MafiEra Season 11 Mini Review |OT| Buffy Wars

[Sawneeks]

Edit:
Hey everyone! So, we threw together a Poll here to see where we are at with some of the hot topics. Once we get the general idea of which direction people want the most we can make changes based on that.

Thank you again everyone for chiming in!

We've put the review thread on OM because we understand that there will be some discussion on the site moderation, and we don't want to have that discussion on Era.

Normally our Review Threads come at the end of Seasons but due to some pressing topics of the last two Main Season games we’re holding a ‘Mini Review’ in the meantime. Feel free to add any other topic, concern, or comment that isn’t listed here that you wish to discuss.

Buffy Mafia:

With moving to Era, there have been some things that have affected how we run this community. Site Moderators and Administrators have become players, and while ResetEra has largely the same rules as GAF did, there are some small adjustments.
It’s fine to discuss GAF during games, because we all largely came from there and most of the community’s history (and meta) stems from there. The issue comes when we are referencing things like bans, PMs, and the like, and using that to make decisions in-game. PMs are already not allowed between players during games, so that’s not much of a change. Digging into off-site information leans towards the “internet detective” side of things, which is disallowed on ResetEra. While we can’t escape the meta of our players, please keep it to referring to old stuff, rather than directly linking to it or considering PMs or bans.

We have some members of the MafiEra community who also fall under the ResetEra site staff umbrella. They give us a place to play our games and recruit, and we’re generally good at self-policing. That said, they do have an overarching role with the site and that may sometimes conflict with some aspects of the game (i.e., warns/bans on players). To that end, if anyone has ANY issues with how another player is acting, whether they’ve broken a site rule or a Mafia rule, please contact the game-runner PRIVATELY, so you don’t derail the thread. Grizzly and Hecht will most likely be the ones in the future to handle site moderation for Mafia if at all possible, but in their absence it may go to any other member of ResetEra moderation. We want the community to be open to anyone who wants to play, staff included, but we also don’t want there to be any perception of a conflict of interest. As such, gamerunners will talk to ResetEra moderation (those not playing) to determine the best course of action.

Please be aware, Discussing the moderation of ResetEra on ResetEra derails threads and is against the Terms of Service. Please PM a moderator or an admin on ResetEra if you have any issues with ResetEra moderation, as public discussions will derail a thread and they will end up locking it. Discussion that takes place with regards to moderation on ResetEra is fine in Outer Mafia and Discord Server as they aren't part of ResetEra, and thus the site rules are not applicable.
Referencing past games, where they were played, and a user's past playstyle is permissible, provided that no posts from other websites are being quoted or linked. If you go past that into internet detective territory such as discussing a user's ban on another website, you are breaking the site rules.​

Console Wars:

A large discussion around Console Wars was activity. During a point in the game nearly 70% of the current players were under the 10 Post Count Minimum and activity stalled. What are some ideas or suggestion that can be done about this? Should we be stricter on people unable to meet the Post Count Minimum?​

General:

We’re going to be adding a Rule that Votes or Commands can not be outside of the default Font Size and Font Family in order for it to be counted by the Vote Tool. However, there has been talk about extending this to encompass all in-game related posts. Should we keep it strictly at just Votes/Commands or ban all Font Size and Font Family changes?​

A thank you to everyone who worked on this Mini Review Thread as well as a thank you to the Players and Gamerunners of the Main Season games and all those who helped when problems arose.

Edit: This Thread is for discussion of games that have ended, discussion of Buck Bumble Mafia is not permitted as it is currently running. If you have any questions/concerns about that game please PM a Mafia Mod/Overseer.

 

[SweetNicole]

I shared this in the Buffy spec thread, but I am posting it here as well for constiency.

________

I want to apologize for the incident I caused in the Buffy mafia game. It is not acceptable to advocate for the mod kill of another player in a game thread like that, and I should have been mod killed for doing so. Although I have played games like Town of Salem before, I am still new to play by post mafia games and to what is permissible in a game thread. It is clear that my arguing for a mod kill was unacceptable.

I am sorry for any enjoyment my actions removed the game for both the other players, game runners, and spectators. Mafia is at the end of the day game played for fun, and my actions have certainly removed some of the fun out of what otherwise would have been pretty fun, crazy game. As there is no way I can apologize personally to each and every one of you, I hope this apology will suffice.

Furthermore, there was no ill intent on my part. I did not intend nor try to use my position as an administrator to influence the outcome or change the state of, the game. Looking back, I can see the perception that my actions give off, and if I were in your shoes, I probably would be concerned about the same thing too. I am sorry for any negative perceptions my unacceptable actions gave off.

I hope you can understand that even though ResetEra staff strives to be better, I am still human, and like any human, I make mistakes. I will be working with Hecht, Grizzly, and Brazil to help ensure we can avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest when ResetEra staff is involved in a mafia game to ensure that anything like this does not happen in the future.

Apologies,
SweetNicole

 

[cabot]

Yeah so what I got from Buffy was that the rules could be re-worded a bit to eliminate ambiguity.

Mainly these two points:

Re-word rule #5 to ensure no verifications/proof of activities outside the game are acceptable behaviour.
What Gorlak did in Buffy didn't sit right with most players and led to the RE staff intervention.It was accepted by monkey/myself because a similar thing happened in the invitational which was never raised as an issue after that game. Eliminate the ambiguity in this rule so this stuff is definitely forbidden.

Make Rule #3 clearer to make it explicit that posting Role PMs is forbidden.
Feedback from Include was that this rule could be improved to emphasize that posting Role PMs is not allowed.


For activity:

I'd say be harsher with post restrictions, currently it's two strikes and you're out?

Make it one strike, unless a player approaches a mod during the day phase in question with a heads up / reason they won't make the post count requirement.

 

[Brazil]

There's one other small thing I'd like to bring up: I think vote count posts shouldn't ever be amended with votes that came afterwards. As in: gamerunner posts a vote count, player puts in a vote right afterwards, and then the gamerunner edits the previous vote count instead of posting a new one.

This ended up causing player mistakes back in Bill & Ted (on D1, I think), and while it didn't really affect gameplay in Buffy in any noticeable way, it made backtracking to read previous day ends really confusing.

I know this is a problem that appeared because we didn't have a vote counting tool available and that will probably disappear almost completely now that we do, but I felt like it was worth mentioning anyway, as a gamerunner may end up choosing to edit a post instead of making a new one even with the tool at their disposal.

 

[Geno]

About inactivity, I've already said this before but I think you guys need to be a bit more strict when it comes to it, if someone doesn't meet the 10 post minimum(Which is very low for 72 hours by the way, I would've suggested raising it to 15) without telling the host, instantly replace him, when you sign up for a game you must know that you need to dedicate time to it, missing like 1 day phase is fine, but constantly being inactive is a problem.

