Total Posts:56|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Mafia - mod ratings

bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:01:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
We all know that some mafia games are more successful and more fun than others. And it seems like games run by better mods are more successful. I believe that mods who do a very poor job should not be invited to moderate again. Moderators who do a very good job should get more frequent opportunities to mod (by removing bad moderators from the pool). Given that a large game can last up to a month long, it is vital that we not force ourselves to suffer through bad or extremely slow games.

How would you rate the following moderators? (on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the highest)

I-am-a-panda (Heavy Metal Mafia)
Zetsubou (4chan)
Danielle (Holidays)
Feverish (elements of hip hop)


Take into account responsiveness (to questions, replacing people, ending the DP on time, updating vote count), fairness (not making mistakes, punishing misbehavior properly), and game design (balanced teams, interesting characters, good roles). Feel free to include other games in your rating of the mod as well.

I'll add more moderators to the list if this is successful, but for now, everyone post and I'll post running averages.

For me:
I-am-a-panda 1/10
Zetsubou - didn't play in his 4chan game, so no rating
Danielle 9/10
Feverish 9/10

Feel free to explain your ratings if you want.

panda: will explain in full when his game is officially done
danielle: would be a perfect 10, if not for the Vi voting mistake, although that seems to be a very rare mistake on her part
feverish: would be a 10, but a few complaints were made about teams not being balanced

Albert Einstein defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." Everyone should get a chance to mod, but bad moderators should not get a chance to mod repeatedly, as if we expect a better result the next time...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:05:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
People can change and do better the next time. Also, I think that if you don't believe someone would be a good mod, then don't play their games. You can't really prevent them from signing up, or else you face them moding without respecting the list, and thus causing the list to break down (as all those that have been waiting decide to not respect the list).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:07:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
i want to be rated!
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:11:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Panda - 3/10
Feverish - 10/10
Danielle 8/10

Panda's game... died, mostly due to the mod. I personally believe that panda would not make the same mistakes twice and most of the issues came down to bad wording and lack of interest, so I believe if we were to give him another chance, the next game would atleast be of average quality, if not higher.
Feverish, great theme, great concept. I was pretty much the only active member of my team but I can't blame that on Feverish.
Danielle - good game, fairly balanced. Annoying thing with innomen, but thats a minor issue.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:24:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I agree with OreEle. If a mod shows up on the list that you don't think will be a good mod, you can simply choose not to sign up for their game. I didn't play in Zetsubou's game for specifically that reason. I figured if he was so illogical with the actual playing that I didn't trust him to mod lol. And to be perfectly honest, I knew from playing in past games that even though Panda is probs one of my favorite people here, he is probably my least favorite mod so signing up for his game only to be annoyed at the outcome is pretty much my fault, I suppose.

I did make that minor mistake in my last game but I pride myself on being a pretty good mod I think. I like that I try to keep everything balanced (with roles), that I push people to move along to keep the game moving as fast as possible (though OreEle not signing on for the weekends kinda created a hiccup last game) and that my themes aren't annoying because I hate most of the themes people use (I actually like KFC though lol).

I don't remember the people who modded most of the games I've played but I know askbob, tvellalott, feverish and Vi's games were good. Can't remember the rest off the top of my head. I know I don't usually enjoy playing in Korashk's games so I tend to not sign up. Nothing personal; just a preference. The Geese brothers also get really crazy with their roles sometime and meh aren't among my faves. Basically I'm just gonna sign up for people I think will be competent enough or for games that I think I'll probs enjoy.
President of DDO
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:26:44 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Aslbob and Danielle are both equal at the top. There seems to be really good balance in power distribution, and imagination.

I only had the one abbreviated experience with Koopin, although he seems quite competent at it. My first game was with JBlake, and that was a great game too.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:28:44 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 10:05:35 AM, OreEle wrote:
People can change and do better the next time. Also, I think that if you don't believe someone would be a good mod, then don't play their games. You can't really prevent them from signing up, or else you face them moding without respecting the list, and thus causing the list to break down (as all those that have been waiting decide to not respect the list).

