going on during the decline, but it was met with "NDA", ignorance, and closed doors. It is really unfortunate that you are too stubborn to realize this. When called on it, you blame other people like the Ranger program and your "workers" who were promised to one day reap a portion of the financial benefits you had hoped to realize when you acquired the site. And yet we stand here today with an average of 3-6 unique forum member visits per day and the only thing that is important to you is your self imposed personal relationships with "industry". Way to stick it to your community dude.

Welp the people who were trying to get their old accounts back on vB are now able to. But uh, I was curious if this is the final version of the skin/template for the new site? I don't want to be rude but the current theme and colors look really bad.

I have a general question for some of the leaders here. When you guys go into a match, are you always putting out your best possible line up every match, or do you consider who you are going up against?

Hey Shane, was wondering if you wouldn't mind delving into UF's plans for clan retention and recruitment? I know that the Ranger program has been responsible for some of these things in the past, but unfortunately many have failed to meet those expectations. Will there be a change to the Ranger program or will there be a global shift in those responsibilities?

A few members from various clans have provided some thought on summit threads I have posted on their sites. With that I would like to include some additional talking points for this discussion. I am going to schedule to plan to meet next weekend with members of the community. Please contact me this week if you would like to meet! The Change to Match Making from Server Browsers First being the topic of clan relations and how the games changed to match making instead of games with server browsers. Perhaps some people can chime in on this but playing with other clans is far easier in a server browser environment as people would tend to hang around specific servers. I feel like the shift from server browsers to match making has had a significant impact on how we play and interact. Benefits of Server Browsers - For recruiting clans, say you have a clan playing on US West 10 and a random clan member comes in and they hit it off maybe the clan tells this new player about the tournaments. I'm fairly certain this scenario played out in the early UF recruiting days on Socom. - For clan to clan relations, you know say clan RVN plays on US East 10 and so you can meet up and shoot em up with good friends. Overall, the server browser environment is much more friendly for what UF-type clans are looking to do. I remember in MW2, this other clan my clan played with, Next of Kin, tried to do something like this. Someone would go into a public match then everyone would join his session. We would fill up the 12-man lobby with friends and even though sometimes the teams were stacked because it would randomize the teams. Getting shot by friends was much more fun than getting shot by randoms or even just normal pub stomping. Especially with all of the broken things in MW2 it allowed us to play without OMA+M203 spam. Unfortunately, this isn't something we can really change. Games are either going to be made to support MM or with server browsers. How can we embrace this change and turn it to a positive? COD Problems Second there has been some talk about the rules and format of tournaments. I have not gotten to talk to many old guard players yet, but the players I have heard from have similar experience as myself in the COD generation. It seems it relation to COD that the size of events is a hot topic as well as settings and game modes. I'm not quite sure where I stand on the 4v4 vs 6v6+ argument. I've played in tournaments with many different settings and to be frank there isn't a ton of difference. As a clan leader, I found it to be much easier to maintain interest in the tournament within my clan when we had larger sized matches as everyone gets an opportunity to play. But as time has gone on, finding clans that can fulfill these requirements has diminished significantly. As an aside, I'm not even sure where 4v4 originated from. Yes it came from MLG settings, but why have 4v4 on a game with maps designed for 6v6+? I've never understood this. The only thing I can think of is when COD hit the scene, Halo was still very significant and it ran on 4v4. Players transitioning from Halo to COD likely wanted to replicate what they were used to. The more hot topic when I was trying to recruit clans to play here a few years ago was the HC vs Core argument. After playing S4 and more recently CSGO, I've learned something that I think benefits UF-type clans and tournaments. Before I talk about that though, I want to cover why HC doesn't work and meta-game in COD. The problem with HC is that COD as a game was simply designed to be played in the Core environment. Weapon tuning, explosive damage, etc are all designed with Core in mind. With game mechanics like how suppressors have damage reduction (over a distance), in HC a max range suppressed sub bullet