 

[SaucyKaz]

I think the best thing you can do with low activity is to follow through with the consequences stated, even if it's large scale.

 

[cabot]

There's one other small thing I'd like to bring up: I think vote count posts shouldn't ever be amended with votes that came afterwards. As in: gamerunner posts a vote count, player puts in a vote right afterwards, and then the gamerunner edits the previous vote count instead of posting a new one.

This ended up causing player mistakes back in Bill & Ted (on D1, I think), and while it didn't really affect gameplay in Buffy in any noticeable way, it made backtracking to read previous day ends really confusing.

I know this is a problem that appeared because we didn't have a vote counting tool available and that will probably disappear almost completely now that we do, but I felt like it was worth mentioning anyway, as a gamerunner may end up choosing to edit a post instead of making a new one even with the tool at his disposal.

this will be easier with a tool, but I was cautious of spamming multiple thread pages with vote counts during day end.

 

[SweetNicole]

What are some ideas or suggestion that can be done about this? Should we be stricter on people unable to meet the Post Count Minimum?

Is there a reason that the minimum post count is set to ten? I'm not familiar with how that specific post count was reached. I would be in favor of raising the post count minimum.

Additionally, echoing what @cabot said, I would reduce the number of strikes. Even one day of low posts is a long time in Mafia, a game where posting is critical. Current rules as I understand it are that you can essentially do 3 days of inactivity (two strikes, and then final day that triggers new replacement). I'd be in favor of reducing that to no stikes with the only exception being Day 1 the only day where a player can fail to meet the minimum post requirements and not be replaced. One strike overall would be fine too.

 

[The Bear]

The rule used to be "post at least once per gameday", it was raised to 10 only later. I don't remember what the reasoning was for the count to be exactly 10.

 

[SweetNicole]

Should we keep it strictly at just Votes/Commands or ban all Font Size and Font Family changes?

I'm in favor of banning all font size and font family changes. It makes it harder to read and follow posts on mobile when there are such changes.

 

[weemadarthur]

If inactivity is going to lead to replacements more frequently, the replacement list will need to be longer as well.

 

[Geno]

Yeah, "post at least once per day" is basically promoting inactivity, that was a good move to raise it, however I think it's not enough. I think it should be 15.

 

[weemadarthur]

The rule used to be "post at least once per gameday", it was raised to 10 only later. I don't remember what the reasoning was for the count to be exactly 10.

It was a nice round number everyone could support, basically. Even the consistently low-quantity posters agreed it was a reachable goal.

 

[SweetNicole]

If inactivity is going to lead to replacements more frequently, the replacement list will need to be longer as well.

What's the average #s of replacement/game?

I know Buffy seemed to have an abnormal number.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

Console wars activity,

As a player who has had some luck with scum/cult, on this forum low activity is a good scum tactic. We tend to get tied up with “giving a player enough noise to hang themselves”. Day 1 and day 2 it’s practically required to just lay low, post some, vote consistently, and try to avoid conversations with the top posters. Look back at the last few games. Day 1 lynch was likely a player who posted in the top half of all day 1 posters but somehow said ornposted something that “tipped off” another big player and then scum just goes along with the lynch.

Now the later days lack of activity I blame on our cutural inability to end a day early. The longest gaps in the day are because no one (and I mean no one, scum or town) wants to put in an early hammer. We had clear cases where a player was red checked, and we all wanted to vote for them but no one wanted to hammer. We all say it’s “because we are waiting for everyone to post and get reads” but all it looks like in game is all conversation stopping for 18 hours, 1 post and then another 6 hours and our typical end of day (which is my favorite time of mafia)

Now sometimes you can’t help it, it takes time for people to have conversations or think about it. Especially on separate chats for scum, or partners.

 

[Android Sophia]

What's the average #s of replacement/game?

I know Buffy seemed to have an abnormal number.

It seems to vary from season to season. In Cluedo Mafia, for example, I replaced two players (both of which were requested), where as back at GAF in Pineapple Pizza Mafia I replaced five players.

Now that I think about it, replacements due to activity specifically have been pretty low tho.

I'm generally of the opinion that there should be an extremely low tolerance to low activity players, at least in regards to replacing them. One warning, and then you're gone on the second offense.

 

[Fireblend]

About the internet detective stuff, I definitely agree, while I also think the rules we've had in place for the last seasons already established a good framework to make this sort of calls on what's ok and what isn't. It is my understanding that already mentioning stuff that's very much not related to the game which most of the "internet detective" stuff falls under, was already discouraged per Rule 5, and that includes minor things ranging between making an argument because a player's profile page says they were online at X hour and they said they were busy then, to the more explicit stuff of whatever that GAF PM stuff was.

I like what Cabot says about making the rule more explicit regarding claim verification and other "clever" workarounds involving outside-of-game stuff.

I like the different font sizes/colors/styles stuff :( I'd rather keep those, on the basis that it makes some posts funnier, mostly :P

I'm not sure what to do about inactivity. I don't think raising the minimum is going to make people who already don't get to 10 to post more. My general feelings about it is we as players should be more aware of the effort that gamerunners and reviewers put into the games, and make sure that they see that effort rewarded in the form of a game that is active and gets to explore some of the interesting design decisions without those being at risk because someone who had a cool role or who might've been in a position to exploit those mechanics decided that they'd post ~7 times a day.

 

[faircure]

I'm also in favor of raising the post count and lowering the strikes to one. If a game drops to more than 50% inactivity and it's still in the first couple days, maybe a reboot from the beginning when the replacements come in would also be beneficial. It could also just be more trouble than it's worth and cause more confusion, so ymmv based on the game maybe?

 

[heymonkey]

The rule used to be "post at least once per gameday", it was raised to 10 only later. I don't remember what the reasoning was for the count to be exactly 10.

It was one, then five, then ten, and there was potential pushback at ten. This is where my first paper is focused so I have read and coded those discussions multiple times. I do not think this community as a whole could go beyond ten for all games unless the community has significantly changed since then (and we won't know until we get settled more on Era).

I'm in favor of banning all font size and font family changes. It makes it harder to read and follow posts on mobile when there are such changes.

YES. small is funny at times but the big was AWFUL. small votes too are terrible.

 

[Hecht]

If inactivity is going to lead to replacements more frequently, the replacement list will need to be longer as well.

This is primarily the reason we haven't been as strict in the past.

