Maybe a set of 6 minis where things are kept simple and newer players can hone their skills.
A "Campaign" of 3~4 Micro games of increasing complexity, meant to be played by mostly the same players (by signing up to the first you sign up for the whole thing), with a continuous storyline. I don't know if it's doable, but I'd love to see it happen.
Yeah, but I think minis would be better. Micros seem to volatile for newbies.
Well, I'm sort of new, but I think part of the apparent volatility of micros is that the recent ones have had strange gimmicks. Blackout Mafia has multiple lynches per day and random role and alignment selection, Prisoner's Dilemma was entirely about gaming the mechanics of the lynch vs escape, Courtly Intrigue was Kingmaker with a Jester, Iso's Micro #2 had a bomb and essentially mason-lovers, Drunken Tracker had, well, a bunch of drunk trackers.
Those games all looked fun, but they made the games end very quickly or at least gave them the potential to end quickly due to a misplay. A micro should be fine for new players if it's relatively straight. When I played face-to-face games we only ever had 10 players at most. It's not exactly the same thing, but it's comparable.
Personally, I'd love to play in a themed set of four games with increasing complexity. But some people may not want to sign up for four-ish games in a row before they even know whether they like the game or not, so that should be taken into consideration.
@Eco: You realize that the reason people got bored with Normals was because of the restrictions we put on them, right? How is just calling Normals "Large Basics" any different from this? It's just putting a fresh name to an old face.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
@Eco: You realize that the reason people got bored with Normals was because of the restrictions we put on them, right? How is just calling Normals "Large Basics" any different from this? It's just putting a fresh name to an old face.
We had this exact conversation when we killed the League, and the agreement was that the League was holding Normals down and making them be lower complexity than they needed to be. The whole point of killing the League and reinstating Normals was to allow them to once again utilise their design space without being oppressed by the League. Normals are categorically not large Basics, and none of the restrictions on Normals mandate that.
1. So w/r/t to core/newb games and the new player contact list, we can move ahead as soon as we find someone/rope in secreatries to administer that program.
6. People seem like to the oversight of the FTQ, but want it to be more transparent. So, do we just switch from PCQs to holding the FTQ committee in a public thread instead of by email or google group? How about that?
#4 (Behavior) is basically just an awareness issue.
Things we still need to hammer out:
I think we need to be more systematic about #3, and encouraging a market for shorter deadline games. How do we accomplish pushing that goal? It definitely seems far more manageable in our smaller games, minis and micros. Would not be a good fit for large games or core games that are trying to welcome new players. So, do we just set a recommended deadline length for micros that's more in line with other sites' pace?
2, managing our complexity ratio, we seem to be splitting on. I would agree that an intermediary step between basics and specialties is helpful, but I'm not certain we need to codify that, or not. Convince me.
5. Mafia universe. Generally speaking, I'm seeing support among the playerbase, including Annorax, for making recruiting efforts there. But we need consensus from the council on exactly what that looks like, and who should oversee that program.
1. Yes. I suspect the newly minted "hello new players" thread would serve, just like a similar one did for the previous PCL.
6. How about each PCQ entry has to be sponsored by someone on the FTQ committee? That way each game is certified up to standard, but the choice of what gets played is still up to the players?
3. Deadlines: I think it's just education and ensuring it becomes part of the reviewing process. Once shorter deadlines start being used and enforced, they'll become more commonplace without needing to be mandated.
2. As the person pushing for change, I feel like you ought to be bearing the burden of convincing, but since you've asked: I believe that if it's not codified complexity will only creep upwards, over time making the games less and less useful as a stepping stone, while also alienating players who do not enjoy Specialty level games (but want some more variety than what Basics can provide). It's not like the limits are particularly strict; are there any you disagree with the existence of?
5. While a properly planned program would be nice, I think exposure is the most important thing. Anyone curious should just go play on MU, make sure your origin is listed as MTGS, and make sure you represent the site well by being a decent human being.
1. Yes. I suspect the newly minted "hello new players" thread would serve, just like a similar one did for the previous PCL.
6. How about each PCQ entry has to be sponsored by someone on the FTQ committee? That way each game is certified up to standard, but the choice of what gets played is still up to the players?
3. Deadlines: I think it's just education and ensuring it becomes part of the reviewing process. Once shorter deadlines start being used and enforced, they'll become more commonplace without needing to be mandated.
2. As the person pushing for change, I feel like you ought to be bearing the burden of convincing, but since you've asked: I believe that if it's not codified complexity will only creep upwards, over time making the games less and less useful as a stepping stone, while also alienating players who do not enjoy Specialty level games (but want some more variety than what Basics can provide). It's not like the limits are particularly strict; are there any you disagree with the existence of?
5. While a properly planned program would be nice, I think exposure is the most important thing. Anyone curious should just go play on MU, make sure your origin is listed as MTGS, and make sure you represent the site well by being a decent human being.
6. I think it's fairly easy bar for a setup to pass to be considered for the FTQ - the harder burden is to persuade the committee that you have the best possible setup, based on how well it's been designed, its complexity, and elegance.
