New Queue Structure Proposal

[xRECKONERx]

Reck's Queue Structure Proposal - rev. 10/22/2014

Goal:

The goal of this proposal is to alleviate some problems I see within the queue system.

#1) Normal games have slowed to a crawl, meaning it takes first-time moderators much longer to get through the queue. (For reference, 37 normal games have been run thus far in 2014, but 96 theme games have been run.)

#2) The sanitized/purist vision of 'normal' has become less and less in line with what the site currently views as a 'standard' game of mafia.

#3) Normal moderators are left with limited creative space (flavor restrictions and limited whitelist) and thus must run otherwise standard normal games in the theme queue.

#4) Newbie games are not indicative of the MafiaScum experience as a whole and do not offer a solid first look at our site culture, meta, and playstyle.

Proposal:

The full proposal is viewable at the above link. Current changes are as follows:

First-Time Moderator Options (Three Months on Site)

Newbie Game Queue

: Scrap the old newbie setup and allow first-time mods to mod a closed 10-13 player setup here. Available roles will be limited and no flavor will be allowed. First-time moderators will have an IC-like co-mod to help them through the process. Each newbie game will have at least 3 experienced players, and at least 6 newbie players. The other 1-4 slots may be filled by either player type. This queue will function similarly to the current mini-normal queue.

Open Game Queue

: Will still function the same as it does now.

Second Modded Game Options

Micro Game Queue

: Will still function the same as it does now, except for the modified normalcy requirements.

Standard Normal Game Queue

: 'Standard' replaces 'mini' to better illustrate its purpose. The normal whitelist will be vastly expanded to include most non-bastard / non-fringe mafia roles and modifiers. Hydras will still not be allowed. Flavor will be allowed, but moderators will be required to ensure flavor-breaking is impossible (either by randomizing flavor names/alignments, or providing sufficient fakeclaims to the non-town roles). No unique mechanics are allowed.

Standard Theme Game Queue

: I want to find a word to replace 'theme', but have been unable. This queue will feature games with non-normal roles, unique mechanics, weird factional distribution (while still adhering to uninformed majority vs informed minority), and heavier flavor influence.

Third+ Modded Game Option

Large Game Queue

: Both 'normal' and 'theme' games will be run out of this queue. 14+ players. Mods who /in to this queue announce what type of game they're running. Normals follow the standard normal guidelines and are sent to the NRG for review. Themes follow the theme definition. All large games require a backup mod/co-mod, regardless of mod experience.

Conclusion

:
The proposal isn't perfect yet, but I feel as though a structure following these guidelines will alleviate a lot of the issues with the current queue system, as well as update/modernize the queues to adjust to current site culture/playstyles.

[xRECKONERx]

Mith indicated in the flavor discussion thread that he was open to including flavor.

[xRECKONERx]

#1) Normal games have slowed to a crawl, meaning it takes first-time moderators much longer to get through the queue. (For reference, 37 normal games have been run thus far in 2014, but 96 theme games have been run.)

So about 30% of players like playing normal games. Not sure what this is an issue

#2) The sanitized/purist vision of 'normal' has become less and less in line with what the site currently views as a 'standard' game of mafia.

So its not what YOU want. Okay. Again, about 30% of the mini games are normal. Do you have data backing up your claim or are you just throwing out stuff?

How about the fact that 70% of games run are themed and 30% are normals? You literally just quoted the data. Ideally, for a queue not to be sluggish, it should run at the same efficiency as the other queue. That's my claim, anyway, and I don't think it takes away from normal games to add flavor except in extreme cases.

#3) Normal moderators are left with limited creative space (flavor restrictions and limited whitelist) and thus must run otherwise standard normal games in the theme queue.

This is a problem for first time mods only who want to run a theme game before anything else. Not sure what your point here even is. Mods who run normal games after they run a theme obviously like the restrictions as is.

A large portion (about half) of normal games ARE run by first time mods (or mods who have been gone awhile and are just coming back). When your queue is only 30% of the total games played, and only 50% of that 30% are run by first-time mods, it's time to sit back and think, "Hey, maybe someone has a point!"

#4) Newbie games are not indicative of the MafiaScum experience as a whole and do not offer a solid first look at our site culture, meta, and playstyle.

That's probably a good thing to at least get used to the pacing and arguments seen before throwing them in a hyper fast game with caustic players. I 100% believe that we would have a higher player retention rate with how we run newbie games now and if we mixed them heavily with other queues.

Unsure what you mean, did you mean "than" instead of "and"?

Newbie Game Queue

: Scrap the old newbie setup and allow first-time mods to mod a closed 10-13 player setup here. Available roles will be limited and no flavor will be allowed. First-time moderators will have an IC-like co-mod to help them through the process. Each newbie game will have at least 3 experienced players, and at least 6 newbie players. The other 1-4 slots may be filled by either player type. This queue will function similarly to the current mini-normal queue.