 

[Geno]

I'm also in favor of raising the post count and lowering the strikes to one. If a game drops to more than 50% inactivity and it's still in the first couple days, maybe a reboot from the beginning when the replacements come in would also be beneficial. It could also just be more trouble than it's worth and cause more confusion, so ymmv based on the game maybe?

A reboot is absolutely out of the question. People would already have flipped and some roles would be known.

 

[Pedro]

Should we keep it strictly at just Votes/Commands or ban all Font Size and Font Family changes?

I'd like to ban all that. Whether you're colorblind like me, or you're viewing the page on a small screen, or you're using a different theme, changing them from the default will most likely make reading the thread harder for some.

 

[Natiko]

The kerfuffle with Era mods/admins:

I’m fine with how the new approach has been explained. I think it’ll work well to alleviate the potential for conflict of interest. I still don’t see this incident as a breach of the rule but that’s an Era issue for being overly strict in their moderation as opposed to an issue with our own internal rules for mafia games. It is what it is, I doubt this will really be an issue ever again since it was an ultra specific circumstance.

Activity level:

If the post count minimum isn’t going to be raised that’s fine, I guess, but unless a player gives you a notice during the day phase that this will be a one phase issue they should be replaced for failing to meet the criteria. I also still think it should be permissible to have varying levels of requirements. If a game runner wants to set a higher minimum then let them. It is not hard to hit 10-20 posts a phase. If you can’t do that then how much are you really going to be contributing? I’ve seen arguments before that some players will make mega posts and not many others which is why they don’t hit 10, but if you are taking the time to make a mega post then make the time to follow up on the points from it.

Font:

We don’t need to be THAT no fun allowed do we? Just make it so people aren’t making the font size smaller which is too hard to read and it should be good. Very few people posted in larger fonts and it wasn’t non-stop.

 

[Hecht]

A reboot is absolutely out of the question. People would already have flipped and some roles would be known.

If any game had any sort of reboot it would have to be retooled as well, a la Werewolf 1 and 2

 

[Zippedpinhead]

I’m the short term, I am pro the 1-strike rule, but against raise the posts from 10 to 15.

If scum is posting up a storm trying to work everyone else to do their bidding on OM, but are just towing the line and floating in game, that should be a valid strategy. They could have 40 or 50 posts but are deliberately trying to just float along in game.

Now when 70% of the game is “waiting” that’s a legit problem.

Again I think this is partly a cultural issue, we need to be less against ending the day early. This alone would speed up the games and help with activity. When the end of the day seems a foregone conclusion no one wants to post

 

[SweetNicole]

Could there (in general) be different requirements for different games like @Natiko mentioned? Rather than per game, I'm thinking like the main season games have one requirement and the midseason have another, etc.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

If any game had any sort of reboot it would have to be retooled as well, a la Werewolf 1 and 2

And werewolf 2 was amazing for it! One of my favorites!

 

[Geno]

If any game had any sort of reboot it would have to be retooled as well, a la Werewolf 1 and 2

Yeah, but wouldn't that require reviewing again and stuff? For bigger games that might be a big problem depending on the roles that flipped, totally not worth the time imo.

 

[turmoil7]

If inactivity is going to lead to replacements more frequently, the replacement list will need to be longer as well.

Being stricter with activity will lead to this problem, if at some point 15 post per phase is going to be tested, a big replacement list should be prepared just in case

When 2 games run at the same time they always share the same replacement list? Probably it would be cool to assign replacements to one or other game, so that they know which one follow just in case.

It was hard for me to follow both CW and Buffy while on the replacements list.

 

[CrimsonFist]

I'd like to ban all that. Whether you're colorblind like me, or you're viewing the page on a small screen, or you're using a different theme, changing them from the default will most likely make reading the thread harder for some.

On a related note: People need to remember to pick "none" when changing the colour back after a vote. Picking "black" or "white" will mess up people on the opposite theme to you.

 

[Fireblend]

I'm also in favor of raising the post count and lowering the strikes to one. If a game drops to more than 50% inactivity and it's still in the first couple days, maybe a reboot from the beginning when the replacements come in would also be beneficial. It could also just be more trouble than it's worth and cause more confusion, so ymmv based on the game maybe?

I think a strict black and white rule like that works better on paper than on reality, which is why I don't think the current attitude towards inactives is necessarily bad; it's just maybe a bit too lenient. Ideally we'd have a huge pool of replacements to draw from, but we already have issues as it is (I wasn't on the list yet ended up as a replacement in Console Wars); as I said it should be more about making the time commitment clear from the get go; encourage inactives to post more, and (which has been missing) be harsher with modkills and preemptively seeking replacements for those players that swear they'll start posting on the next day phase or whatever.

 

[Splinter]

On ERA moderation: I think it's been covered well enough now. We have a better procedure and understanding of how to deal with similar issues in future.

On inactivity: I didn't follow console wars but as a pure guess we probably need to be stricter with activity requirements. Is it really 3 strikes? That's almost half the game even if they fail every day. It's harsh but I think it has to be 0 strikes - although I like the idea of an exception for day one.

I sympathise with the gamerunners though. Replacements are disruptive and noone wants to have to make them, especially at the cost of forcing another player out.

On rule changes: yup, all good, except for restricting font size/style. Why would you clip Blarg's wings like that? :(

Ban wingdings I guess, but I honestly don't see a benefit for restricting the rest.

On a similar note, can we simplify the vote tag? {color=#ff0000}{b}VOTE: {/b}{/color} is such a pain in the arse on mobile. {highlight} was bad enough! I know the reasoning is to make votes easier to see but... I feel that's a bad reason. The most basic requirement of playing in these games should be to read the posts in the game thread, if anyone's missing votes that's on them for skipping stuff. The only people who arguably need to see votes at a glance are the gamerunners/support.

Bold, color, or code (on a seperate line of text) should suffice, with color being the worst option (hard to type + colorblind unfriendly). If we're actually banning font size changes then {size=8} is another option.

(Also for manually counting we really don't need to be strict about spelling, as long as the vote is unambiguous. We've got a bot now though so fair enough)

 

[Hecht]

Yeah, but wouldn't that require reviewing again and stuff? For bigger games that might be a big problem depending on the roles that flipped, totally not worth the time imo.

Yeah, in theory. On the other hand Palmer and I came up with the redesign for Werewolf in a matter of hours :D

 

[heymonkey]

I have a lot of feelings on a hard and fast one strike rule but I'm in class. I'll post about it later. In short, I don't agree, but I don't 100% disagree in all scenarios, either, as I'll explain.

 

[Splinter]

Never mind your conflict of interest and inactivity woes, vote formatting is the real hot-button issue of MafiERA 2018!

Also I'd be totally in favour of banning font size changes of it meant we had simpler vote tags.