2. Do you think that complexity creep was more of a problem earlier in our site's history than it would be now? I'm unsure about that.
5. I think that might do well at representing our individual players, but what we really want to sell is the complete package: a great playerbase, creative designs, a more relaxed pace, and terrific flavor.
6. Perhaps then the FTQ sponsor needs to raise that bar. I'm not wedding to the idea mind, I'm just trying to think of ways we can have a shadowy cabal with no set process that is also transparent and driven by the people at large.
2. Difficult to say whether it would be worse or not, but the past has shown us that complexity creep does happen, and that it is a problem.
5. Sure, I'm just saying people don't need to wait for a plan, they should just go and get involved if they fancy it. A coherent plan is still a good idea.
The choice of what is played is always up to the players. You sign up for the game, or you don't. I don't see why we need to have a popularity contest every time we want to run an exciting, special, blockbuster game. Taredas won the previous PCQ (see here) due to his ability to sell his game very well - too bad the game had not actually gone through the review process and was an unplayable, swingy disaster. Not what you're looking for from a game you're trying to have headline your entire community. Let's ditch the populism and go back to the old system, with additional oversight included. Here's what I envision:
- Mafia Secretary posts an announcement stating a deadline for FTQ submissions.
- Hosts send in their reviewed setups. At least one reviewer for each FTQ submission must be a member of the qualified reviewer group. The names of the qualified reviewer group (FTQ committee, whatever you want to call it) are always available in the setup thread as public knowledge.
- The Mafia Secretary announces the list of submissions, names redacted, to the qualified reviewer group.
- The qualified reviewer who reviewed the setup makes his or her recommendation to the group.
- Group discusses and votes on which setup should run.
- Mafia Secretary gives the go-ahead to post signups and also makes an announcement that describes the voting process, explaining why the reviewers selected the setup they did.
- Repeat this process a few weeks before the FTQ game ends.
EDIT: I'd also like to volunteer to host a basic when/if that queue returns.
@Eco: You realize that the reason people got bored with Normals was because of the restrictions we put on them, right? How is just calling Normals "Large Basics" any different from this? It's just putting a fresh name to an old face.
We had this exact conversation when we killed the League, and the agreement was that the League was holding Normals down and making them be lower complexity than they needed to be. The whole point of killing the League and reinstating Normals was to allow them to once again utilise their design space without being oppressed by the League. Normals are categorically not large Basics, and none of the restrictions on Normals mandate that.
Yet I've seen nothing but complaints about the newer Normals since Stargate, as well.
Again, I think you're taking the interpretation of "large Basics" a bit too literally, here, because you haven't answered the question: What is wrong with labeling Normals "Large Basics" and putting them in the same queue as "Small Basics" if nothing is changing about the Normals other than the name?
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
We'll have great Normal games when hosts stop making these two mistakes: thinking Normal are the equivalent of Large Basics (where "Basic" implies genericness and predictability), and thinking you need non-core mechanics or extra complexity to make a game exciting.
There is a middle ground between Large Basic and Specialty Lite, which is where Normals should prosper. To find this middle ground is, apparently and unfortunately, extremely difficult for many designers.
Yet I've seen nothing but complaints about the newer Normals since Stargate, as well.
Again, I think you're taking the interpretation of "large Basics" a bit too literally, here, because you haven't answered the question: What is wrong with labeling Normals "Large Basics" and putting them in the same queue as "Small Basics" if nothing is changing about the Normals other than the name?
Would you like guess how many Normals have run since Stargate? None. Not a single one. How, then, could people be complaining about games which have not taken place?
With regards to your question, ZDS has accurately answered it. Normals are not large Basics. Normals are not intended to be large Basics. The Normal guidelines permit and encourage games which are inappropriate for a Basic-level game queue.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
1. So w/r/t to core/newb games and the new player contact list, we can move ahead as soon as we find someone/rope in secreatries to administer that program.
6. People seem like to the oversight of the FTQ, but want it to be more transparent. So, do we just switch from PCQs to holding the FTQ committee in a public thread instead of by email or google group? How about that?
#4 (Behavior) is basically just an awareness issue.
Things we still need to hammer out:
I think we need to be more systematic about #3, and encouraging a market for shorter deadline games. How do we accomplish pushing that goal? It definitely seems far more manageable in our smaller games, minis and micros. Would not be a good fit for large games or core games that are trying to welcome new players. So, do we just set a recommended deadline length for micros that's more in line with other sites' pace?
2, managing our complexity ratio, we seem to be splitting on. I would agree that an intermediary step between basics and specialties is helpful, but I'm not certain we need to codify that, or not. Convince me.
5. Mafia universe. Generally speaking, I'm seeing support among the playerbase, including Annorax, for making recruiting efforts there. But we need consensus from the council on exactly what that looks like, and who should oversee that program.
Alright, we're again stalling out here.
I'll move ahead with getting someone to handle the new PCL.
We'll move ahead with reinstituting the FTQ, once the PCQs have run.
