Print

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

[Vector]

There should be a third one, like last time, but who, Vector, who?

Need to think about it.  You're right that we need three, because otherwise the balance of power is just bad.

That said, I can't actually think of anyone who deserves it.  Perhaps we should just forget about it for now, and say that it will be reinstated once we have three deserving people.

From these, Pandar, Toony and maybe Leafsnail are still quite active in games, yes?

Not exactly, no, and no.  Pandar used to kick the town into action as scum when the game was dying (MSPA mafia 1, anyone?).  Until he does that again, I'm going to have to say no.

[ToonyMan]

Zathras gets S vote for me.

[Eduren]

And I'm too lurky to qualify.

[ToonyMan]

I think I'm still active in games, I've been in one since forever.

[webadict]

I was actually going to do a partially subjective system. No defined rules for what constitutes A,B,C,D,F. I would still list the actual offenses (2 prods, 1 Force replace) but the letter grades would be more flexible so that if there were mitigating circumstances or behavior that couldn't be defined within the system, I could have a way to incorporate those into people's rank as I saw fit. Of course you guys would be able to provide input on this (and if I went mad with power you guys could just overthrow me).

I was going to make it semester based. Fall, Spring, and Summer. This would make bad attendance have more of an impact and would somewhat ease administrative hassle. It would also sync up with observed trends in Board activity.

One could also (with the influx of less dependable mods  ) start to keep track of shoddy modding. One thing that is the foundation of Mafia is a dependable mod and it would be nice to have some sort of incentive to treat your players right.

I was also planning on running a semi-regular Mountainous Game that, if you played and participated in well, would substantially boost your grade. With the longer Seasons, I could see this becoming a fairly important tool. And of course anybody could play regardless of rank.

Good, but you NEED to define ranks. That is a necessity. I do enjoy your time schedule, but I think my way works pretty well. Luckily, I stole dakarian's stuff and am now rewriting it to my needs.

I might have to add in the mod grade as well. That'd be nice.

Right. We should probably determine who is S-Rank. Of course, I nominate myself Vector, but is there anyone else we should add? There should be a third one, like last time, but who, Vector, who?

Well, a place to start would be the ones from the old list....

      CobaltKobold                  S               S              
      Dakarian                  S               S            ***   
      Leafsnail                  S               S            *** 1st prod   
      Pandarsenic                  S               S            **   
      ToonyMan                  S               S            **   
      Vector                  S               S            **   
      webadict                   S               S            **   

From these, Pandar, Toony and maybe Leafsnail are still quite active in games, yes? Maybe decide between themselves and end up with a top three or so that would be the new S ranks? (Wuba, Vector, plus one of the other three, maybe?)

Errr... Ninja'd.

Okay then. I'll simply remove S-ranks until there is an actual need for them. Perhaps in a month or so. Or Zathras could, I think. He does stay active and does attempt to motivate the town.

I think I'm still active in games, I've been in one since forever.

Not the right kind of active. We mean push to make the Town active.

[Mr.Person]

Gonna go ahead and drop this here:

Ideally the whole rank system would be passive and hidden so that nobody worries about their rank. In fact, it's not a measure of skill, it's a measure of attendance. Really it's actually a measure of failure to attend properly, so there's no reason to divide up "A" from "S" from "B", really, since only the most demanding of mods would bother with ranks that high. At that point, you might as well be invite-only from who you think is a good player.

Here's what matters with rules infractions; how fucked up the game was. There's no reason to try and put them into categories when the answer is simply to divide them based on what the mod had to do to continue the game.

Warnings: Not major enough to warrent any action other than the mod issuing a warning. Prods are warnings. Might also be about revealing too much info in a "bah" post, threatening to break the rules, or whatever else you kids are going to come up with next.
Minor rules infractions: Major enough to warrant a modkill or force replace, but minor enough that the game can continue in some fashion. This includes flaking!
Major rules infractions: Major enough that the mod deems the game ruined and decides to stop it prematurely. Only given out if one particular person or aligned group were directly responsible for the game stoppage. If many people were involved but none of them did anything bad enough to stop the game on their own, they get minor rules infractions only. This is so that, for instance, a bunch of flakers don't all get stuck with major rules infractions, but a group of players all teaming up to make another player lose for out of game reasons do get major rules infractions.

So personally, I think there's should be only 4 categories.