 

[turmoil7]

What about adding this rule: "a vote/unvote command should be the LAST line of a post" that would avoid the unexpected forum behavoir of fucking the color in the opposite theme after the vote, because there would be nothing after :p

 

[SweetNicole]

Are there rules in place regarding repeat offenders of replacement? My general thinking is that unless the player requests a replacement specifically such as Royal_Flush did in Buffy, that user would be blacklisted from any mafia games for X amount of time.

You could amend this to if someone has to be replaced, they may join one more game, but if they fail to finish that one are then blacklisted.

The blacklist could be for one full season, so if you got replaced in Buffy you couldn't do a game until next season or it could last for the remainder of that season + all of next season.

Basically, giving some long term threat behind getting replaced might help to cut down on the number of replacements.

 

[CrimsonFist]

Yeah, in theory. On the other hand Palmer and I came up with the redesign for Werewolf in a matter of hours :D

My takeaway from this is that we should absolutely do more reboots.

 

[SweetNicole]

My takeaway from this is that we should absolutely do more reboots.

Mafia Season 12: Everything's A Reboot

 

[Ty4on]

There's one other small thing I'd like to bring up: I think vote count posts shouldn't ever be amended with votes that came afterwards. As in: gamerunner posts a vote count, player puts in a vote right afterwards, and then the gamerunner edits the previous vote count instead of posting a new one.

This ended up causing player mistakes back in Bill & Ted (on D1, I think), and while it didn't really affect gameplay in Buffy in any noticeable way, it made backtracking to read previous day ends really confusing.

I know this is a problem that appeared because we didn't have a vote counting tool available and that will probably disappear almost completely now that we do, but I felt like it was worth mentioning anyway, as a gamerunner may end up choosing to edit a post instead of making a new one even with the tool at their disposal.

I agree with this. When looking back at votes it's great to have a vote count post where everything is "set in stone" and being able to work from that. Makes it much easier to visualize how votes moved and to present it in an analytical post.

 

[Hecht]

By the way, the highlighted button (below) in the rich text editor will remove formatting from text.

So either type out your whole post, then highlight the vote and format it, or after you type your vote, finish the post and click "remove formatting" for everything after the vote.

 

[CrimsonFist]

On vote formatting: I feel that votes should be easy to see at a glance. I know that as a player when looking back over end of days I've skimmed to look for votes, or when doing vote counts during hectic end of days.

Bold plus colour is excessive though. EIther just colour or a larger font size might work.

 

[Geno]

I agree with the blacklist Nicole mentioned, also should be applied to people that violate the rules, not accidentally, but more like, if someone threatens to modkill himself to prove something.

 

[Geno]

Also about vote formatting, I don't know how relevant this is but for years in gamefaqs we did ##Vote:X
Never had a problem with users not seeing it.

 

[CrimsonFist]

Reminded of something else that was discussed in the modchat a while back, don't recall if it came up outside it, but on Modkills:

Ideally modkilling town should end the day, modkilling scum should continue it, to prevent for example town essentially gaining an extra lynch from a townie under suspicion being modkilled.

 

[Fireblend]

Bold, color, or code (on a seperate line of text) should suffice, with color being the worst option (hard to type + colorblind unfriendly). If we're actually banning font size changes then {size=8} is another option.

(Also for manually counting we really don't need to be strict about spelling, as long as the vote is unambiguous. We've got a bot now though so fair enough)

As the person who wrote the current vote tool, here's some info on how it parses votes:

For each post:
1. It breaks down the post into lines.
2. It looks for color style tags on each line, and extracts the contents.
3. It matches against certain patterns, most notably "VOTE: XXXX" and "UNVOTE"
4. That's it.

You'll notice that it doesn't do anything with bold tags, or checks for a specific color, just that it's colored. This means that if someone screws up and selects the wrong color, or if they forget to bold the vote, the command will be accepted anyway.

Now, that those things can be done and how the rules specify votes should be formatted are two separate things; it doesn't mean it's now ok to color your votes blue instead, but I at least coded it in a way that it's resilient to the most common mistakes we've seen when voting. This doesn't really change anything but it maybe provides some additional info for the argument you're making. Personally I think bolding + red color is ok; the bold part may be a bit of overkill, but it never bothers me to just click on the button.

 

[The Bear]

My takeaway from this is that we should absolutely do more reboots.

As bit of a buzzkiller, the enjoyability of a game usually does not come from the design per say, the way how players play the game is much more important factor to it.

 

[Geno]

Reminded of something else that was discussed in the modchat a while back, don't recall if it came up outside it, but on Modkills:

Ideally modkilling town should end the day, modkilling scum should continue it, to prevent for example town essentially gaining an extra lynch from a townie under suspicion being modkilled.

I've said this as well in the Buffy spectate chat but people seemed to be against it

 

[Splinter]

As the person who wrote the current vote tool, here's some info on how it parses votes:

For each post:
1. It breaks down the post into lines.
2. It looks for color style tags on each line, and extracts the contents.
3. It matches against certain patterns, most notably "VOTE: XXXX" and "UNVOTE"
4. That's it.

You'll notice that it doesn't do anything with bold tags, or checks for a specific color, just that it's colored. This means that if someone screws up and selects the wrong color, or if they forget to bold the vote, the command will be accepted anyway.

Now, that those things can be done and how the rules specify votes should be formatted are two separate things; it doesn't mean it's now ok to color your votes blue instead, but I at least coded it in a way that it's resilient to the most common mistakes we've seen when voting. This doesn't really change anything but it maybe provides some additional info for the argument you're making. Personally I think bolding + red color is ok; the bold part may be a bit of overkill, but it never bothers me to just click on the button.

There's no buttons on mobile

#hardmode

Thanks for the explanation though. Pedro I apologise in advance for all the times I "forget" to bold my votes.

 

[Splinter]

Reminded of something else that was discussed in the modchat a while back, don't recall if it came up outside it, but on Modkills:

Ideally modkilling town should end the day, modkilling scum should continue it, to prevent for example town essentially gaining an extra lynch from a townie under suspicion being modkilled.

That seems overly punishing when our meta (rightly or wrongly) revolves so much around day end.

 

[Hecht]

There's no buttons on mobile

#hardmode

Thanks for the explanation though. Pedro I apologise in advance for all the times I "forget" to bold my votes.

What?

 

[Splinter]

I guess the fear is that someone could intentionally modkill themselves as it's slightly more efficient than a mislynch? I don't think we've had that happen, and it would (or at least should) be met with more than a simple modkill.