If we can't reach a consensus on normals/basics, I'd suggest we leave normals as-is, and occasionally upgrade from small to large basics, if sufficient demand is demonstrated.
I need more people to chime in on MU recruiting efforts and authorizing the FTQ committee to begin preparations to solicit and consider either new or reworked game submissions for advertising and recruitment purposes. Only Eco has chimed in, and I'm not entirely certain where he stands on the issue since he mostly suggested it might be superfluous to simply playing over there.
When you say "once the PCQs have run", which games are you talking about? Mind Screw obviously, but are you expecting more PCQ games to fire after that?
Happy to see the PCL start up again, we need some Basic hosts if anyone has a game lying around and/or we can use Off the Grid's grid for 9 players. Also happy to leave Normals as-is right now, and we can think about larger Basics if and when we see the demand for them.
I like the idea of an FTQ-like process to make a game for MU, although we probably don't want to aim at the highest levels of mindbending that the FTQ sometimes experiences in terms of mechanics. Az, do you want to be in charge of liaising with the MU staff to make sure everything is all clear? We might need to join their hosting queue, and I don't know how long that might be.
When you say "once the PCQs have run", which games are you talking about? Mind Screw obviously, but are you expecting more PCQ games to fire after that?
I thought that Taredas' Mind Screw, Iso's 4 Horsemen and Xyre's Big Red Button all won it and the latter two are currently waiting for their turn...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Prophylaxis »
Also modgaming Bur setups is kind of treading down a dark path
When you say "once the PCQs have run", which games are you talking about? Mind Screw obviously, but are you expecting more PCQ games to fire after that?
Happy to see the PCL start up again, we need some Basic hosts if anyone has a game lying around and/or we can use Off the Grid's grid for 9 players. Also happy to leave Normals as-is right now, and we can think about larger Basics if and when we see the demand for them.
I like the idea of an FTQ-like process to make a game for MU, although we probably don't want to aim at the highest levels of mindbending that the FTQ sometimes experiences in terms of mechanics. Az, do you want to be in charge of liaising with the MU staff to make sure everything is all clear? We might need to join their hosting queue, and I don't know how long that might be.
Yeah, I was thinking that we wouldn't bump Iso or Xyre, since we'd already awarded those slots by contest, and I believe our intention was that we could run two PCQ slots at a time, and are authorized to run concurrently and conclude within three months, potentially.
I would want to avoid risking over-stretching the playerbase, especially with Basics coming back. While I think we can easily run Xyre's in a Mini slot (it's 12 players), I think it's pretty clear 3 large games at once is too much. I think it would be best if 4 Horsemen ran after Star Trek finishes, so it takes the Specialty slot.
I would want to avoid risking over-stretching the playerbase, especially with Basics coming back. While I think we can easily run Xyre's in a Mini slot (it's 12 players), I think it's pretty clear 3 large games at once is too much. I think it would be best if 4 Horsemen ran after Star Trek finishes, so it takes the Specialty slot.
Out of curiosity, what is your plan to empty the remains of the Speciality queue? We have 2 games remaining, mine and Azreal's...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Prophylaxis »
Also modgaming Bur setups is kind of treading down a dark path
Well, that's a good question. Maybe it would be better to finish the Specialty queue, then run 4 Horsemen, then restart the FTQ? That would put it a long way away, but at least we get through the games. Open to ideas here, I just don't think we can handle more than 1 Normal and 1 Specialty at once.
Yeah, my current plan was to run to run Xyre's BRB as the next mini (unless DCIII makes a come-back, since he is the only person who has a set-up in the mini queue at the moment), empty the Speciality queue, run Iso's Horsemen and then continue with the FTQ (or whatever you are planning) after those.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Prophylaxis »
Also modgaming Bur setups is kind of treading down a dark path
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I think Micros should be capped at 7 players and their day length capped at 10 days. That would almost certainly guarantee a Micro takes no more than a month, which would solve the problem of always giving people a ready option to join in.
I'd also be in favor of discouraging the design of games with more than 20 roles for active players (a broad phrasing to account for things like hidden players) as a protection against the sort of quagmire that seems to have overtaken Mind Screw. The days where the community could maintain the high energy required for the twists and turns of a big game are probably behind it, simply because most of us have complicated lives now. Not prohibiting it, mind, but inserting the necessary caveat "larger games have a greater risk of imploding due to indifference, and so if you want to design a larger game, it'd better be damn well worth that risk."
Here's a question I don't think people have posed yet: how many people here still engage with the rest of MTGS (that is, for non-mafia-related activities) on a regular basis? Because I hate the Curse software, too (having to press something like three buttons just to get to the most recent posts in a single thread and having to draft my posts in notes and copy-paste them over on my phone is abysmal).
At this point, I'd be in favor of taking the entire community and setting up again on a new site, with maybe a few of us maintaining a presence here to get interested people to come visit. Undoubtedly it'd be complicated and irksome, and there'd be some attrition (both in players and history), but at the point where we're trying to come up with the best way to advertise ourselves offsite, one wonders whether it'd just be better to sell something new rather than the same old MTGS.