can kill someone, this vastly simplifies the meta-game. As a result, the rule of thumb in HC is you want to use the most accurate (looking at you ACR from MW2/MW3) rifle or sub and slap a suppressor on it. Heck even suppressed snipers suddenly become viable. That's not fun or interesting. What makes tactical games fun is choice. You need to be equipped with the optimal gear for the map or situation you are in. Looking at Core, there are more variety in loadouts unless we are talking about guns like FAMAS in BO1 where it completely outclasses all other guns in its category. If you were to ban the FAMAS the entire inventory of viable ARs open up. COD4, one of the best in the series, had several guns that were viable but did not completely outclass others in its category. M16, M4, AK, MP5, AK74u, Remington R700 to name a few. COD in general is designed to be easy to play for new players, hence its rapid growth and rise in popularity. If you are new, you are likely to have poor positioning, so you can take a few bullets, then just hide behind cover and regain your health. Because HC is not viable nor balanced in terms of meta-game and strategy, the most balanced option I can come up with is to simply remove health regen. Which leads me into the next topic. Competitive Balance Between Clans I'm going to go out on a limb and say this has been a major issue since late SOCOM and early COD as you didn't see back-to-back championships in UF tournament history until these times. For my clan, aside from a few great innovations in strategy we had, I can safely say the reason we were very successful was due to the sheer amount of talent and younger, twitch fingers in comparison to other active clans at the time. To counter, other clans started recruiting to stack their rosters. After I stopped running my clan, I witnessed how ugly this gets as a particular team popped up where their ideology was to get as much talent as they could even if the players didn't get along. I think everyone here can agree that this is not ideal for the community abroad. After helping with Autumn Forge, I came up with some rules to discourage this type of "team" from participating in that clans participating in events need to show stability in terms of staying together under the same name and leadership as well as a stable roster. When I played with some older clans like LPK, this brought me some interesting insight to what other UF clans were going through. LPK had some players that had been in the clan for some time, but were more there for friendship as opposed to competition. It was interesting in my first S4 tournament with LPK, trying to win matches against teams with more better players. Looking back on this has brought me to the realization why no health regen is beneficial for UF-type community events. When you have a player of lesser skill, assuming they can at least acquire a target and at least put a few shots into an enemy, even though they don't get the kill they are able to contribute by damaging the opponent to make things easier for other players to clean up. With health regen, if you don't get the kill, you are not valuable to the roster. COD, as it was used here has really forced out the clans with lesser talent by only rewarding the clans with more. Also with game modes with respawn, where maintaining map control is actually what wins, a player's life is less important because they can come back and you can regain map control. With 1-life, round based modes, kills are very important as they give you more opportunities for power plays because you can then take map control and plant the bomb. Along with improved clan relations and if In-Country had been a 1-life, round based, event, my clan having more talent would have been more irrelevant, and the playing field would have been more even. Game modes of SnD, 1-life Sabotage, and 1-life TDM would have been ideal looking back with this in mind. Those are some of my thoughts along with some of the topics that have come up in reaching out to the community. What are your thoughts?

Even if we can't get a group together this weekend, I'd like to talk with some people. I will be available today to talk at 5pm EST, 7pm EST, and 9pm EST. I can be reached on skype, please message me for contact info, or on RaidCall (free). If you use another program, I will see if I can get it. - - - Updated - - - Even if we can't get a group together this weekend, I'd like to talk with some people. I will be available today to talk at 5pm EST, 7pm EST, and 9pm EST. I can be reached on skype, please message me for contact info, or on RaidCall (free).

How about the upcoming H1Z1? A 1st & 3rd Person Survival MMO coming to PS4 and PC in the fall. With the right group on a server, these types of games can be fantastic.

Here are a few of the game modes: Most of the modes are 1-life type, where you only respawn if an objective is completed. Yea it's 1st Person, but a tactical game of any POV and room for many strats is good in my book. Be it Socom or Counter Strike.

What about Insurgency?

Well for the people who have made it here, would you be interested in holding a VOIP meeting this weekend?