Ok, then we should abolish large games and run 3 small games at a time, staggered slightly. I'm fine with skipping what I know will be a really badly modded game if it'll be over in a week and there are other opportunities to play. This proposal has its own merits as well. I don't think we have enough truly active players on the site for a game of 25. 18 maybe...

I think you're missing the flipside OreEle - the player side. Askbob has done an amazing job with the beginner games getting new players to be interested in mafia. Bad mods then turn them off to the experience. And forcing players to sit out multiple, back-to-back badly mod-ed games will mean even more people may stop playing mafia altogether. If I "sat out" mafia for a month, I'd definitely miss the next sign-ups after that.

It's not hard to regulate. If someone gets rated an average of 1.5 out of 10 and tries to skip the list, just tell no one to sign up (don't know why anyone would want to). The problem is, without ratings, I personally don't know if someone has mod-ed before/will be bad. In fact, if I wanted to do your "sitting out" solution, I'd still need you and older players to rate unknown mods for me, to help me decide.

It's almost illogical that with all the libertarians on here we have such a state planning style approach to mafia mod-ing. The mod-list should be like a guild of high quality mods who guarantee their products on the free market, not a communist style, equal-modding opportunity (in spite of quality) system.

In any smart system, when a service is rendered, it is rated and the service provider is held accountable for bad services rendered...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:34:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I really enjoyed Askbob's games. The fairy tale one was a rather difficult for the mafia, since all the roles tied together (making it nearly impossible to make a fake claim once the town announced their roles, because they could all confirm each other), but that was trying something new, and I really like doing those, even if they don't work our perfectly.

He has done a great job with the rookie games too, bringing up some really good players which have added new life into the game (I remember when we had 2 small games and 1 large game going at the same time, that things really slowed down, 1 small game ended up being canceled, and both the other games hit hard times with participation, but we recovered). I do look forward to the next wave of rookie games and rookies.

Also, I think Koopin is doing really well with his game, though I'm kinda sorry that I made so much of the town have to out themselves to get lynched.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:36:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 10:24:43 AM, Danielle wrote:
I agree with OreEle. If a mod shows up on the list that you don't think will be a good mod, you can simply choose not to sign up for their game. I didn't play in Zetsubou's game for specifically that reason. I figured if he was so illogical with the actual playing that I didn't trust him to mod lol. And to be perfectly honest, I knew from playing in past games that even though Panda is probs one of my favorite people here, he is probably my least favorite mod so signing up for his game only to be annoyed at the outcome is pretty much my fault, I suppose.

I did make that minor mistake in my last game but I pride myself on being a pretty good mod I think. I like that I try to keep everything balanced (with roles), that I push people to move along to keep the game moving as fast as possible (though OreEle not signing on for the weekends kinda created a hiccup last game) and that my themes aren't annoying because I hate most of the themes people use (I actually like KFC though lol).

I don't remember the people who modded most of the games I've played but I know askbob, tvellalott, feverish and Vi's games were good. Can't remember the rest off the top of my head. I know I don't usually enjoy playing in Korashk's games so I tend to not sign up. Nothing personal; just a preference. The Geese brothers also get really crazy with their roles sometime and meh aren't among my faves. Basically I'm just gonna sign up for people I think will be competent enough or for games that I think I'll probs enjoy.

I just don't see where the logic in that is though. Zets is supposedly next up for large games, which are slow enough as it is. If a lot of the players agree that his game will be bad, why not skip him? Some people sign up anyway just b/c they want to play mafia, regardless of the experience, but there's a simple way to solve this problem. I don't get why we're slaves to some random mod list. In a free market, we'd encourage the next mod whose game we all want to play in to go, and we'd sign up for that game instead. But there is inelastic demand for games (many people want to play no matter what), so when supply is constricted, people sign up anyway. It just seems illogical to me. If we all agree that one game will be bad and the next mod will be much more enjoyable, obvious = obvious.