 

[faircure]

Yeah, I definitely wasn't advocating for roles to stay on the same people in a reboot. There would be new PMs and stuff, and I would just put a reboot as an optional thing cause that could end up being a lot of work.

For font size/family changes, I like them. Should always be an option to request a post be reposted without formatting if it's too unreadable, though.

I'm also starting to see the argument to keep the inactivity rules the same. I was too harsh before, but I do think two strikes and then a replacement is too long a time. Keep the count at ten, and then one strike before a replacement comes in on a repeat offense.

 

[The Bear]

Reboots have been done in the past, but they are very time consuming and unfair to the gamerunners, who need to usually re-design the whole game.

 

[SweetNicole]

Reminded of something else that was discussed in the modchat a while back, don't recall if it came up outside it, but on Modkills:

Ideally modkilling town should end the day, modkilling scum should continue it, to prevent for example town essentially gaining an extra lynch from a townie under suspicion being modkilled.

This would punish the whole town and give scum an inherent advantage. Modkilling already tends to hurt town enough. Having the day end makes that even worse.

 

[Natiko]

Another idea - perhaps we need to just make our game windows tighter for day phases. No more 72 hour phases or some such. Then you’re at least asking for the same 10 posts minimum but in a smaller time frame. Either way I just don’t see the benefit in letting people skate by for “playing” while posting almost nothing at all. The only people it benefits are those that aren’t willing to put in the effort to post more. Either way I stand by the idea that there should be no tolerance unless the game runner has been notified in advance and even then only if it’ll just be one day phase. Otherwise get them replaced earlier so the replacement has less to read to catch up.

 

[Geno]

This would punish the whole town and give scum an inherent advantage. Modkilling already tends to hurt town enough. Having the day end makes that even worse.

Depends on the situation, if a modkill happens day 1 for example that will likely help town because they would mislynch anyway.

 

[Hecht]

This would punish the whole town and give scum an inherent advantage. Modkilling already tends to hurt town enough. Having the day end makes that even worse.

Not necessarily. It punishes town by removing the time for discussion, but it doesn't mean someone else gets killed. Basically votes are voided for the day and only the modkilled player is "lynched."

 

[Geno]

Another idea - perhaps we need to just make our game windows tighter for day phases. No more 72 hour phases or some such. Then you’re at least asking for the same 10 posts minimum but in a smaller time frame. Either way I just don’t see the benefit in letting people skate by for “playing” while posting almost nothing at all. The only people it benefits are those that aren’t willing to put in the effort to post more. Either way I stand by the idea that there should be no tolerance unless the game runner has been notified in advance and even then only if it’ll just be one day phase. Otherwise get them replaced earlier so the replacement has less to read to catch up.

I've been saying for a while to make games 48/24, much better in my opinion.

 

[Hecht]

I've been saying for a while to make games 48/24, much better in my opinion.

The main issue we have with that is that weekends tend to be quieter in games, and 48/24 ends up moving the needle so that entire day phases are on a weekend.

I tried to address this with the invitational, but it's slightly complicated:
Day Phase: Sunday-Tuesday
Night Phase: Tuesday-Wednesday
Day Phase: Wednesday-Friday
Night Phase: Friday-Sunday

 

[Sawneeks]

Mainly these two points:

Re-word rule #5 to ensure no verifications/proof of activities outside the game are acceptable behaviour.
What Gorlak did in Buffy didn't sit right with most players and led to the RE staff intervention.It was accepted by monkey/myself because a similar thing happened in the invitational which was never raised as an issue after that game. Eliminate the ambiguity in this rule so this stuff is definitely forbidden.

Make Rule #3 clearer to make it explicit that posting Role PMs is forbidden.
Feedback from Include was that this rule could be improved to emphasize that posting Role PMs is not allowed.

I'll be implementing these and update the rules so they are clearer. Thanks cabot.

Now the later days lack of activity I blame on our cutural inability to end a day early.

So I'm split on the reasons why we sometimes just get quiet games. I agree with Zipped that it would help if we weren't so afraid of turbos and hammering a vote to end the Day early since entire Phases can stall once a decision is reached but there's still 24 hours left. However, I'm not sure if it's just that alone. We've had people point to that, to the Scum Meta being to stay quiet, to low activity posters being the problem, etc. I feel it's a combination of all of those things, not just one single problem.

Could there (in general) be different requirements for different games like @Natiko mentioned? Rather than per game, I'm thinking like the main season games have one requirement and the midseason have another, etc.

So the first two mid-seasons games were are starting out with will have this. One game is planning to have a higher minimum post count requirement to test it out. Our Mid-Seasons are very much a place to test out different game set-ups and some rules.

Being stricter with activity will lead to this problem, if at some point 15 post per phase is going to be tested, a big replacement list should be prepared just in case

When 2 games run at the same time they always share the same replacement list? Probably it would be cool to assign replacements to one or other game, so that they know which one follow just in case.

It was hard for me to follow both CW and Buffy while on the replacements list.

Unfortunately if we broke up Replacement lists like that then we would run into an issue of lower Replacements for either game. We've had Seasons where one game needs a lot of Replacements and the other only needs 1 or 2 so if we split the list up then we may be short on one of the games.

(I wasn't on the list yet ended up as a replacement in Console Wars);.

Yes you were. Check the OT. :p

Are there rules in place regarding repeat offenders of replacement? My general thinking is that unless the player requests a replacement specifically such as Royal_Flush did in Buffy, that user would be blacklisted from any mafia games for X amount of time.

You could amend this to if someone has to be replaced, they may join one more game, but if they fail to finish that one are then blacklisted.

The blacklist could be for one full season, so if you got replaced in Buffy you couldn't do a game until next season or it could last for the remainder of that season + all of next season.

Basically, giving some long term threat behind getting replaced might help to cut down on the number of replacements.

Currently we do not have rules like that, no. The worry is pushing people out of the community and dissuading them from joining or stopping new people from joining. We have a strong core of players but we are not very large compared to many other Mafia communities. If we lose players we can't run larger games and, if we take into effect the Post Count Replacement changes, we'd need larger replacement lists to keep up.

 

[Splinter]

On the subject of phase lengths, we never did try Crab's majority lynch rule

 

[Geno]

The main issue we have with that is that weekends tend to be quieter in games, and 48/24 ends up moving the needle so that entire day phases are on a weekend.

I tried to address this with the invitational, but it's slightly complicated:
Day Phase: Sunday-Tuesday
Night Phase: Tuesday-Wednesday
Day Phase: Wednesday-Friday
Night Phase: Friday-Sunday

Hm, I guess it depends on the community then, Gamefaqs and some others I played in never had that weekend problem. To me the opposite would make sense, to have more activity in the weekend since everyone has more free time. I guess your solution is fine though, I think that's what was happening in Berserk.