Good:
No problems whatsoever or extremely infrequent problems. 1 or 0 warnings

Average:
No major issues, but does need warnings every so often. 3 to 5 warnings OR a single minor rules infraction with 1 or 0 warnings

Not good:
Probably going to be a nuisance, but the game will be fine even if they do fuck up.. 6 or more warnings OR a minor rules infraction with 2 or more warnings OR a single major rules infraction with 1 or 0 warnings and 0 minor rules infractions

Horrible:
Probably going to ruin the game. 3 or more minor rules infractions OR a major rules infraction with 2 or more warnings OR a major rules infraction and a minor rules infraction.

Rankings should be measured in semesters. They should roll over onto new ones, but the conditions that gave the rank out in the first place should not. For instance, if in 6 months Pandarsenic gets 3 warnings for lurking, he drops to Average the moment the third warning is issued. However, when the new semester starts, Pandarsenic stays at Average but has no warnings. If he keeps having no warnings for the new semester, his rank will become Good again for the following semester. I hope this makes sense.

PPE: STOP POSTING SO FAST, JEEZ

[Vector]

Zathras gets S vote for me.

Not yet accustomed to the way things work around here, needs to learn how to keep his temper.  If an S rank player is supposed to be a model of good play, then he'd better also get a better handle on the functioning of the subforum as a whole.

That said, he was the first person I thought of, as well.  So, maybe in a couple of months.

[Eduren]

I was actually going to do a partially subjective system. No defined rules for what constitutes A,B,C,D,F. I would still list the actual offenses (2 prods, 1 Force replace) but the letter grades would be more flexible so that if there were mitigating circumstances or behavior that couldn't be defined within the system, I could have a way to incorporate those into people's rank as I saw fit. Of course you guys would be able to provide input on this (and if I went mad with power you guys could just overthrow me).

I was going to make it semester based. Fall, Spring, and Summer. This would make bad attendance have more of an impact and would somewhat ease administrative hassle. It would also sync up with observed trends in Board activity.

One could also (with the influx of less dependable mods  ) start to keep track of shoddy modding. One thing that is the foundation of Mafia is a dependable mod and it would be nice to have some sort of incentive to treat your players right.

I was also planning on running a semi-regular Mountainous Game that, if you played and participated in well, would substantially boost your grade. With the longer Seasons, I could see this becoming a fairly important tool. And of course anybody could play regardless of rank.

Good, but you NEED to define ranks. That is a necessity. I do enjoy your time schedule, but I think my way works pretty well. Luckily, I stole dakarian's stuff and am now rewriting it to my needs.

I might have to add in the mod grade as well. That'd be nice.

Meh. I knew it would be controversial but I thought I could make it work.

And not necessarily a mod grade, but just keeping track of when they fail.

[Zathras]

Zathras gets S vote for me.

Thanks, but no thanks.

[webadict]

I was actually going to do a partially subjective system. No defined rules for what constitutes A,B,C,D,F. I would still list the actual offenses (2 prods, 1 Force replace) but the letter grades would be more flexible so that if there were mitigating circumstances or behavior that couldn't be defined within the system, I could have a way to incorporate those into people's rank as I saw fit. Of course you guys would be able to provide input on this (and if I went mad with power you guys could just overthrow me).

I was going to make it semester based. Fall, Spring, and Summer. This would make bad attendance have more of an impact and would somewhat ease administrative hassle. It would also sync up with observed trends in Board activity.

One could also (with the influx of less dependable mods  ) start to keep track of shoddy modding. One thing that is the foundation of Mafia is a dependable mod and it would be nice to have some sort of incentive to treat your players right.

I was also planning on running a semi-regular Mountainous Game that, if you played and participated in well, would substantially boost your grade. With the longer Seasons, I could see this becoming a fairly important tool. And of course anybody could play regardless of rank.

Good, but you NEED to define ranks. That is a necessity. I do enjoy your time schedule, but I think my way works pretty well. Luckily, I stole dakarian's stuff and am now rewriting it to my needs.

I might have to add in the mod grade as well. That'd be nice.

Meh. I knew it would be controversial but I thought I could make it work.

And not necessarily a mod grade, but just keeping track of when they fail.

How about that be a separate part of this thread or simply a separate thread? That way, we can focus on player activity and mod activity but not both?

[Zathras]

Agreed with Mr. Person that it should be transparent and not get in the way. Also to remember that it's about attendance, not skill. Which reminds me about the Elegy post. I'll put it up in a second.

