Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vector]

So, I don't know if y'all have been paying attention to the arguments over at the end of Kingmaker, but it has become evident that the DF forums are currently having a few problems with flakers and dying interest in games.  It seems that this may be mainly due to poorly matched supply and demand; that is, the supply is too high at the moment.

As such, I would like to make a proposal.

1. That there be some games which are always run as long as mods for them exist.
     a. Paranormal, because it seems to be an expert game everyone enjoys
     b. Beginner's, because it is good for Mafia to be accessible and to have a game for learners

2. That some number of serial games be placed on rotation
     a. Examples include Vote, Toon, and Weirdo Mafia
     b. Suggest that only two games be run at a time
     c. A thread shall be constructed with polls to vote for the next game to go up as various games end

3. That some number of new games be placed on rotation
     a. Examples include Quantum, Systematically Make Others Lose, and Ridiculous Mafia
     b. Suggest that only one or two games be run at a time, for a sum of 16 players or so
             i. Test games should probably be smaller, in most cases
     c. A second thread shall be constructed with polls to vote for the next game to go up as various games end

4. That flakers be banned for some period of time
     a. In most cases, for the next game run
     b. Examples of flaking, as opposed to typical lurking, are:
         Jack_Bread in Weirdo Mafia I
         Org, in the last little bit
         Myself in Paranormal 9

5. That replacements become more of a solid institution
     a. If a game is over-filled, the additional players be automatic replacements should someone flake
     b. The Mafia subforum gains its own replacement thread


In summary:

We limit the number of games played at a given time
We ban flakers for a short time, and longer if they persist after a cluster of bans
We try to keep games on the small side, so people can't lurk/flake as easily
We take overflow players as replacements, should players be persistently inactive
We create a Mafia-Subforum replacement thread

Opinions?

[webadict]

I request that we ban certain people who tend to flake fairly often.

Those I namely want gone:
Archangel
Kashyyk

Then there are those who tend to be gone every once in a while:
Org

More will come.

[Mephansteras]

Hmmm..question for the people who flake regularly: Would a game with longer-running day/night phases be easier for you to play?

It's possible that some people like to play mafias but just don't have the time to actually get on and post every day. It might be useful to have a game that has longer then usual day/night periods and a more sedate pace then our usual 2-3 real day per phase games.

Also, I think people should be a bit more careful about joining games. If you're already in 2 or 3 games, think before you join another one. Are you going to have time to be active in it? Is joining this game going to reduce your participation in other games?

Obviously some people have more time then others and 3-4 games might not be a big deal for them, but I think some people need to be careful about how much they agree to take on.

I also think people need to calm down a bit about people who lurk. Just because someone hasn't been able to get onto the boards for a day or two isn't cause to scream about banning them. Life happens, and much as we all like these games they're just that. Games. And slow-paced internet games at that. They shouldn't take precedence over real life issues that come up.

[Mr.Person]

I would recommend that most mafia games be limited to, at most, 13 players and the days should be much longer, like at least 5 real life days.

Aaaaand, Mephansteras gets in ahead of me. Well, he's right, so no big deal.

[Vector]

I request that we ban certain people who tend to flake fairly often.

So, at this point I'm trying not to institute full-on bans before people have been partially banned.  The hope is that their behavior will improve under the new system.  That way, we will hopefully be able to have a large number of skillful Mafia players running around here.  Plus, I feel that Kashyyk has been improving in the past bit, so it would be unfair to him to go ban him right off the bat.

Also, I think people should be a bit more careful about joining games. If you're already in 2 or 3 games, think before you join another one. Are you going to have time to be active in it? Is joining this game going to reduce your participation in other games?

I also think people need to calm down a bit about people who lurk. Just because someone hasn't been able to get onto the boards for a day or two isn't cause to scream about banning them.

The problem is that people are notoriously bad at regulating themselves, so it might be a good idea to limit the number of games in hopes of generating activity.  Plus, I mean "temporarily exclude from the next game," not perma-ban.  Missing days here and there due to real life is one thing.  Sitting out from an entire game without any warning is another.

I would recommend that most mafia games be limited to, at most, 13 players and the days should be much longer, like at least 5 real life days.

I agree with the small games, but I'm worried that days going that long would completely kill activity.

[Mephansteras]

I agree with the small games, but I'm worried that days going that long would completely kill activity.

Yeah, I think that depends on the game. Wizard Duel seems to be doing well with shorter days, for example. But I think having at least one 'casual' game running with longer cycles would be helpful for people who tend to be busier and unable to post as often.

[Vector]

I agree with the small games, but I'm worried that days going that long would completely kill activity.

Yeah, I think that depends on the game. Wizard Duel seems to be doing well with shorter days, for example. But I think having at least one 'casual' game running with longer cycles would be helpful for people who tend to be busier and unable to post as often.

Yeah, that sounds like a good idea.  I was wondering about limiting the number of games, however--do you think that would solve the problem, or would it just make people mad?

[Mephansteras]

Well...I think it's a matter of looking at the number of players and the number of games running. The odd thing about mafia games is that you lose players as time goes on by default. So even with, say, 4 games running we could still have a lot of people sitting around waiting for a new game to start.