And you are a good mod danielle. I'd like to see you going more often b/c I'm interested to see what you can come up with. I don't see why you should only get to mod like once every 4 months for small games, and once a year for large games...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:46:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 10:28:44 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 3/21/2011 10:05:35 AM, OreEle wrote:
People can change and do better the next time. Also, I think that if you don't believe someone would be a good mod, then don't play their games. You can't really prevent them from signing up, or else you face them moding without respecting the list, and thus causing the list to break down (as all those that have been waiting decide to not respect the list).

Ok, then we should abolish large games and run 3 small games at a time, staggered slightly. I'm fine with skipping what I know will be a really badly modded game if it'll be over in a week and there are other opportunities to play. This proposal has its own merits as well. I don't think we have enough truly active players on the site for a game of 25. 18 maybe...

I think you're missing the flipside OreEle - the player side. Askbob has done an amazing job with the beginner games getting new players to be interested in mafia. Bad mods then turn them off to the experience. And forcing players to sit out multiple, back-to-back badly mod-ed games will mean even more people may stop playing mafia altogether. If I "sat out" mafia for a month, I'd definitely miss the next sign-ups after that.

It's not hard to regulate. If someone gets rated an average of 1.5 out of 10 and tries to skip the list, just tell no one to sign up (don't know why anyone would want to). The problem is, without ratings, I personally don't know if someone has mod-ed before/will be bad. In fact, if I wanted to do your "sitting out" solution, I'd still need you and older players to rate unknown mods for me, to help me decide.

It's almost illogical that with all the libertarians on here we have such a state planning style approach to mafia mod-ing. The mod-list should be like a guild of high quality mods who guarantee their products on the free market, not a communist style, equal-modding opportunity (in spite of quality) system.

In any smart system, when a service is rendered, it is rated and the service provider is held accountable for bad services rendered...

okay, so the two options are...

1) If a bad mod comes up, you can choose to not participate, and if enough people agree with you (and enough people don't sign up), then the game will never get going and be skipped.

2) A bad mod is kept off the list, and if they so choose than they can skip the list and create a game anyway. And the only way for their game not to happen is if enough people choose to not play.

Really, whatever happens, the only way it can be enforced is by players choosing to not give power to games that have bad mods. Only, one way is done by a voting system, and the other way is done by individual preference.

Also, while the activity can be effected by the mod, it really does come down to the playing of the people. I think the issue with Panda's game, is the use of some roles which stiffle activity, and not nessicarily him as a mod (though there have been some poor wording). I would hope that he will learn from this particular game, and not make the same mistakes twice.

I remember my first game, for one, I tried a bunch of new roles, which naturally made it harder for the town. But I also made night actions time sensitive (so if you kill someone before getting roleblocked, the kill still goes through), I don't think I'll do that again. I'll also go back to allowing hammers (I had it so that if the hammer was voted, but I wasn't on to end the DP, someone could unvote, and the DP would continue).

Though I will be honest and give a hint with the alcohol game (and my other games). I like to mess with 3rd parties, like Jesters and Survivors.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:49:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 10:07:45 AM, askbob wrote:
i want to be rated!

10/10 overall

The books game was really well done. Some of your games were slightly problematic - like the first one I ever played in (you making a bunch of n00bs confused/worried about some unknown penalty) and the recent fairy tale one (too many linked roles, screwed mafia), but that is bound to happen to a mod sometimes. I'm sure if I played in more of danielle's games I'd have given her a 10, cuz mistakes happen. Your games are always well designed, you're very responsive, and your end game results threads are the best (player rankings, mafia PM's screenshot-ed for town to read). Danielle gets props for having a good endgame as well. I guess I'll revise her to a 10 in my book.

Others can rate askbob as well. inno seems to rate him highly too.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:53:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 10:36:30 AM, bluesteel wrote:
At 3/21/2011 10:24:43 AM, Danielle wrote:
I agree with OreEle. If a mod shows up on the list that you don't think will be a good mod, you can simply choose not to sign up for their game. I didn't play in Zetsubou's game for specifically that reason. I figured if he was so illogical with the actual playing that I didn't trust him to mod lol. And to be perfectly honest, I knew from playing in past games that even though Panda is probs one of my favorite people here, he is probably my least favorite mod so signing up for his game only to be annoyed at the outcome is pretty much my fault, I suppose.