I wouldn't want to pick up and move without a significant super-majority being in favor of that measure. 66, 75%.
While I have a few ideas on possible ways to accomplish that (and can ask for assistance with if needed), moving wholesale to another site could cut down on the new players we'd get if they have to register a new account on a separate site. Hell, I'd propose marketing our games on other Curse forums like MMO-Champion and selling them on being able to just hop right in and sign up for a game; we'd lose that potential with a new site.
I'd say that moving to a new site should be considered only as an absolute last resort due to the community fracturing effect it'd be extremely likely to have.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey all... I'm retired, not dead. Check out what I'm doing these days (and beg me to come back if you want):
While I have a few ideas on possible ways to accomplish that (and can ask for assistance with if needed), moving wholesale to another site could cut down on the new players we'd get if they have to register a new account on a separate site. Hell, I'd propose marketing our games on other Curse forums like MMO-Champion and selling them on being able to just hop right in and sign up for a game; we'd lose that potential with a new site.
I'd say that moving to a new site should be considered only as an absolute last resort due to the community fracturing effect it'd be extremely likely to have.
Indeed.
Marketing us on the other Curse sites is definitely an interesting thought. When we get ready to roll out the new game lineup, we should likely cast our nets as wide as possible.
I wonder whether we'd be wiser to run those games on the MU website, or here. For people who are familiar with MU already, it's not so big of an ask to get them to hop over, and their interface is just fantastic, and would help with retention. And from there, you could get them to bleed over back to the home site.
Perhaps we run some of the games on MU, for the people who wouldn't otherwise come, and the rest here?
Going to bump this a bit, since I couldn't get the chance to post at all during my vacation and I want to comment because I've been around this community for around five years now.
The lack of growth and sharp decline has honestly been a huge problem that I've seen, and I only really stood up and noticed it around the 2013 era. I remember back in the old days (2011-2012) we used to run three Basics, three Minis, a Normal, a Specialty, and maybe an FTQ consistently. Even though I was a trash-tier player back then, the activity levels were astronomical in terms of how many games were run. Right now, we've cut back from eight/maybe nine games to only four, and that's seriously a problem we have to tackle.
From personal experience, I'm a big fan of the cross-community stuff and I've been playing somewhat consistently off-site for a couple of years now. We got a fair amount of the DarkLordPotter/fantasystrike people (fulcrum, Vaimes, CitricBase, NotVoxxicus/Newcomb) over here, and we've invited some MTGS people to play over there (tom just joined, I've been playing there for three years or so). I really like this cross-culture stuff that's happening and I hugely respect the MafiaUniverse people for connecting all of the interspersed mafia communities from across the 'Web for doing something like this. I think contributing to an off-site community first - joining their games, get actively involved in their community - and then maybe recruiting some of the stronger players from that site to play over here is something that has worked in the past.
The big problem here is that so many of the MU people (and mafia communities across the web) simply can't handle 14 day to month long deadlines. (That makes me remember games from years ago that had like 2-3 month long Days, haha). I think we just have to sell them on the fact that MTGS caters to a slower paced, more analytical playerbase. From reading the championship games I know that there are people like that - maybe they'll go outside their comfort zone and try out longer Days.
I would love to bring Basics back; the quick sign ups of Iso's Three Little Pigs shows that there is an audience for simple 12 man games. That, or copying the Matrix setup that mafiascum uses, due to how good Off the Grid Mafia was, could work.
Quote from Silvercrys »
Well, speaking as one of those new players... I'm came here for Magic information first (been lurking MTGS for years looking at primers and what not) and accidentally stumbled on to the Mafia subforum. I had some experience playing face-to-face and figured I'd give it a shot.
This was exactly my experience. Came here for the custom card subforum, and I played mafia face to face and wondered what the forum version of it was all about.
This might be my fault (since I didn't know that people couldn't post on the blue announcement at the top until Azrael notified me) but something I noticed was that people always go to the signup threads, and never post in any of the "Welcome to the Mafia Subforum" or "New Players, post here" threads. I wonder why? I think I remember a thread like existing when I first joined, and I posted in it.
..and then I got distracted with reading pages 2 and 3 of this thread and forgot what I was going to say. I'll voice support for Mini and Large Basics, though. Those sound great to me.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I'm pretty sure there are just as many people who feel that the long deadlines are welcome.
I personally don't see a problem with my proposed system (# of players + lynch threshold in days, to be changed at host discretion for certain types of setups.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I'm pretty sure there are just as many people who feel that the long deadlines are welcome.
I personally don't see a problem with my proposed system (# of players + lynch threshold in days, to be changed at host discretion for certain types of setups.
I certainly don't want to advocate for removing something that a group of people enjoy.
But as many have said, it might be leading to the death of the forum (among other factors, of course).
I think a suggestion was made somewhere about trying rigid 2 week maximum deadlines for a while to see how it plays out. Those deadlines were very well received in Ace Attorney, and seems to be the best blend of 'long enough so that mafia can be a hobby rather than your only hobby' while still keeping the game moving at a reasonable clip.