 

[Sawneeks]

So far the general consensus seems to be we need to become much stricter on Replacements for inactivity.

I agree that we need to have a much stricter ruling for when we need to start debating replacing a player for being too quiet, but the problem is that line is usually not very clear. Also it's been mentioned but we would need more Replacements in general just in case we needed them.

So my question to all of you is: What should that 'line' be? Is it just not meeting 10 posts? Or should 'skirting the line', aka only hitting 11 - 13 posts, every Phase also be taken into consideration? Is 'One Strike and you're out' too strict?

 

[Geno]

So far the general consensus seems to be we need to become much stricter on Replacements for inactivity.

I agree that we need to have a much stricter ruling for when we need to start debating replacing a player for being too quiet, but the problem is that line is usually not very clear. Also it's been mentioned but we would need more Replacements in general just in case we needed them.

So my question to all of you is: What should that 'line' be? Is it just not meeting 10 posts? Or should 'skirting the line', aka only hitting 11 - 13 posts, every Phase also be taken into consideration? Is 'One Strike and you're out' too strict?

11-13 should be fine, if you passed the minimum then you passed the minimum, could be scum just not wanting to post much after all. I think one strike and you are out without prior warning isn't too strict, you signed up to play, if you will be busy irl inform the host, if you cannot play then ask to be replaced. Otherwise why are you here?

 

[Yuta]

Most important topic first: simplify votes :p - convenience wins. Now I have no idea from what planet Splinter is typing, but still formatting sth. twice is one too much.

And look at the way we've come, people asking for a higher post requirement. Back in the day we've had enormous resistance towards putting one in place at all. I'm always pro raising the bar.

Shorter phases are also welcome. Berserk had the same rhythm Hecht posted above. It was perfect. The game had a great flow because of it.

Also strongly in favour of going the no strike route. If you didn't give a heads up and miss the 10 posts, you're out. No way around it.

Against banning different fonts and sizes. Yes, it can be bothersome, but I don't want to miss out on the entertainment it can provide.

 

[Yuta]

Clarifying, reviewing and updating the rules is necessary.

I'm sorry for what happened in Buffy. I never intended to play against the rules.

Regarding future incidents I trust that we won't derail the game thread, keep to messaging game runners and also have people in the era ranks when discussion is necessary (as in able to prevent premature bans or thread shutdowns)

 

[Sawneeks]

Most important topic first: simplify votes :p - convenience wins. Now I have no idea from what planet Splinter is typing, but still formatting sth. twice is one too much.

I just talked to Fireblend about this to make sure it was possible. We can change the way we do our votes, the Tool can recognize a different formatting option. The question is which option would be both easier and still be easily visible by Players, Gamerunners, and others.

We're open to suggestions.

 

[heymonkey]

Okay, much to say.

There's one other small thing I'd like to bring up: I think vote count posts shouldn't ever be amended with votes that came afterwards. As in: gamerunner posts a vote count, player puts in a vote right afterwards, and then the gamerunner edits the previous vote count instead of posting a new one.

This ended up causing player mistakes back in Bill & Ted (on D1, I think), and while it didn't really affect gameplay in Buffy in any noticeable way, it made backtracking to read previous day ends really confusing.

I know this is a problem that appeared because we didn't have a vote counting tool available and that will probably disappear almost completely now that we do, but I felt like it was worth mentioning anyway, as a gamerunner may end up choosing to edit a post instead of making a new one even with the tool at their disposal.

In general, I agree with you. I amended a few in Buffy but only if I'd missed a vote. Shouldn't be an issue anymore anyway with the new vote tool.

I'd like to ban all that. Whether you're colorblind like me, or you're viewing the page on a small screen, or you're using a different theme, changing them from the default will most likely make reading the thread harder for some.

In the end, I agree here. Small may be funny but it's not worth sacrificing accessibility and inclusion.

Could there (in general) be different requirements for different games like @Natiko mentioned? Rather than per game, I'm thinking like the main season games have one requirement and the midseason have another, etc.

Are there rules in place regarding repeat offenders of replacement? My general thinking is that unless the player requests a replacement specifically such as Royal_Flush did in Buffy, that user would be blacklisted from any mafia games for X amount of time.

You could amend this to if someone has to be replaced, they may join one more game, but if they fail to finish that one are then blacklisted.

The blacklist could be for one full season, so if you got replaced in Buffy you couldn't do a game until next season or it could last for the remainder of that season + all of next season.

Basically, giving some long term threat behind getting replaced might help to cut down on the number of replacements.

As far as I know, there used to be an idea that some repeat offenders would get banned or something and this is where I think lines for one-two strikes should be flexible. Sometimes people just aren't able to participate as much in a phase. It happens. I don't think we should replace at first infraction. But in the Buffy game, for instance, it became very clear that Benghis Khan was not going to be able to play. It was also obvious that StarSketch just wasn't going to play. I had to track Star down to confirm her PM and I should have just replaced her then. I didn't. Because that felt like a gray area - but in retrospect, I think if players do not respond to gamerunners with x time, they should probably be replaced, for whatever reason. But with BK, I prodded him, he said he would be able to participate, and then couldn't - turns out he had some RL shit to deal with. In that case, he just wasn't able to assess what he would be able to do and life didn't meet his own expectation. Why should he be banned from the community, though, even for a short time? Wouldn't it be better to talk to him and say hey, just come back when you have all your connection stuff worked out - and then we all go on our merry?

What it comes down to is that some of this is situational. Nin didn't prod as he should have and then replace in CW because it was THE WHOLE GAME. I got very alarmed about some players' activity at the end of Buffy, too, because we were out of replacements and replacing more people felt like a burden on everyone, and everyone was contributing, at that point, what I saw as "enough" - and as a player who appreciates high activity, that's something. Game was moving, people were playing; I stopped caring about numbers.

Also we lost the post count per thread on Era and that sucks.

Anyway, point is, I do not think there is a good answer to this. If we change the rules in any way, there's a huge cascading effect, but we do need some base standard. I do think perpetual offenders - people who disappear or have to be replaced a lot - should be discouraged from playing. It's a hassle for everyone. And I think signing up IS a commitment... but also we are human and shit happens.

There has to be a middle ground.

Also about vote formatting, I don't know how relevant this is but for years in gamefaqs we did ##Vote:X
Never had a problem with users not seeing it.

I've been saying for a while to make games 48/24, much better in my opinion.