I did make that minor mistake in my last game but I pride myself on being a pretty good mod I think. I like that I try to keep everything balanced (with roles), that I push people to move along to keep the game moving as fast as possible (though OreEle not signing on for the weekends kinda created a hiccup last game) and that my themes aren't annoying because I hate most of the themes people use (I actually like KFC though lol).

I don't remember the people who modded most of the games I've played but I know askbob, tvellalott, feverish and Vi's games were good. Can't remember the rest off the top of my head. I know I don't usually enjoy playing in Korashk's games so I tend to not sign up. Nothing personal; just a preference. The Geese brothers also get really crazy with their roles sometime and meh aren't among my faves. Basically I'm just gonna sign up for people I think will be competent enough or for games that I think I'll probs enjoy.

I just don't see where the logic in that is though. Zets is supposedly next up for large games, which are slow enough as it is. If a lot of the players agree that his game will be bad, why not skip him? Some people sign up anyway just b/c they want to play mafia, regardless of the experience, but there's a simple way to solve this problem. I don't get why we're slaves to some random mod list. In a free market, we'd encourage the next mod whose game we all want to play in to go, and we'd sign up for that game instead. But there is inelastic demand for games (many people want to play no matter what), so when supply is constricted, people sign up anyway. It just seems illogical to me. If we all agree that one game will be bad and the next mod will be much more enjoyable, obvious = obvious.

And you are a good mod danielle. I'd like to see you going more often b/c I'm interested to see what you can come up with. I don't see why you should only get to mod like once every 4 months for small games, and once a year for large games...

Here's the problem that we found (and I was part of the problem a while ago, but I liked the way it worked out). There would be a flood of games (free market, open competition, therefore anyone that wants to start a game can). People sign up for a bunch of games, then no game is active because the people couldn't keep up with all the games they signed up for. That also kills any large games, because as soon as there are a few people dead from current games, people will start small games to get those people to sign up with them (so there are never enough people for the large games). There will be some people that hold out for a large game, but eventually they will get tired of holding out and we'll be left with nothing but small games.

Small games can be fun, but with less players, you get less roles, and less combinations, and so, less options. I, personally, like the complexities of large games that have twists and turns with their roles.

Also, we do have a free market, kind of. Technically, there is nothing but the will of the members (i.e. customers) that holds people to the list, because the people said that they like the list.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 10:56:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 10:36:30 AM, bluesteel wrote:
I just don't see where the logic in that is though. Zets is supposedly next up for large games, which are slow enough as it is. If a lot of the players agree that his game will be bad, why not skip him? Some people sign up anyway just b/c they want to play mafia, regardless of the experience, but there's a simple way to solve this problem. I don't get why we're slaves to some random mod list. In a free market, we'd encourage the next mod whose game we all want to play in to go, and we'd sign up for that game instead. But there is inelastic demand for games (many people want to play no matter what), so when supply is constricted, people sign up anyway. It just seems illogical to me. If we all agree that one game will be bad and the next mod will be much more enjoyable, obvious = obvious.

And you are a good mod danielle. I'd like to see you going more often b/c I'm interested to see what you can come up with. I don't see why you should only get to mod like once every 4 months for small games, and once a year for large games...

For the most part I agree with you and this has been brought up before. Originally mods would just host sign-ups whenever, but then a bunch of people expressed interest in modding and started calling "Next." That's where the list originated. Suppose I was modding but then you were all, "I wanna mod" and Vi is like "Me too" and Askbob chimes in "Me three." The list was basically just to keep track of everyone who wanted a turn, and to keep track of the order they expressed that interest. Suppose you called next but then a new random member joined and hosted sign-ups, but you had been waiting a few weeks to host. Some people thought it wasn't fair that they had been waiting (i.e. waiting for the previous game to end), only to be skipped or whatnot.