I say this as someone who has been a part of two of the most drug out, epic endgames the site has had, even.
The forum has existed and strived for over ten years with long deadlines, why would they only now become poison to it?
Also, the thing with deadlines is it's very hard to find a middle ground for them. Every deadline that is perfect for someone will be too long or too short for someone else. There's no pleasing everyone.
We could try running a "Quick Games" queue, maybe.
I like this idea; I'd like to at least consider Quick Games as a queue that has a hard deadline cap for all games, but no other queue-imposed requirements. Games could be listed as Quick Normal, Quick Specialty, Quick Whatever, but having the option to put a game of any complexity/size in that queue would help with keeping the queue filled and having games and hosts ready to go.
Hell, if you guys think this is worth a test, I have a review-ready setup (Bastard Mod Mafia II) and a couple ideas that'd make for good test subjects without having to staple the deadline requirement onto an existing setup in one of the current queues.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey all... I'm retired, not dead. Check out what I'm doing these days (and beg me to come back if you want):
I don't think that our long game deadlines are a problem, but if people see fit to run some shorter deadline games, there's certainly an untapped market there for the tapping.
I think a suggestion was made somewhere about trying rigid 2 week maximum deadlines for a while to see how it plays out. Those deadlines were very well received in Ace Attorney, and seems to be the best blend of 'long enough so that mafia can be a hobby rather than your only hobby' while still keeping the game moving at a reasonable clip.
I say this as someone who has been a part of two of the most drug out, epic endgames the site has had, even.
As the person who hosted Ace Attorney, I can confirm that the two week deadlines gave the players enough time to accomplish what they wanted to do as well as kept the game moving at a rapid clip (19 player Specialty that started in March and concluded in May). I like two week deadlines with a bunch of emergency deadline extension options, with on the ball mods - we were able to get replacements quite quickly, and I don't think the game had much of a problem with lurkers?
I think a suggestion was made somewhere about trying rigid 2 week maximum deadlines for a while to see how it plays out. Those deadlines were very well received in Ace Attorney, and seems to be the best blend of 'long enough so that mafia can be a hobby rather than your only hobby' while still keeping the game moving at a reasonable clip.
I say this as someone who has been a part of two of the most drug out, epic endgames the site has had, even.
As the person who hosted Ace Attorney, I can confirm that the two week deadlines gave the players enough time to accomplish what they wanted to do as well as kept the game moving at a rapid clip (19 player Specialty that started in March and concluded in May). I like two week deadlines with a bunch of emergency deadline extension options, with on the ball mods - we were able to get replacements quite quickly, and I don't think the game had much of a problem with lurkers?
That was an excellent game. I enjoyed it very much.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I left because the curse UI is horrendous and the "notable" players that are here now enjoy smelling their own farts. Every time I've tried to come back and get back into the game I become dissuaded when I realize neither of these things have changed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Official Moderator of The [Gutter]
Think the MtgStaff is just swell? Join today! You too can be involved in an 8 year grudge and delete nearly 9000 of kpaca's posts!
I haven't written it, and I haven't seen any volunteers, so I suspect nothing is happening. I can try and get around to it if no-one else really wants to, but it won't be for a couple of weeks at least.
Quote from Iso »
Did we ever decide on a finalized queue structure? If so, we should probably tell our Secretaries how to update the Hosting thread.
Pretty sure we just agreed to leave things as they are (Ensuring we only run one specialty and one normal at once, once Mind Screw ends) and to bring back Basics. We've yet to actually fire one, but we could do with people signing up to host them.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Mmkay. And I suppose the "switch PCQ to FTQ again" after running the 2 we have queued up will also be a thing?
Also, I thought we were dropping Specialty in favor of making all games of that sort FTQ?
Yes and yes, but neither of those things can happen until we finish running through the Specialty list. We basically just need to not run more than two large games at once.
Would this post I wrote in the Family thread qualify as an article?
Sadly not, if the article is going to get accepted for the main site, it needs to be more introductory. They would quite like to see a draft/pilot to get an idea of what we want, since they're reluctant to publish non-MTG articles. Some sort of tenuous connection to MTG would probably help.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
With Star Trek MU4 finishing at last, I have updated the data for 2016 Q1 and Q2 (i.e. games that started this year up to end of June). Full data is still available on my github.
Full data with these two quarters added on:
As can be seen, there has been a slight recovery! Total player numbers are up to where they were a year ago. This is mostly down to a large growth in new players (hooray), so if they stick around and become active players, we're in much better shape as a forum than we have been. Active players stayed reasonably stable, but this will hopefully see an uptick as new players stick around. Returning players fell slightly, which is a small concern, but they are still within reasonable historic parameters.
While this step of recovery is great news, we cannot rest on our laurels: Basics have been brought back to help new players out (and any of our newer players itching to keep playing should head over to the Player Contact List
and sign up for a Basic). Most importantly, our game queues are critically empty. We should be running an event to help repopulate them, but if anyone (ANYONE) out there has any interest at all in hosting a game they should get on it now: there's never been a better time to host!