In general, Geno, I'm gonna go ahead and say that I'm not sure how helpful or relevant "well, on Gamefaqs we..." posts are, from anyone. This community isn't Gamefaqs. I, for one, do not want it to be, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in that. But further, we're using different tools for a different community. Our vote structure isn't arbitrary, for instance; there are reasons for it, and the vote tool is built around it. While we didn't have a vote tool, it was still prudent to keep people in the habit of doing it the correct way for when we had a vote tool again. And while I think it's fine to change for some games, we have players who would absolutely suffer and/or be left out if all games started at 48/24. Collaborating across timezones, especially for scum, for people working, in school, etc., is difficult. So in short, sure, experiment with some games, but maybe back off the "but at Gamefaqs...." because I'm just not sure it's relevant here.

 

[Geno]

Like I said, ##Vote:X is the one I'd prefer, I'm used to it and I think it's very easy to notice.

 

[Yuta]

We're open to suggestions.

A secret dream of mine is that somebody can call in a favour of an Era coder and that person implements the old highlight function, but with a much smaller tag option like {h} or sth.

 

[heymonkey]

I just talked to Fireblend about this to make sure it was possible. We can change the way we do our votes, the Tool can recognize a different formatting option. The question is which option would be both easier and still be easily visible by Players, Gamerunners, and others.

We're open to suggestions.

In this, submitting suggestions and then polling the community - perhaps gamerunners separately - might be helpful. As long as febe can implement whatever we decide.

 

[Yuta]

Like I said, ##Vote:X is the one I'd prefer, I'm used to it and I think it's very easy to notice.

It's ugly :p

 

[Yuta]

##Vote: Geno

 

[Ty4on]

Vote: ##Vote:

 

[Zippedpinhead]

What about adding this rule: "a vote/unvote command should be the LAST line of a post" that would avoid the unexpected forum behavoir of fucking the color in the opposite theme after the vote, because there would be nothing after :p

This would make mobile voting a lot easier. I can be for this.

By the way, the highlighted button (below) in the rich text editor will remove formatting from text.

So either type out your whole post, then highlight the vote and format it, or after you type your vote, finish the post and click "remove formatting" for everything after the vote.

View attachment 42

It’s impossible to highlight when mobile posting. On computer it’s fine, but on mobile it’s really hard to do this. It’s why I like the “votes only at the end” thing from turmoil.

I've been saying for a while to make games 48/24, much better in my opinion.

Console wars was 48/24 and we had probably the worst inactivity in a lot time. However, I loved the 48/24 cycle. So much easier for me to play and keep track. I agree with you Geno, it needs to stay.

Now what’s this about crab’s majority lynch idea?!!

 

[Hecht]

A secret dream of mine is that somebody can call in a favour of an Era coder and that person implements the old highlight function, but with a much smaller tag option like {h} or sth.

Trust me, it's been brought up :P

 

[Geno]

It's not about "becoming Gamefaqs", It's about evolving, plus I'm seeing a lot of people are in favor of the 48/24 so I think I'm definitely not alone on this one. It's good to compare 2 communities and try to take good things from one and put it in the other. I think you are very wrong in that Gamefaqs stuff shouldn't even be mentioned. Sure you can dismiss them if you like but I'm just mentioning the possibilities.

 

[heymonkey]

Vote: ##Vote:

ugh, agreed

we need something easy to do/see on mobile - so no matter what, we do need to keep the idea that it has to be on a single line by itself. color changes are apparently beyond the scope of ease on era for some but should we get rid of it? god, i miss the highlight tag. @Hecht MAKE IT HAPPEN

 

[heymonkey]

It's not about "becoming Gamefaqs", It's about evolving, plus I'm seeing a lot of people are in favor of the 48/24 so I think I'm definitely not alone on this one. It's good to compare 2 communities and try to take good things from one and put it in the other. I think you are very wrong in that Gamefaqs stuff shouldn't even be mentioned. Sure you can dismiss them if you like but I'm just mentioning the possibilities.

Did not say at all it shouldn't be mentioned; don't be hyperbolic. What I'm saying is we need to discuss the needs of this community as the needs of this community, and just because something worked elsewhere doesn't necessarily mean it will work here.

 

[Yuta]

Also we lost the post count per thread on Era and that sucks.

Anyone got the backstory on this?

It popped up in quite a few communities, but I never read a sufficient answer on why it was dropped. Either I'm terrible (and a lot of others too) at reading announcements or communication was bad.

 

[Geno]

This would make mobile voting a lot easier. I can be for this.


It’s impossible to highlight when mobile posting. On computer it’s fine, but on mobile it’s really hard to do this. It’s why I like the “votes only at the end” thing from turmoil.


Console wars was 48/24 and we had probably the worst inactivity in a lot time. However, I loved the 48/24 cycle. So much easier for me to play and keep track. I agree with you Geno, it needs to stay.

Now what’s this about crab’s majority lynch idea?!!

Hmm, iirc Console wars only went 48/24 after a few days right? But anyway, I think CW is a bad example of 48/24, Berserk had 70 pages of posts and it was 48/24. So activity is definitely not the issue here, the issue lies in the players themselves, not the cycles.

 

[Natiko]

Longer phases just allow those not trying to skirt by easier. I don’t think I’ve ever been in a game where the full 72 hours was truly needed. We just bullshit around in circles until the last hour anyways.

 

[Geno]

Did not say at all it shouldn't be mentioned; don't be hyperbolic. What I'm saying is we need to discuss the needs of this community as the needs of this community, and just because something worked elsewhere doesn't necessarily mean it will work here.

But it doesn't hurt to try, you are not "becoming gamefaqs" by placing a 48/24 cycle or changing the vote format, and actually 48/24 is the norm for most communities. It worked out fine in Berserk so I don't see the problem.

 

[SweetNicole]

Anyone got the backstory on this?

It popped up in quite a few communities, but I never read a sufficient answer on why it was dropped. Either I'm terrible (and a lot of others too) at reading announcements or communication was bad.

Technical issues. The tech team is looking at fixing the feature in the future.

 

[SweetNicole]

I'd be fine with 48/24 hours. I think it was used in Bill and Ted? It seemed fine to me.

@heymonkey There's definitely some middle ground there, and I think we should in general be lenient because real life shit happens to everyone. I think we could introduce some sort of restriction for people who leave with no notice provided that they don't have a qualified excuse later? Sort of like having a legit reason to miss a college course, etc.

 

[Apollo]

As the player who got replaced in Console Wars, I’d just like to pop in and publicly apologize for my activity in that game. It wasn’t fair to the gamerunners or the other players.

 

[heymonkey]

What about the day/night structure used in the invitational and some others? What was it - Sunday-Tuesday and then Wednesday-Friday? I'm not sure I love that particular structure but it did work really well when it was used; maybe in the next few games, we can evaluate roster size, game type, and do some experimentation and then poll the community afterward?

