A Heads Up to Hosts

In light of recent issues in the gameroom, the moderators have decided it would be prudent to re-highlight a few things. When deciding to create and start a game, there's a few things that hosts must consider.

First of all, hosts must be able to acquiesce to a twenty four hour phase schedule for small games. This might seem difficult, but one thing which we've been noticing is that small games are becoming increasingly complex. While adding complexity can indeed add to the richness of a mafia experience, it can also confuse players and fatigue hosts. While its just a recommendation and not a rule, it may be wise to consider one's own scheduling limitations and the clarity of a game when deciding how complex to make a game. Vanilla games and minimally complex games have their own rewards, particularly(in my opinion) the increased emphasis on thread behavior which can help sustain a game. Another part of game sustenance is making sure that updates are made in a timely, predictable manner. Players appreciate being able to count on a host having the results of night actions and lynches when they anticipate them. Continued delays in getting results posted can demotivate players from an otherwise enjoyable experience.

For large games, sometimes it can be unavoidable that phases might exceed 24 hours, but if this delay exceeds 36 hours multiple times, the moderators will have to step in to make sure that the game can continue. As with small games, continued delays drag games out and increase player fatigue. However, with large games, this is all the more noticeable. This means more than getting phases updated on time- game mechanics should not excessively drag the game out. In other words, mafia should able to me very active from the beginning. Excessive doctors and role blockers or crippling mafia kills can make games stretch out far beyond their 'expiration date'. Another aspect to consider is the "no lynch" mechanism. While I'm not a fan of the concept in general, it can have uses. Using it more than twice in a game, however, can make the game start to spin its wheels in the mud. Mafia's not much fun when the mafia have to kill everyone.

To summarize- mafia is a game that needs to be kept consistent and concise. This doesn't mean complexity is bad- but hosts must have realistic expectation of what they think they can handle. Keep phases to twenty four hours, with a bit more leeway for large games, but approaching 48 hours is dangerous. Games cannot run aimlessly forever and expect to keep the interests of the involved parties. As a last bit, we have decided to, at least temporarily, move back to an "Old-style" queue for small games, as the current large game-style queue was simply not working as we had hoped. Thanks for the attention, this will be stickied for a little bit so as to bring attention to the issue.

Understood YK. :bow:

Doesn't help when real-life deadline comes up (in my case)

Thank you.

I was getting sick of the games having 48 hour phases to try to draw activity out. Made the games last longer than they should have.

Coupled with me hearing that I'm being called 'the new YLC', this thread totally crits Secura for nine thousand and one damage...

As I've stated to Beskar, The Aeducan Succession was actually on the cusp of completion as it is (we're talking one more Day Phase probably) and I had been in the process of drafting result PMs for the night phase to send out; it's just that I've been hectic with work and hadn't expected my job to take over my life as it did (I was unemployed when TAS started), considering the hours are pretty malleable... it's just really exhausting, both physically and mentally. :/

Regardless, I'd obviously appreciate any private feedback that my players could give (aside of the time between updates, that's explanitory in it's own right) regarding the style of the game, the strong points, weak points and so on.

Again, apologies about the game. :<

Secura, I couldn't play in TAS but I've read it in its entirety, and I have a few words of feedback if you care to hear it :bow:

First of all, the setup, the writeups, the depth of the game, all that was marvelleous. Simply top class. Just like YLC's games, if I may say so.
What's sad about that is that it's (I'm convinced) part of why the game stalled that much. I know how much time and energy such an advanced and complex game drains, and that's why they're the most likely to slip into the stagnation that sadly has claimed some of YLC's games as well.

Running such a game through to the end requires a lot of willpower and dedication (in addition to actually having the time, of course). But if it succeeds, these are often by far the most rememberable and 'epic' games.

I was sad to see TAS closed prematurely, but I sort of expected it, accurately because of the depth of the game. On that account, my advice (erudite as it may be) is to try and strike a balance between complexity and sustainability. I'd aim at a slightly less complex game if you are to host another game relatively soon.

That aside (and I hope I wasn't just brushing out the obvious and made you feel worse for having to pause the game), many of the complex game mechanics I really liked; The Item system has inspired me a lot, and the gold system in general was very well thought out. I love it when a game works with many different factions and goals, and it semed like this game did so very well. Also, the way people could bid on vigilante kills and stuff like that was really nice. I'd have to see the background mechanics/role PMs in order to provide more feedback (which I would be happy to) and I sure do hope to enjoy the work I know you put into all those detailed descriptions. If the game does not continue (or ends soon, as you say), can you please post that for us all to see?

Thanks and I hope I helped just a tiny bit :tongue::bow:

Secura, this thread is in no way a dig against you or anyone else. We've observed a sort of "hosting creep" for several months now in which almost every single host was taking more and more time per phase and games eventually just started slogging along and this lethargic pace became the norm. If anything, what we're doing is correcting our own mistake by not enforcing our own deadline rules and not seeing this as a potential consequence towards adopting a calendar system (since extended, drawn-out games no longer held anyone else up). :bow:

I disagree that 48 hour day phases are inappropriate or discourage participation. That's the length I "grew up on" over at CFC, and this place still seems too fast-paced for me half the time.

I think we went through a phase of about 18 months to two years of constant 24 hour phases. Its the culture here, discussion drops off fast, sometimes not even the 24 hours is used.

When a phase is extended, or you have 48 hour phases, quite often you only get 3-4 extra posts. A phase a day suits everything well, it allows people that can only check once a day to have it regimented, which helps a lot (at least I found it did)