Yeah, but I think minis would be better. Micros seem to volatile for newbies.
Those games all looked fun, but they made the games end very quickly or at least gave them the potential to end quickly due to a misplay. A micro should be fine for new players if it's relatively straight. When I played face-to-face games we only ever had 10 players at most. It's not exactly the same thing, but it's comparable.
Personally, I'd love to play in a themed set of four games with increasing complexity. But some people may not want to sign up for four-ish games in a row before they even know whether they like the game or not, so that should be taken into consideration.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
We had this exact conversation when we killed the League, and the agreement was that the League was holding Normals down and making them be lower complexity than they needed to be. The whole point of killing the League and reinstating Normals was to allow them to once again utilise their design space without being oppressed by the League. Normals are categorically not large Basics, and none of the restrictions on Normals mandate that.
1. So w/r/t to core/newb games and the new player contact list, we can move ahead as soon as we find someone/rope in secreatries to administer that program.
6. People seem like to the oversight of the FTQ, but want it to be more transparent. So, do we just switch from PCQs to holding the FTQ committee in a public thread instead of by email or google group? How about that?
#4 (Behavior) is basically just an awareness issue.
Things we still need to hammer out:
I think we need to be more systematic about #3, and encouraging a market for shorter deadline games. How do we accomplish pushing that goal? It definitely seems far more manageable in our smaller games, minis and micros. Would not be a good fit for large games or core games that are trying to welcome new players. So, do we just set a recommended deadline length for micros that's more in line with other sites' pace?
2, managing our complexity ratio, we seem to be splitting on. I would agree that an intermediary step between basics and specialties is helpful, but I'm not certain we need to codify that, or not. Convince me.
5. Mafia universe. Generally speaking, I'm seeing support among the playerbase, including Annorax, for making recruiting efforts there. But we need consensus from the council on exactly what that looks like, and who should oversee that program.
6. How about each PCQ entry has to be sponsored by someone on the FTQ committee? That way each game is certified up to standard, but the choice of what gets played is still up to the players?
3. Deadlines: I think it's just education and ensuring it becomes part of the reviewing process. Once shorter deadlines start being used and enforced, they'll become more commonplace without needing to be mandated.
2. As the person pushing for change, I feel like you ought to be bearing the burden of convincing, but since you've asked: I believe that if it's not codified complexity will only creep upwards, over time making the games less and less useful as a stepping stone, while also alienating players who do not enjoy Specialty level games (but want some more variety than what Basics can provide). It's not like the limits are particularly strict; are there any you disagree with the existence of?
5. While a properly planned program would be nice, I think exposure is the most important thing. Anyone curious should just go play on MU, make sure your origin is listed as MTGS, and make sure you represent the site well by being a decent human being.
6. I think it's fairly easy bar for a setup to pass to be considered for the FTQ - the harder burden is to persuade the committee that you have the best possible setup, based on how well it's been designed, its complexity, and elegance.
2. Do you think that complexity creep was more of a problem earlier in our site's history than it would be now? I'm unsure about that.
5. I think that might do well at representing our individual players, but what we really want to sell is the complete package: a great playerbase, creative designs, a more relaxed pace, and terrific flavor.
2. Difficult to say whether it would be worse or not, but the past has shown us that complexity creep does happen, and that it is a problem.
5. Sure, I'm just saying people don't need to wait for a plan, they should just go and get involved if they fancy it. A coherent plan is still a good idea.
- Mafia Secretary posts an announcement stating a deadline for FTQ submissions.
- Hosts send in their reviewed setups. At least one reviewer for each FTQ submission must be a member of the qualified reviewer group. The names of the qualified reviewer group (FTQ committee, whatever you want to call it) are always available in the setup thread as public knowledge.
- The Mafia Secretary announces the list of submissions, names redacted, to the qualified reviewer group.
- The qualified reviewer who reviewed the setup makes his or her recommendation to the group.
- Group discusses and votes on which setup should run.
- Mafia Secretary gives the go-ahead to post signups and also makes an announcement that describes the voting process, explaining why the reviewers selected the setup they did.
- Repeat this process a few weeks before the FTQ game ends.
EDIT: I'd also like to volunteer to host a basic when/if that queue returns.
"...a talisman against all evil, so long as you obey me."
Yet I've seen nothing but complaints about the newer Normals since Stargate, as well.
Again, I think you're taking the interpretation of "large Basics" a bit too literally, here, because you haven't answered the question: What is wrong with labeling Normals "Large Basics" and putting them in the same queue as "Small Basics" if nothing is changing about the Normals other than the name?
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
That sounds great!
Would you like guess how many Normals have run since Stargate? None. Not a single one. How, then, could people be complaining about games which have not taken place?
With regards to your question, ZDS has accurately answered it. Normals are not large Basics. Normals are not intended to be large Basics. The Normal guidelines permit and encourage games which are inappropriate for a Basic-level game queue.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I'd settle for something in between large basic and more recent normals.
A slightly lower powered Checks and Balances, which is one of the best games this site has had.
Alright, we're again stalling out here.
I'll move ahead with getting someone to handle the new PCL.