I could see a more closed setup newbie/IC/SE queue but:

1) There should be absolutely nothing added to the white list because its an INTRODUCTION to the site. Not a "check out all this crazy stuff" move. Like absolutely anything its best to ease someone into a new idea or concept instead of throwing them in the deep end.
2) No first time mods. First time mods have enough issues already with stuff, I do not want any first time mod or mod with past issues running newbie games. They have to deal with lots of player flakes already, mod flakes would just make it worse.
3) Players who are ICing should be held to current standards of ICs.

1) I am not suggesting anything is added to the whitelist. I'm suggesting the minimal whitelist, aka newbie whitelist, is kept pretty small and restricted. Not once did I suggest expanding the whitelist for newbie games.
2) First time mods have issues with what, exactly? Why do the old guard on this site have an opinion that somehow, playing more games as a player will make you better prepared to moderate? Nothing is to stop a normal game from having newer players, and nothing is forcing newbies to play a newbie game first. At least this way, you have a co-mod (think "IC Mod") holding your hand in case anything goes wrong. I would also not want a mod with past issues running newbie games -- we screen for ICs now, why can't we screen for IC mods? That seems WAY easier to screen for than IC players.
3) Disagree. Players who are veterans shouldn't be looked upon higher for any reason. The IC system has been stupid and broken for a long time, there is no reason we should continue it. Sure, knowing what WIFOM means is helpful, but in general it means we have newbies looking up to a single player as their lighthouse for introduction to this site, and that onus should not be on anyone (not to mention, the types of characters we've put it on are pretty bad). A good mix of old and new without anyone having the responsibility to be the "authority" is the way to go.

Standard Normal Game Queue

: 'Standard' replaces 'mini' to better illustrate its purpose. The normal whitelist will be vastly expanded to include most non-bastard / non-fringe mafia roles and modifiers. Hydras will still not be allowed. Flavor will be allowed, but moderators will be required to ensure flavor-breaking is impossible (either by randomizing flavor names/alignments, or providing sufficient fakeclaims to the non-town roles). No unique mechanics are allowed.

Why break up Normal and Theme? What if I want to play a game with current whitelist and no flavor like 30% of the current site does? You know the study you need to be doing? Asking normal players why they are choosing normal games and not theme games. If changing the definition of normal makes those who enjoy them no longer want to, why change it? Remove what a noticeable portion of the site wants because they are in the minority? Isnt 30% of players liking something worth leaving it alone when the 70% still have something they want to play? If players who play normal games want an expanded white list and flavor... then its something to talk about. I think those are two things most normal players like though.

Your assertion that 30% of the current site would prefer flavorless normals to flavored normals is unfounded.

You have a point, though, in that a study should be done to figure out what is driving these players.

30% of players isn't a valid statistic. The point, I think, is that the normal queue can be lubricated to run much better if we eased up the requirements. And then, if people still wanted their flavorless, strict normal games as they are right now, they would still have an option in playing under the new first time mod queue.

[xRECKONERx]

Why is it bullshit, holy fuck, give suggestions instead of pissing on it

Pedit: that's exactly what I suggested last time it came up

[xRECKONERx]

This proposal would still have flavorless, strict normal games in the form of the new newbie games.

PEDIT: Okay, what if I changed it to:

"Would you be more likely to play in a game with light flavor than you currently would be to play in a normal game?"

[xRECKONERx]

More people like themes, people will answer yes to that, my proposed question is better because it actually shows the separation of pro vs anti flavour sentiment among those that prefer normal mechanics.

Okay, I've added your question to the poll.

Even normals have light flavor. You've gotta be more precise.

(that was @reck)

That's why I specifically mention:
For example, would it bother you if you had a character name associated with your role PM, as long as the flavor didn't intrude elsewhere?

[xRECKONERx]

If you are posting the poll somewhere instead of sending it manually to everyone who has completed a mini in the last few months its a bad poll to start because not everyone will know it is there and only those who have a strong opinion will likely vote in it.

I have sent it to the players of the last ten completed mini normals.

[xRECKONERx]

Because you are taking away the type of game someone wants to play.

That's the same thing as not adding a type of game someone wants to play. Where do we draw the line? What's a viable percentage of people to warrant removing/adding something?

Should we add another queue, called "basic themes", that straddle the line between normals and complex themes?

Nobody is taking away flavorless, strict normals, btw. They're just being moved to the newbie queue.

[xRECKONERx]

I got through five at least, went to the bar. Goal is ten tonight, rest of 2014 tomorrow

[xRECKONERx]

Sorry, made it through 6 (possibly seven, don't remember if I made it through phok's game)

[xRECKONERx]

Flavor claiming wouldn't be valid under my proposed system.

[xRECKONERx]

I am actually not trying to be biased here. I don't want the poll to be biased because it will invalidate the results. Maybe chamber could setup a poll using the back end like he did for Valentine's Day?