I will say that I was very excited about switching Buffy to 48/24 until it happened and then I realized I'd have no break, really, and neither would the players. I think I'd have regretted it if a chunk of the roster hadn't suddenly needed to be modeaten. For a long game, I think all 48/24 might end up very wearying.

 

[Geno]

I'd be fine with 48/24 hours. I think it was used in Bill and Ted? It seemed fine to me.

@heymonkey There's definitely some middle ground there, and I think we should in general be lenient because real life shit happens to everyone. I think we could introduce some sort of restriction for people who leave with no notice provided that they don't have a qualified excuse later? Sort of like having a legit reason to miss a college course, etc.

Yes, Bill and Ted used 48/24, although that was a small game, it still had around the same amount of posts as CW with 6 less players and 24 less hour days. Further proving my point that it's not the cycles but the players.

 

[Kalor]

For inactive players, as has been mentioned, it should be an one strike then out system. The only exception should be if the player contacts the gamerunner and explains that they won't be available that day. The issue then becomes a matter of getting replacements.

For when to look into inactives, I think when they miss the post limit is fine. As someone whos activity can lean on the low side , 10 feels like a good number. Sometimes I'll be busy on a day and 10 will be the amount that I can make. Anything larger would mean that I'd be posting way more pointless posts just to meet the limit.

 

[heymonkey]

But it doesn't hurt to try, you are not "becoming gamefaqs" by placing a 48/24 cycle or changing the vote format, and actually 48/24 is the norm for most communities. It worked out fine in Berserk so I don't see the problem.

Let me clarify-
I'm totally okay with discussing the benefits of changes. I don't think anyone is against that. But what I want is "here's why that might work better for some games, here are the benefits, here are the drawbacks, here are the pitfalls, here's what we can consider." Not "well, at Gamefaqs/at other communities," because frankly, that doesn't tell me anything. Just that other people do a thing.

Here's an example:

48/24 can keep a game moving and sustain excitement. That might help encourage activity and maybe cut down on accusations of "fluff" because more is happening. But if it will be harder for some players to make post count, how do we handle that? Do we adjust? Do we just tap more possible replacements? Do we create games with smaller rosters and use that schedule? What happens if the full 48 is on the weekend, when our activity is traditionally lower - do we drop requirements for that day, lest we have to replace the whole roster? What about people who are on wholly different timezones than the gamerunner (like 12 hour differences), who essentially lose a day of the phase regardless of length? We make adjustments for turbos already; what kind of adjustments might we make here?

 

[Yuta]

Timezones don't make you lose a day. Everyone needs to sleep.

Weekend is no issue with Hecht Rhythm™.

If people don't feel comfortable, knowing they won't make the post requirement, why not let players play who feel comfortable with it? This doesn't need to be the only option for games. We don't have to put a general rule on lengths of phases for every single game. But having variety and offering different kinds feels like a step in the right direction.

We can test and try further, the two games that had this specific day/night cycle went pretty good, eh?

 

[Pedro]

It's not about "becoming Gamefaqs", It's about evolving, plus I'm seeing a lot of people are in favor of the 48/24 so I think I'm definitely not alone on this one. It's good to compare 2 communities and try to take good things from one and put it in the other. I think you are very wrong in that Gamefaqs stuff shouldn't even be mentioned. Sure you can dismiss them if you like but I'm just mentioning the possibilities.

But it doesn't hurt to try, you are not "becoming gamefaqs" by placing a 48/24 cycle or changing the vote format, and actually 48/24 is the norm for most communities. It worked out fine in Berserk so I don't see the problem.

But we aren't most communities; we have our own players, our rules, our ways designing games, and adding changes because they worked in other places is really not enough. We need better reasons to do that.

 

[Geno]

Let me clarify-
I'm totally okay with discussing the benefits of changes. I don't think anyone is against that. But what I want is "here's why that might work better for some games, here are the benefits, here are the drawbacks, here are the pitfalls, here's what we can consider." Not "well, at Gamefaqs/at other communities," because frankly, that doesn't tell me anything. Just that other people do a thing.

Here's an example:

48/24 can keep a game moving and sustain excitement. That might help encourage activity and maybe cut down on accusations of "fluff" because more is happening. But if it will be harder for some players to make post count, how do we handle that? Do we adjust? Do we just tap more possible replacements? Do we create games with smaller rosters and use that schedule? What happens if the full 48 is on the weekend, when our activity is traditionally lower - do we drop requirements for that day, lest we have to replace the whole roster? What about people who are on wholly different timezones than the gamerunner (like 12 hour differences), who essentially lose a day of the phase regardless of length? We make adjustments for turbos already; what kind of adjustments might we make here?

I don't think it's hard to reach the post count, 10 posts for 48 hours still seems very easy to reach to me. As for the timezones that shouldn't be an issue really, if someone can't manage their time to make it to 10 posts in I repeat, 48 whole hours then they probably shouldn't have signed up, even the host posting votals can reach 10 posts.

 

[Hecht]

Update:

 

[Yuta]

Trust me, it's been brought up :P

Update:View attachment 44

 

[CaptainNuevo]

But we aren't most communities; we have our own players, our rules, our ways designing games, and adding changes because they worked in other places is really not enough. We need better reasons to do that.

One of the biggest drawbacks to having uneven day lengths is that I worry it will drastically change our normal schedule of running games. If we have 1 game on 72/48 length, and other at 48/24, that can impact the larger "season" aspect, and since we tend to run fewer games over longer periods of time, may have bigger impact on the larger structure of mafiera games as a whole. I'm fine with trying it on some smaller games provided the game runner makes it SUPER KNOWN that's the case during signups. Like, an image that's neon and flashing lights, and you have to scan a signed doc saying you agree.

 

[Geno]

But we aren't most communities; we have our own players, our rules, our ways designing games, and adding changes because they worked in other places is really not enough. We need better reasons to do that.

But like I said, it already worked in Berserk and Bill and Ted. I'm not trying to make people here gamefaqs or mafia scum or whatever. And I mean, all I mentioned is the vote format and the day cycle, the day night cycle has proven that it works already. And the vote format is something very minor that I just mentioned, I don't even care that much if it stays the same or changes tbh.

 

[turmoil7]

Everything was a ploy to get the highlight tag

 

[Natiko]

Hooray for the highlight tag! Please implement prior to me convincing myself to play again thanks in advance.

When players are in one game and die do we explicitly check with them about being put on the replacement list for the other game or do we just put them in spec thread right off the bat if they ask? That could bolster the list a bit.