We'll move ahead with reinstituting the FTQ, once the PCQs have run.
If we can't reach a consensus on normals/basics, I'd suggest we leave normals as-is, and occasionally upgrade from small to large basics, if sufficient demand is demonstrated.
I need more people to chime in on MU recruiting efforts and authorizing the FTQ committee to begin preparations to solicit and consider either new or reworked game submissions for advertising and recruitment purposes. Only Eco has chimed in, and I'm not entirely certain where he stands on the issue since he mostly suggested it might be superfluous to simply playing over there.
Happy to see the PCL start up again, we need some Basic hosts if anyone has a game lying around and/or we can use Off the Grid's grid for 9 players. Also happy to leave Normals as-is right now, and we can think about larger Basics if and when we see the demand for them.
I like the idea of an FTQ-like process to make a game for MU, although we probably don't want to aim at the highest levels of mindbending that the FTQ sometimes experiences in terms of mechanics. Az, do you want to be in charge of liaising with the MU staff to make sure everything is all clear? We might need to join their hosting queue, and I don't know how long that might be.
I thought that Taredas' Mind Screw, Iso's 4 Horsemen and Xyre's Big Red Button all won it and the latter two are currently waiting for their turn...
*nods* I can be the liaison.
Yeah, I was thinking that we wouldn't bump Iso or Xyre, since we'd already awarded those slots by contest, and I believe our intention was that we could run two PCQ slots at a time, and are authorized to run concurrently and conclude within three months, potentially.
Out of curiosity, what is your plan to empty the remains of the Speciality queue? We have 2 games remaining, mine and Azreal's...
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I think Micros should be capped at 7 players and their day length capped at 10 days. That would almost certainly guarantee a Micro takes no more than a month, which would solve the problem of always giving people a ready option to join in.
I'd also be in favor of discouraging the design of games with more than 20 roles for active players (a broad phrasing to account for things like hidden players) as a protection against the sort of quagmire that seems to have overtaken Mind Screw. The days where the community could maintain the high energy required for the twists and turns of a big game are probably behind it, simply because most of us have complicated lives now. Not prohibiting it, mind, but inserting the necessary caveat "larger games have a greater risk of imploding due to indifference, and so if you want to design a larger game, it'd better be damn well worth that risk."
Here's a question I don't think people have posed yet: how many people here still engage with the rest of MTGS (that is, for non-mafia-related activities) on a regular basis? Because I hate the Curse software, too (having to press something like three buttons just to get to the most recent posts in a single thread and having to draft my posts in notes and copy-paste them over on my phone is abysmal).
At this point, I'd be in favor of taking the entire community and setting up again on a new site, with maybe a few of us maintaining a presence here to get interested people to come visit. Undoubtedly it'd be complicated and irksome, and there'd be some attrition (both in players and history), but at the point where we're trying to come up with the best way to advertise ourselves offsite, one wonders whether it'd just be better to sell something new rather than the same old MTGS.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
While I have a few ideas on possible ways to accomplish that (and can ask for assistance with if needed), moving wholesale to another site could cut down on the new players we'd get if they have to register a new account on a separate site. Hell, I'd propose marketing our games on other Curse forums like MMO-Champion and selling them on being able to just hop right in and sign up for a game; we'd lose that potential with a new site.
I'd say that moving to a new site should be considered only as an absolute last resort due to the community fracturing effect it'd be extremely likely to have.
https://twitch.tv/annorax10 (classic retro speedruns & occasional MTGO/MTGA screwaround streams)
https://twitch.tv/SwiftorCasino (yes, my team and I run live dealer games for the baldman using his channel points as chips)
Indeed.
Marketing us on the other Curse sites is definitely an interesting thought. When we get ready to roll out the new game lineup, we should likely cast our nets as wide as possible.
I wonder whether we'd be wiser to run those games on the MU website, or here. For people who are familiar with MU already, it's not so big of an ask to get them to hop over, and their interface is just fantastic, and would help with retention. And from there, you could get them to bleed over back to the home site.
Perhaps we run some of the games on MU, for the people who wouldn't otherwise come, and the rest here?
If we moved to somewhere else, I'm not sure if I would follow or just quit playing internet mafia...
The lack of growth and sharp decline has honestly been a huge problem that I've seen, and I only really stood up and noticed it around the 2013 era. I remember back in the old days (2011-2012) we used to run three Basics, three Minis, a Normal, a Specialty, and maybe an FTQ consistently. Even though I was a trash-tier player back then, the activity levels were astronomical in terms of how many games were run. Right now, we've cut back from eight/maybe nine games to only four, and that's seriously a problem we have to tackle.
From personal experience, I'm a big fan of the cross-community stuff and I've been playing somewhat consistently off-site for a couple of years now. We got a fair amount of the DarkLordPotter/fantasystrike people (fulcrum, Vaimes, CitricBase, NotVoxxicus/Newcomb) over here, and we've invited some MTGS people to play over there (tom just joined, I've been playing there for three years or so). I really like this cross-culture stuff that's happening and I hugely respect the MafiaUniverse people for connecting all of the interspersed mafia communities from across the 'Web for doing something like this. I think contributing to an off-site community first - joining their games, get actively involved in their community - and then maybe recruiting some of the stronger players from that site to play over here is something that has worked in the past.