Personally idc what tournament sites choose to do. There have been times where we've had several sites running, trying to meet different expectations and the clans still were falling apart. Because of this, making points that this is _____ site's fault is moot. Now there is definitely some valid discussion in the type of rules and formats that have been run and if the sites are delivering what is wanted by the community. That is definitely something we can discuss. Additionally, cooperation between sites and tournaments only benefits everyone. Scheduling on top of each other doesn't benefit a small group of clans. However when the community is large this is where it become acceptable. Lets steer this discussion back to where it needs to be guys, about rebuilding clans. Over the years I've heard people say the phrase "build it and they will come." Many sites have tried it and it has not helped. That's a fact. I personally bought into that ideology as well with the projects I was involved with. Although people reading this may or may not be involved in running these sites, it needs to be recognized by everyone that clan/community building and tournaments, while they are not mutually exclusive, play a small part in this process. We need to encourage existing clans to rebuild and promote new clans from starting up. Take for example the Riz post here a few days ago. I respect Mets for his ability to keep his clan rolling for so many years, he can bring some valuable information in this discussion regarding that. But, if everyone scoops up all these potential seeds for new clans, then there will be no more new clans. Additionally, I've seen so many people leave UF-type clans to only join another UF-type clan. Just imagine if those people had started their own communities. In fact, I'm proof that doing that can lead to success, albeit we are not around now. I had a disagreement with the way that my former clan was being run, so I left and started my own. We need more stories like this happening. We need more completely new people starting up their own clans and we sure as well have enough knowledge here to help those individuals get started.Edit: Typos

All I did was play COD and ask people if they were interested in joining my clan.

Start a new clan! Recruit some new players. We need more clans and more awareness of what sites like this and others offer. If you need help setting up a clan, there are many that would be willing to help you get started.

Without a doubt, the change in clan support in titles over the years had a big effect on how clans have played and played together. The way match making works these days, inter-clan stuff isn't encouraged like it was in the early Socom(s). A result of this paradigm shift (imo) introduced why I personally experienced here with my clan. We felt like outsiders. The only time we ever played with other members of the tournament community was in events, along with the occasional pre-tournament scrimmages. Talking to people who were playing before I was, they have given me the impression that inter-clan relations were much more involved back then. Clans would host community nights and multiple players from various clans would join in. Things were rough for AieL, but I watched things get worse after we quit playing. I know having some sort of rapport with other clans would have changed quite a bit of what we experienced. Also I think the COD community in the way many are really only single-title players. I was in this camp as well. The only titles I bought between COD4 and BO1 was COD games. Since moving on from COD, I have experienced great genres like MOBAs and other multiplayer games. Additionally, I saw many clans die to age of their members. Real life catches up and video games are something that just gets squeezed out. UF always was a more "mature" community as its player base was older. Those players hit the later stages in their lives, they moved on but their spots were never filled in the community. Sites that have run tournaments afterwards were merely supporting preexisting clans. Sure a few new communities popped up but they did not last. TL;DR The way people play games has changed over the years. The older players moved on and were never replaced. Moving forward, new communities need to be encouraged to start and develop. This is likely what we need to figure out how to make happen.

Competed as: (UF) [WOLF] FrozenPaw, (UF/CT) [AieL] TheCaracarn, (UF/AF) [LPK] [iFx] i2IDIUM Clan Leader of: The AieL Sept (Former) Current Clan: None Preferred VOIP: RaidCall, Skype Preferred Time (summit): Day or Night

Due to the near complete demise of what we used to know as our competitive online gaming, I would like to organize a summit for the clan leaders of the many communities that have participated at UF and UF-like communities (Autumn Forge, Chaos Tactics, GetSomeGaming) as well as those websites' owners . The purpose of this summit is to bring everyone together to begin rebuilding what was once a great thing for gamers and communities to something greater than it ever was. Please reach out and contact clan leaders and have them post here that they would like to participate and have them post in this thread. The initial plan is to conduct the summit on a free voip program (Skype, RaidCall, TS/Mumble) on a day/night agreed upon.