So, rather then any strict limit on the number of games running I think we should instead be good mods and just not start new games if there are a lot of active games fairly early on in their cycle. Perhaps simply start the sign-up process and then set a reasonable-guess starting date based on the current load of games.

[Vector]

Ah-ha, that sounds like a much better idea.  I'd go with that, then.

So, right now, we have:

Smaller games
Mod-regulated restrictions on number of games
A game or two with longer cycles
Self-regulation on joining games
Short bans?
Mafia Subforum replacement thread?
Player overflow set to become replacements, if needed?

(Also, how do we rename topics?  I realized this one looks like the discussion thread for Leaf_snail's game)

[Mephansteras]

Just edit the OP and change the subject.

[Rysith]

Hmmm..question for the people who flake regularly: Would a game with longer-running day/night phases be easier for you to play?

It's possible that some people like to play mafias but just don't have the time to actually get on and post every day. It might be useful to have a game that has longer then usual day/night periods and a more sedate pace then our usual 2-3 real day per phase games.

So, I don't feel like I flake, but I do feel like I tend to lurk excessively, because I can (absent really active discussion) post at most two or three times a day. Lengthening the days might help, but at the same time I'm hesitant to ask for general day-lengthening since it seems like the more active people would end up bored.

Also, I think people should be a bit more careful about joining games. If you're already in 2 or 3 games, think before you join another one. Are you going to have time to be active in it? Is joining this game going to reduce your participation in other games?

I was actually thinking that since (as Vector said) people are bad at self-regulation, it might be good to impose a limit on the number of mafias that people are allowed to be active in at a time, even if it was only a soft limit. Something like approval of mod beyond two games, or some such.

I also think people need to calm down a bit about people who lurk. Just because someone hasn't been able to get onto the boards for a day or two isn't cause to scream about banning them. Life happens, and much as we all like these games they're just that. Games. And slow-paced internet games at that. They shouldn't take precedence over real life issues that come up.

I definitely agree with that.

[dakarian]

I'll state this right away: 48 hours is not enough time for a normal mafia.  Although each game works differently, we do need to think of allowing for a longer day.  The mod could always do an early deadline if needed.  I think that's more just a judgement on the mod than any set rule here.  Let's just stop trying to force a 48 hour rule and, instead, judge by the game we're playing.  For example: I'd set beginner at 3 days while Religious would be at least 4 days if not more.

I don't agree with the "total number of games we can play" though.  I don't think we've had a case of people who were active in some games but not in others.  Either they are active in all or flaking them all.  A game limit won't change that. 

Excluding Para and Beginner, the matter, I think,  may be about interest.  If there was a way to determine how many people would be interested in joining a game before posting a new thread.  So long as there's demand for all of the game, it's ok to have that many, BUT it'll be good to be able to judge interest before ending up with a dead thread.

[webadict]

Yes, but the problem with longer Days is that it's noticeable that no one wants to be there. I would love to lengthen Days (it's a lot less work for me...) if people were active enough to allow it. I believe that time limits at least give people an incentive to say things.

And it's not those people that tend to lurk. I know they're there. It's the people who say in on a game and then disappear after the first Day. They make me angry!

[Vector]

Bah, ninja'd by Webadict.

I don't agree with the "total number of games we can play" though.  I don't think we've had a case of people who were active in some games but not in others.  Either they are active in all or flaking them all.  A game limit won't change that.

Not true.  I've caught myself flaking on Paranormal while being active in Toon (Though of course, everyone was trying to kill me in Toon and no one cared in Paranormal).  I also think that we're not just addressing flakers.  We're addressing the fact that games with lots of players, many of whom may be generally active, tend to die out.  This is why we need some kind of limit, or some kind of conference on how to make Mafias more interesting, or something.  This is also why I'm suggesting the size-reduction for most games, because that forces players to interact much more.

And it's not those people that tend to lurk. I know they're there. It's the people who say in on a game and then disappear after the first Day. They make me angry!

Yeah, this.  People who persistently do this should be dissuaded from playing, because it just ruins the game for others.  I understand it when people have other things to do and can only post a couple times per day, at the most.  I understand when people suddenly have something come up they didn't know about.  I understand lurking as a strategy.  It's just stupid, however, when people start the game, stop paying attention to the game almost immediately, and make things bad for other people as a result of their flakery.  They clearly don't care, so why should the minor bans not happen?

[webadict]

I agree that smaller games leads to increased activity. the only problem is that flakers ruins those games MORE significantly, which is why I would want to instill some sort of ban on flakers, especially those that constantly do so.

Maybe that Karma system:
While positive Karma has no real effects, negative Karma could be used to blacklist you from games (I want people with at least 5 Karma, or those without negative Karma. Perhaps even some games accepting negative Karma players as a means of redemption.) I think some way of distinguishing differences between them and those that play regularly (People like chaoticjosh, Pandarsenic, Alexhans, Mr.Person, ToonyMan [I don't know how but he manages to come up with crap], etc.) will make at least a noticeable difference. I'm not saying that negative Karma should be easy to get. If something comes up, that's also understandable, but leaving with no reason several times is not.