The big problem here is that so many of the MU people (and mafia communities across the web) simply can't handle 14 day to month long deadlines. (That makes me remember games from years ago that had like 2-3 month long Days, haha). I think we just have to sell them on the fact that MTGS caters to a slower paced, more analytical playerbase. From reading the championship games I know that there are people like that - maybe they'll go outside their comfort zone and try out longer Days.
I would love to bring Basics back; the quick sign ups of Iso's Three Little Pigs shows that there is an audience for simple 12 man games. That, or copying the Matrix setup that mafiascum uses, due to how good Off the Grid Mafia was, could work.
This was exactly my experience. Came here for the custom card subforum, and I played mafia face to face and wondered what the forum version of it was all about.
This might be my fault (since I didn't know that people couldn't post on the blue announcement at the top until Azrael notified me) but something I noticed was that people always go to the signup threads, and never post in any of the "Welcome to the Mafia Subforum" or "New Players, post here" threads. I wonder why? I think I remember a thread like existing when I first joined, and I posted in it.
..and then I got distracted with reading pages 2 and 3 of this thread and forgot what I was going to say. I'll voice support for Mini and Large Basics, though. Those sound great to me.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I personally don't see a problem with my proposed system (# of players + lynch threshold in days, to be changed at host discretion for certain types of setups.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I certainly don't want to advocate for removing something that a group of people enjoy.
But as many have said, it might be leading to the death of the forum (among other factors, of course).
I say this as someone who has been a part of two of the most drug out, epic endgames the site has had, even.
I like this idea; I'd like to at least consider Quick Games as a queue that has a hard deadline cap for all games, but no other queue-imposed requirements. Games could be listed as Quick Normal, Quick Specialty, Quick Whatever, but having the option to put a game of any complexity/size in that queue would help with keeping the queue filled and having games and hosts ready to go.
Hell, if you guys think this is worth a test, I have a review-ready setup (Bastard Mod Mafia II) and a couple ideas that'd make for good test subjects without having to staple the deadline requirement onto an existing setup in one of the current queues.
https://twitch.tv/annorax10 (classic retro speedruns & occasional MTGO/MTGA screwaround streams)
https://twitch.tv/SwiftorCasino (yes, my team and I run live dealer games for the baldman using his channel points as chips)
As the person who hosted Ace Attorney, I can confirm that the two week deadlines gave the players enough time to accomplish what they wanted to do as well as kept the game moving at a rapid clip (19 player Specialty that started in March and concluded in May). I like two week deadlines with a bunch of emergency deadline extension options, with on the ball mods - we were able to get replacements quite quickly, and I don't think the game had much of a problem with lurkers?
That was an excellent game. I enjoyed it very much.
What's the progress on recruiting?
What's the progress on article-writing?
Has anyone reached out to old vets? I know HAWKEYE is coming back soon.
Did we ever decide on a finalized queue structure? If so, we should probably tell our Secretaries how to update the Hosting thread.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Aside from that, I have done no recruiting.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
A cross-site game is starting very soon on MU http://www.mafiauniverse.com/forums/threads/3139-Org-CFC-and-MTGS-inter-forum-invitational-exhibition-game
I haven't written it, and I haven't seen any volunteers, so I suspect nothing is happening. I can try and get around to it if no-one else really wants to, but it won't be for a couple of weeks at least.
Pretty sure we just agreed to leave things as they are (Ensuring we only run one specialty and one normal at once, once Mind Screw ends) and to bring back Basics. We've yet to actually fire one, but we could do with people signing up to host them.
Also, I thought we were dropping Specialty in favor of making all games of that sort FTQ?
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Yes and yes, but neither of those things can happen until we finish running through the Specialty list. We basically just need to not run more than two large games at once.
Sadly not, if the article is going to get accepted for the main site, it needs to be more introductory. They would quite like to see a draft/pilot to get an idea of what we want, since they're reluctant to publish non-MTG articles. Some sort of tenuous connection to MTG would probably help.
You could also bring up the politics of multiplayer Magic formats and how they compared to Mafia politics.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Full data with these two quarters added on:
As can be seen, there has been a slight recovery! Total player numbers are up to where they were a year ago. This is mostly down to a large growth in new players (hooray), so if they stick around and become active players, we're in much better shape as a forum than we have been. Active players stayed reasonably stable, but this will hopefully see an uptick as new players stick around. Returning players fell slightly, which is a small concern, but they are still within reasonable historic parameters.
While this step of recovery is great news, we cannot rest on our laurels: Basics have been brought back to help new players out (and any of our newer players itching to keep playing should head over to the Player Contact List
and sign up for a Basic). Most importantly, our game queues are critically empty. We should be running an event to help repopulate them, but if anyone (ANYONE) out there has any interest at all in hosting a game they should get on it now: there's never been a better time to host!