Now I suppose you would say people have the freedom to choose what games they want to play, and that's what I'm suggesting, no? For instance Zets is next on the list, but I don't wanna play in his game so I won't sign up. You don't have to either. So suppose Goose is next after Zets and you and I wanna sign up for that; however, due to people playing in Zets' game too, Goose's sign-up had a little turn-out. Even if it had a big turn-out, the past shows that people can't handle playing in several games at once. Every time we tried that, ALL of the games suffered. I'd consider myself veteran-ish and even I got super confused one time playing in 3 games (the fact that I had the same role in 2 probably contributed).

Sooo what I'm saying is that even if people had the OPTION to skip, that many wouldn't because being less organized in the past proved to be less efficient in terms of quality of the games. However, since there are some mafia "regulars" and I agree that we probably have our mod preferences, that maybe we can propose a trial period where we work around the list to try and come up with an alternative solution. If it works out we can abandon the list; if not we accept that the list is the most fair, organized and efficient way to determine this stuff. What say ye?
President of DDO
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 11:07:08 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
@OreEle

Doesn't the list break down either way? If I decide to start guerrilla warfare on Zetsubou's game b/c I want someone else to mod the next big game, then I'd post in his sign-up thread for no one to sign up and urge the next person on the list or someone else entirely who I prefer to go. If people refuse to go, I could, in theory, post my own sign-ups for my own big game. I may or may not be successful in my campaign, but in either solution, the list breaks down.

You also seem to be concerned/implying that you have done a few unpopular things as a mod in the past. I'm not sure, but I doubt you need to be worried about it. People seem to be forgiving of new concepts, especially if the mod is an active mod and is a good player when not mod-ing. You're one of the mods I'd like to see get more chances to mod, personally. If someone is a good player, I have faith that they'll be a good mod.

Again, it just doesn't make sense to me. If I enjoy danielle and askbob as mods, I have to wait like 4 months until one of them comes up again? It's like telling koopin that he has to eat at Popeyes, Sonoma Chicken Coop, Chick-fil-A, etc before he can eat at KFC again...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 11:18:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 11:07:08 AM, bluesteel wrote:
@OreEle

Doesn't the list break down either way? If I decide to start guerrilla warfare on Zetsubou's game b/c I want someone else to mod the next big game, then I'd post in his sign-up thread for no one to sign up and urge the next person on the list or someone else entirely who I prefer to go. If people refuse to go, I could, in theory, post my own sign-ups for my own big game. I may or may not be successful in my campaign, but in either solution, the list breaks down.

You also seem to be concerned/implying that you have done a few unpopular things as a mod in the past. I'm not sure, but I doubt you need to be worried about it. People seem to be forgiving of new concepts, especially if the mod is an active mod and is a good player when not mod-ing. You're one of the mods I'd like to see get more chances to mod, personally. If someone is a good player, I have faith that they'll be a good mod.

The list doesn't break down if enough people agree to stick with the list and not respect games that are taken out of turn, even if they are from a good mod.

Originally, we only had one list, and it moved painfully slow. So we decided (after some less than ideal confrentations) to add the second list (a small games list). Now, it looks like we are thinking of allowing the small games list to go 2 people at a time. And if participations keeps improving (we can thank Askbob's rookie games to help with that), we may pick it up to 3 at a time, and maybe even 2 big games at a time.

I do look forward to doing my big game, but I understand that those games only happen once a year for me, so I make sure to put in extra effort to make the game as perfect as possible, even though I already have 3 big games setup and ready to go.


Again, it just doesn't make sense to me. If I enjoy danielle and askbob as mods, I have to wait like 4 months until one of them comes up again? It's like telling koopin that he has to eat at Popeyes, Sonoma Chicken Coop, Chick-fil-A, etc before he can eat at KFC again...

You probably just got koopins vote with that.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 11:25:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
@OreEle/Danielle

oh wow that's interesting - I didn't know what the world was like pre-list.

What you guys are saying about a complete free market makes complete sense. That would definitely be a bad idea. I agree though danielle that we should explore alternatives or modifications to the list.

