Let's Discuss the Hyperpost Meta

[RadiantCowbells]

Your name violates my copyright I am issuing a cease and desist order.

[RadiantCowbells]

Speaking as the person who ran the first post restricted game that resulted from the previous discussion on the topic , I think that while unlike in the previous iteration the people complaining about hyperposting are actually people who play mafia rather than people who

hypothetically

would want to play mafia but actually don't, the same problem remains regarding the fact that the hyperposting meta is essentially the normalized meta. Too much of the community is hyperposters or people who are at home in the hyperposter meta at this point. I don't think a post restricted game is likely to fill with the kind of playerlist that entices people to join or stay and the problem has gotten worse in terms of there being significantly less games firing and significantly less people playing in them. The ship has fundamentally sailed I think.

[RadiantCowbells]

As a mod I would be curious about giving players a set amount of posts for the entire game and then having them figure out how to space those posts throughout the game. (I actually think it would be relatively easy to set this to something reasonable and also guarentee that the maximimum length of the game in terms of total posts would generally not exceed a general amount.)

This is highly liable to create situations where players burn through their posts and don't have posts which while their fault ostensibly is also not very healthy for game health. Posts being trust funded out for the players own benefit is definitely the right way to go.



I'd like to reiterate the implied question of my previous post: when the 2017 version of this discussion came about it was pretty similar to this with mostly everyone (who actually posts in the thread) agreeing it's some sort of a problem, discussing solutions, and then there was games run with the ruleset, and then they all in the nicest terms possible fell flat. There are fewer players now than there were then to make a pocket community within the community for such games. I don't have any personal investment one way or the other because i don't play mafia and that's not subject to change, and this isn't an attempt to sway hearts and minds to one side or the other. My question is what exactly do you plan to do to make this change actually happen, because just repeating something that failed in the past when the reasons it failed are still applicable now defeats the purpose of having a past to learn from.

Also i sound like Reckoner now dear god funny how that happened

[RadiantCowbells]

Ok so the post restricted games need to be significantly more lenient and more generally accessible by players without them explicitly being geriatric style players, that's a helpful start. What's a good number of per day posts per person then? 200 day 1, 100 following days? That gates the extremes but is not generally intrusive for most players, is that enough of a reduction to give space to the people who can't handle hyper posting?

[RadiantCowbells]

Collective caps btw create an extreme strategic power that doesn't typically exist where increasing your post count simultaneously increases your thread presence and collectively decrease everyone else's and that also applies to things like two players thunderdoming increasing that weight in the thread and probably rewards people for monopolizing thread presence in a way that does the opposite of fix the problem.

[RadiantCowbells]

Like you can say oh you should collectively punish people for taking up thread presence in case it is a scum stratagem but in most cases the people who will get away with doing it will get away with it as town or scum because it's something that they are known to do.

How many posts per day per person is enough for the 60th, 70th, 80th percentile poster and how many is too many for the people who can't handle the current meta and who would actually participate in such games

[RadiantCowbells]

Also a mechanic that i think would be helpful is to have player voted extensions on specific days

If a majority of players agree on a day that is specifically very active and productive players can be given additional posts while not giving players license to go beyond their standard post cap on days where they're the only people close to their post cap, and you can probably give day 1 at least one automatic extension by default because of how much of games tends to be played on day 1. This does create situations where in standard play a hyper poster could try to bully the game into extending just for then but in an explicitly post restricted game that coming up and actually happening likely signals a problem with the player list in such a game moreso than the mechanic itself. (If you tried to mass institute gates on post count in games that aren't explicitly post restricted, that would be the end result of it.)

[RadiantCowbells]

I actually think it is explicitly unhealthy to ever be in a situation where scum are using post limits as a weapon against town. That's not the game, so I'm fine with the fact that that does potentially put scum in the awkward position of having to either extend or vote against extension when it's clearly in towns interest. I feel the same way about deadline extensions in that i feel like deadlines should not actually be weaponizable by either alignment and I know that that's an unpopular view so the former view may also be unpopular.