EPTActive List of Mafia Games - Page 46
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
| ||
|
Forumite
Sweden3280 Posts
On November 01 2011 01:35 iGrok wrote: I have a 7 player setup ready to go if we're looking for small setups. I don´t know what the others think, but I say you should go ahead with it. It will probably be for those who didn´t want to join a Caller game, so it´s not stealing players, and even if it did, it´s going to fill up quickly and get played, which is better than waiting for weeks without anything happening. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
| ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On November 01 2011 03:06 Forumite wrote: ...it´s going to fill up quickly and get played, which is better than waiting for weeks without anything happening. My thoughts exactly. I'll write it up (its all in my notebook atm) and post it tonight. | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
| ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
However, I think we should wait to hear what Foolishness thinks before posting any games. | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
Its been more than a week since the last Mafia game ended. | ||
|
Hesmyrr
Canada5776 Posts
| ||
Ver
United States2186 Posts
| ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
I love big games as much as the next guy, but in times of less activity we need smaller games. It'll also help activity if players know they don't have to commit 3 weeks to play a single game. | ||
|
Ver
United States2186 Posts
| ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On November 01 2011 06:51 Ver wrote: Well it shouldn't be hard whatsoever to get 20-30 people games from S&G or general. 2-3 years ago we were able to get 30-70 player games without problem and TL is so much more populous now. Minigames are also going to have lower signup rates of forum regulars because more people like playing 15-30 player games than the minis. Yes, but we don't have those players now, and I'd rather not play in a 30 man game with 25 newbies (no offense newbies), unless the setup is extremely limited. Otherwise they'll learn bad follow the blue habits and the game will be boring, with little analysis actually going on. 11 player Newbie Minis with Coaches are definitely the way I'd go, even if that meant running more than one Newbie Mini at once. Once we do have the activity to warrant large games, I'm all for them, but right now we just don't. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
Also I'm up for a mini. Mafia withdrawals man | ||
|
Incognito
United States2071 Posts
On November 01 2011 06:10 iGrok wrote: I'll post my game now, and wait 24 hours for objections before the earliest possible start time. Worst possible scenario? People signed up for a game and it gets cancelled. Its been more than a week since the last Mafia game ended. Its kinda late now, but I think it would be best if you wait for approval before posting. If everyone gets impatient and decides to ignore this thread then we'll end up with a bunch of dead end threads and there would be no point in having this thread. There are also 3 hosts in line for a mini game, and cutting in just because you think its convenient isn't really fair to those hosts. We have always had the problem of having more people wanting to host than play. Adding another category for games just seems like it will complicate the issue by spreading our resources thin. And while newer player only games are nice in theory, I think its much easier to learn when everyone is mixed in together, provided there is some organized coaching going on (so people know they can talk to someone who isn't trying to actively misinform them). While I get the argument that new players might be intimidated to play in a game with experienced players, I think that the intimidation factor is overstated. The fact is that there are players who are interested in improving their skills and are eager to play games, while there are players who are not. Usually people who are not interested in improving aren't suddenly going to get interested. By having new-player-only games, you cut off the newer players from the rest of the active player base, lower the skill ceiling, misrepresent how games actually unfold on TL Mafia, and prevent ambitious newer players from seeing the strategic potential of the game. Segregating experienced from new players has the goal of encouraging activity, but this is a blind hope. Players who naturally show interest will participate even if there are high impact players in the game, and inactive players aren't going to do anything either way. Rather than hoping to encourage activity by barring experienced players from playing, we should be focusing on creating an environment where ambitious mafia players can quickly become integrated into the community. Playing with experienced players shouldn't intimidate players, it should motivate them to get better. Of course, BM, flame wars, spam, etc. will scare players away, but having highly skilled players mixed in with newer players should provide more of an incentive to improve rather than intimidate. I propose that instead of having newer player only games, we allow experienced players into these games on a few conditions. Experienced players are invited to play provided that they are well mannered, don't spam, and recognize the goals of the setup. These games are not a place to dominate the game and win at all costs, they are primarily focused on giving newer players direction and a sense of what to do in the game. Of course, you should also legitimately contribute your own ideas, but the point is that this is secondary to winning. Don't make a bad argument to get someone lynched just because you know other people will fall for it. The more transparent, the better, as far as learning is concerned. Of course, this would also misrepresent how things go around here, but as long as players can recognize what is a good argument or not, they should be able to tell when people are just trying to meet a certain end vs. when they actually have a good case. | ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
On November 01 2011 06:51 Ver wrote: Well it shouldn't be hard whatsoever to get 20-30 people games from S&G or general. 2-3 years ago we were able to get 30-70 player games without problem and TL is so much more populous now. Minigames are also going to have lower signup rates of forum regulars because more people like playing 15-30 player games than the minis. I have a nice recruitment post ready and everything I just need for a game to be posted -__- Hell, I have a setup ready too, I could have a game and the recruitment post up tonight if necessary, I just need the goahead | ||
|
Cyber_Cheese
Australia3615 Posts
On November 01 2011 08:05 GMarshal wrote: I have a nice recruitment post ready and everything I just need for a game to be posted -__- Hell, I have a setup ready too, I could have a game and the recruitment post up tonight if necessary, I just need the goahead If you don't have a co-host, I volunteer  | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
No offense to Palmar at all. But it just isn't. I don't see an 18 player game filling up, unless theres a ton of people who've just been waiting to play anything but Caller's game. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On November 01 2011 09:30 iGrok wrote: 18 Players is not a "Mini" game. No offense to Palmar at all. But it just isn't. I don't see an 18 player game filling up, unless theres a ton of people who've just been waiting to play anything but Caller's game. Yes, he was worried about that too, so if it looks like signups will not fill he will change to a 9 person game (probably an F11 or similar setup). We decided to post it as a team melee because people were expressing interest in it a while back, so we will see if that interest is still persisting. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
This whole inactivity business is sad. | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On November 02 2011 04:49 Palmar wrote: Yeah, but that's foolishness's decision too, he and I were in contact through pms during this week. I mean, I personally offered to give up my spot for something smaller, so it's not about me wanting to host a game, it's more about us all having to trust foolish is doing whatever feels right. He was probably waiting to launch my game to see if Caller's would fill up and probably also waiting for an update for Caller, all the while he also made sure I was ready to put up my game within a short time of his go-ahead. I mean, I think everyone appreciates the effort you put in, you tried to start a game when people were calling for one, but while we use foolish's system it's probably best if we follow it. Moved to proper thread. I'm not putting you at fault at all. What I do have an issue with is that the system didn't work, because of the games that were queued. Caller's game still isn't full and people are /outing, and for a full week there were no games being played or any signups other than Caller's game. You may have been in PM contact with Foolishness, but the rest of us had no way of knowing that. Once your game starts (and Caller's ultimately gets removed since people are leaving), who goes next? Whats up with XLVI? Is that another game that there's pm convos that is ready to go but we just don't know about it? | ||
| ||