Here are some of the options I see:
1) Same list - some attempt is made to purge really really bad or really really inactive mods from the list (individual petitions to skip certain mods, or attempts to get people not to sign up)
2) Multi-track list - the community would create a "preferred moderator" list which would go more often. If we are able to run 3 games at a time (one big, two small), the preferred moderators would get to always run one of the small games, for example.
3) TOS for moderators - community standards that render certain moderators ineligible. I'd really like to see people who don't play anymore or never played mafia here struck from the list, for example.

Personally, I'll play in games I'm not really crazy about if they are run by people who play somewhat regularly b/c those people are contributing and without them, we couldn't even have mafia. But if people don't care enough to play, they shouldn't be allowed to mod, which is a higher responsibility.

I can see the "unfair" complaint that danielle referred to being bandied around against an alternate system, but definitely regarding the TOS idea, I think it's definitely fair that if the person doesn't play, they don't mod. If you don't contribute, you don't get benefits.

/ I can't believe I can't come up with any other better solutions. Definitely open to more suggestions.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 11:26:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
As a mod, I rate askbob 10/10. His beginner games were really helpful, and brought a whole bunch of noobs (like me) to mafia. He is very quick to answer questions, and keeps up with the vote count and the ending of day phases. I also appreciate his end game results and player rankings.

I rate Danielle 9/10 based on her quickfire game which was extremely well orchestrated.

Bases on bluesteel's one game, I rate him 8.5/10. It was a good game, especially for a first attempt, and there is a lot of potential there. It didn't help me that I know nothing about sports, but that's not his fault.

I would play in all 3 of their games again.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 11:51:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Really in terms of modding games I've never really given a shitt about the list. I do things when I want and how many times I want. I usually just do things to get around the list and there are plenty of ways to do it so people don't flip out on you.

PM Mafia Games
Small Games
Quickfire Games
Beginner Games
Concept Games

I'm sure I can come up with more but TBH i just do what i want.

Most of my games prelist require about an hour of setup including the fairytale one. I just think about a theme that everyone will relate to, then pick some famous characters from the theme. Then I find out how I can make the characters into roles. Sometimes characters just scream out a role and sometimes you have to design a role to fit the character.

Then I make a short list of the good characters and bad characters (i generally do about 30 - 40 characters with roles) then pick which ones i think are the best to even the game out/make it interesting.

Once I have that, I manually assign players to roles based on their playing style. I like to mix it up all the time. I also don't let people who are inactive multiple times into my games.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 11:54:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 11:25:51 AM, bluesteel wrote:
Here are some of the options I see:
1) Same list - some attempt is made to purge really really bad or really really inactive mods from the list (individual petitions to skip certain mods, or attempts to get people not to sign up)

I do like this idea, but I think it should only be done as people are coming up to their turn. If someone is not on for a month or two (which has happened to me), if that is while they are in the middle of the list, than no big deal. But if they are not on, when it is their turn, they should be skipped.

I also think that for those that are not ready when it is their turn, they should be allowed to allow two people to pass them, without losing their spot at the top of the list, but if they still aren't ready, than they should be bumped off the list. I mean, from the time you sign up, you have several months to get your game in order and ready. I can understand when several people skip, if you need a day to tidy things up (when I did my big game, there were two people in front of me that said they weren't ready, so I was tossed in a little pre-maturely), but still, you should be mostly prepared.

2) Multi-track list - the community would create a "preferred moderator" list which would go more often. If we are able to run 3 games at a time (one big, two small), the preferred moderators would get to always run one of the small games, for example.

Maybe if we do 3 small games at a time, have 2 small game lists. 1 for experienced and well liked mods (that do 2 games at a time), and another for new mods, and those that still need practice making a good game (to do one at a time). And still the big game. Or limit the big game to only experinced mods (it is much harder to do a big game, than a small game).

3) TOS for moderators - community standards that render certain moderators ineligible. I'd really like to see people who don't play anymore or never played mafia here struck from the list, for example.

I like this, though I think that the TOS should be small in scope, as to allow mods to be free to experiment at their own risk.