[Zathras]

Elegy's response to the last points of the previous thread:

The thread got locked right before I could post my response to your post which is probably the definition of irony.

But no, it's all about some class ranking system that would only serve to clear out this board of anyone who just wanted to play mafia for fun.

This is an interesting point. The purpose of the attendance ranking system is to encourage and increase attendance, not the contrary. Hopefully, however, it will get rid of those who cheat, flake, break games, fail to "play to win", or the like. I think this is positive. Do you agree? Does the fact that there will be an attendance board disturb you, would it decrease your enjoyment of the game, intimidate you, or otherwise make you "clear out"? Why, can you elaborate?

Firstly, I've never seen anyone cheat besides Breadbocks pretty flimsy attempt in VM2, which was hardly gamebreaking. The only thing I can see as a problem is flaking. In every game I've played recently, people just stop posting, so I try to post more to avoid the game dying, end up dropping a logical fallacy because I'm posting so much compared to anyone else and then get jumped by two or three lurkers.

It's bullshit.

But so is a ranking system. If this board had more than... uhh... A dozen or so people who post regularly, it might be feasable, but as it stands, it would just be a way for people to stroke their e-peens about how good they are at mafia based on their rank. There just aren't enough people to justify seperating us all out.

Instead, if you really need a way to stick it to people, just let GMs choose who they will and will not accept into the game, just like how players can choose which game they want to join based on the GM (hahaha never again Org). To compliment this, just make a thread called "these people suck" or something a little more polite. In it, you can say "hey this player didn't do shit except lurk, complain about schoolwork, then show up three minutes before day ends to OMGUS a town to death" and then GMs reading can think to themselves "oh well that doesn't sound like the kind of player I want!"

Also, who decides rank? I love web and vector or whoever the fuck is considered good at this game, but I don't think anyone should have the authority to decide what level another forum goer is on.

[Zathras]

And my reply...

Firstly, I've never seen anyone cheat besides Breadbocks pretty flimsy attempt in VM2, which was hardly gamebreaking. The only thing I can see as a problem is flaking. In every game I've played recently, people just stop posting, so I try to post more to avoid the game dying, end up dropping a logical fallacy because I'm posting so much compared to anyone else and then get jumped by two or three lurkers.

It's bullshit.

But so is a ranking system. If this board had more than... uhh... A dozen or so people who post regularly, it might be feasable, but as it stands, it would just be a way for people to stroke their e-peens about how good they are at mafia based on their rank. There just aren't enough people to justify seperating us all out.

The important point is that it's not a skill ranking board, separating "good/skilled" vs. "bad/unskilled" players. It's attendance, separating "active" and "lurky". This is an explicit distinction in the setup of the board. The intention is to avoid the situation when people, as you say, just stop posting.

Instead, if you really need a way to stick it to people, just let GMs choose who they will and will not accept into the game, just like how players can choose which game they want to join based on the GM (hahaha never again Org). To compliment this, just make a thread called "these people suck" or something a little more polite. In it, you can say "hey this player didn't do shit except lurk, complain about schoolwork, then show up three minutes before day ends to OMGUS a town to death" and then GMs reading can think to themselves "oh well that doesn't sound like the kind of player I want!"

That's exactly what the ranking board does. You say in your game you want "C rank or above" means that only players who have never flaked out and been forcefully replaced for lurking are allowed. But it's only about activity and reliability (non-flaky), not skill.

Also, who decides rank? I love web and vector or whoever the fuck is considered good at this game, but I don't think anyone should have the authority to decide what level another forum goer is on.

That's another point. It's objective and numerically determined. No one person sits in judgement of others, it merely tracks "so and so has been prodded twice, and flaked once"; "so-and-so has always been active and never needed a prod". Objectively and numerically. No authority figure needed.

But anyway. I'll be continued on the new thread.

[Eduren]

Face -->Palm

Don't continue arguments from a modlocked topic, just don't.

In fact I'd delete your post.

[Zathras]

Um... I asked earlier if this was right for discussion, and explicitly said he had an insightful post (as opposed to our continued combativeness); I thought I detected interest from Web...

...but if you guys think it detracts, I'll get rid of it.

ETA: To clarify, it's insightful because we need to make the point of "not skill, but only activity" clear to the board at large, or it will scare away new players. It's important that people who haven't seen the attendance board at play before not be intimidated by it. Yes?