Or, that anything against the Mafia TOS, must be announced during sign-ups, so that players may evaluate if they still wish to partisipate.


Personally, I'll play in games I'm not really crazy about if they are run by people who play somewhat regularly b/c those people are contributing and without them, we couldn't even have mafia. But if people don't care enough to play, they shouldn't be allowed to mod, which is a higher responsibility.

I can see the "unfair" complaint that danielle referred to being bandied around against an alternate system, but definitely regarding the TOS idea, I think it's definitely fair that if the person doesn't play, they don't mod. If you don't contribute, you don't get benefits.

I can't believe I can't come up with any other better solutions. Definitely open to more suggestions. :/
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:34:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 11:51:39 AM, askbob wrote:

Once I have that, I manually assign players to roles based on their playing style. I like to mix it up all the time. I also don't let people who are inactive multiple times into my games.

wow, that's really interesting. I can see that being one reason your games are successful.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:36:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
OreEle, I agree with everything you said, in spite of it probably placing me initially at a disadvantage as a mod. I know I need to acquire more experience before running a successful large game. I've already revised my big game concept based on experiences I've had playing since originally creating it.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:42:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
mods should always at least pretend they've done it randomly i think. they're already a big enough part of the game when it comes down to roles and characters and things like that.. you can't have us thinking of the mod the whole game.. that'd be annoying.. and you'd be figured out :)

korashk i think used be a good mod. well i liked his games anyway. they were just a different style.. his roles and things.. and that'd be hard to get away with right? straying from the most common..
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:46:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
just don't say what way you've assigned roles i think. and there'd probably be plenty of different ways you could do to still make the game far more interesting.. you wouldn't have to just go by player and what you think they should have.. you could just make it less random.. varying degrees of lessness lol is that a word?

i'm feeling like modding.. but i'd say i'd definitely let ye down lol
signature
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:48:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 12:36:12 PM, bluesteel wrote:
OreEle, I agree with everything you said, in spite of it probably placing me initially at a disadvantage as a mod. I know I need to acquire more experience before running a successful large game. I've already revised my big game concept based on experiences I've had playing since originally creating it.

Considering how slow the big game list moves, I think if you are signed up for it now, and get a few small games modding in before you start the big one, you should be fine.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:51:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 12:46:59 PM, badger wrote:
just don't say what way you've assigned roles i think. and there'd probably be plenty of different ways you could do to still make the game far more interesting.. you wouldn't have to just go by player and what you think they should have.. you could just make it less random.. varying degrees of lessness lol is that a word?

i'm feeling like modding.. but i'd say i'd definitely let ye down lol

I'd be in one of your games, i think it might be a lot of fun.

On your other point, i sort of agree except for noobs. First timer noobs shouldn't be mafia, it can just blow the whole game.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:51:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 12:49:12 PM, badger wrote:
well that's probably what you already do :)

well mine's kinda a way to help you not get yourself caught out.. just to be sure you know.. though i wouldn't be going through all that hassle being as undependable as i am lol.. but you could possibly?
signature
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:53:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/21/2011 12:51:05 PM, innomen wrote:
At 3/21/2011 12:46:59 PM, badger wrote:
just don't say what way you've assigned roles i think. and there'd probably be plenty of different ways you could do to still make the game far more interesting.. you wouldn't have to just go by player and what you think they should have.. you could just make it less random.. varying degrees of lessness lol is that a word?

i'm feeling like modding.. but i'd say i'd definitely let ye down lol

I'd be in one of your games, i think it might be a lot of fun.

On your other point, i sort of agree except for noobs. First timer noobs shouldn't be mafia, it can just blow the whole game.

Yeah, but if we know as a rule of thumb that they are always town, that is an unfair advantage.

I always like to see 1 newb in the mafia, with everyone else being experienced, since that allows the newb to see mafia from a different angle, and get help from more experienced players.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2011 12:54:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
straight up random everytime is probably actually the better way to be doing it for the long run.. which you'd be going for i imagine, askbob? just in case there're any geniuses out there you know..
signature