[xRECKONERx]

That's like saying, "People in current normal games could claim bastard roles"

If people operate outside the parameters of the system then they are just idiots

[xRECKONERx]

The questions were admittedly not well designed, I'd love to make them universally accepted

[xRECKONERx]

I am actually not trying to be biased here. I don't want the poll to be biased because it will invalidate the results. Maybe chamber could setup a poll using the back end like he did for Valentine's Day?

If you are trying not to be biased you shouldn't be making polls without some sort of collaborative effort between people who see it in different ways. Other problem you already initiated contact so created some biases from respondents.

CD response is perfect reason of why what you did already causes issues because you are influencing people who have read this and know what you are talking about more compared to people who don't know this thread exists.

You play this game, you should know how much introducing a thought and then asking questions influences creates different responses than asking questions without introducing your own opinions.

I tried to make the poll in an unbiased manner. I think it's clear that I do not desire to persuade people one way or the other.

We are not a fucking scientific community, so it'd be great if people stopped treating informal survey creation as some betrayal of basic scientific values.

Anyone who creates a poll has the same potential to create biased respondents. Relationships with the poll creator, opinions of their posts, knowledge of their stances, etc. all create biases.

I cannot separate myself from my posting style. This is why, before posting the poll publicly, I went and just PMed it to normal game players who may not have seen this thread.

I know you have a problem with me, but your continued contrarian behavior towards me, and inability to separate your stances from an objective point of view, have shown that you are unable to perform your duties objectively. I have made every effort to be forthright and open about this process. This is why I suggested chamber (someone who has openly disagreed with me) create a poll on the backend that doesn't even involve me. You have made no effort to find common ground or work from a POV that is outside of your limited framework. You, admittedly, operate with a POV that is not held by the majority of the site. Let's try and find a way to find out what's better for the site, not what is better for a single person.

My biases here honestly have nothing to do with the queues. I will play in an open or normal or theme because of the playerlist or moderator, and it has very little to do with the nature of the queue. This is why, despite liking and playing with hydras (and in hydras) on a regular basis, I was for the removal of hydras from normal queues. I have shown I can put aside my biases in order to find a solution that improves the site. Can you?

[xRECKONERx]

I don't see how this matters. The complaints are coming about because Tierce

has been hospitalized

hasn't been around for some reason. If there was a back-up listmod nobody would have even noticed the recent slowdown in the normal queue and this thread probably wouldn't exist.

Incorrect. The backup and slow queue times extend beyond Tierce's absence.

[xRECKONERx]

Addendum: Shea & I don't even agree on how the new system should work or be implemented. We agree that it's worth discussing and bringing to the public eye, and are able to put aside our differences to try and effect change. It's a useful tactic!

[xRECKONERx]

Newbie Game Queue: Scrap the old newbie setup and allow first-time mods to mod a closed 10-13 player setup here. Available roles will be limited and no flavor will be allowed. First-time moderators will have an IC-like co-mod to help them through the process. Each newbie game will have at least 3 experienced players, and at least 6 newbie players. The other 1-4 slots may be filled by either player type. This queue will function similarly to the current mini-normal queue.

I'd guess there about ~100 Newbie games per year and I think you said ~30 Normal games every year. You'd need a whole lot of your Normal playerbase to switch over to playing in your new Newbie Queue to make these numbers remotely viable. You're not going to get 3 experienced players per game wanting to play with flaky newbies in even more basic set-ups than the current Normal guidelines (I agree that the whitelist needs expanding but that only furthers the point that you're not going to get the volume of experienced players that you need) and I don't think I'd call a 13-player game with one or two ICs a "proper" game any more than our current newbie set-up.

~51% of newbies are replaced according to the latest stats. Let's keep that contained to a Queue where the games are as short as they can reasonably be.

Except that newbie games currently have 3 experienced players in the form of IC + 2 SEs.

[xRECKONERx]

I know you have a problem with me, but your continued contrarian behavior towards me, and inability to separate your stances from an objective point of view, have shown that you are unable to perform your duties objectively. I have made every effort to be forthright and open about this process. This is why I suggested chamber (someone who has openly disagreed with me) create a poll on the backend that doesn't even involve me. You have made no effort to find common ground or work from a POV that is outside of your limited framework. You, admittedly, operate with a POV that is not held by the majority of the site. Let's try and find a way to find out what's better for the site, not what is better for a single person.

You brought something you thinks needs fixing. I am explaining why I think it doesn't need fixing and why I think the way you are going about proving it is going to create bad information that backs up what you think because of how you are obtaining it. If you really think that is me taking a stance opposite of you because I don't like you and thinking the only way someone can think you are wrong is that they hate you lets you sleep at night, more power to you, but you are wrong.

This is the attitude I cannot stand -- just because something is technically working doesn't mean we can't improve it and make it better.

Technically

, people could run 9 players or less games in the mini queue, so

technically

we didn't need a micro queue for them, but we implemented it because it was decided that breaking it down further would be an improvement. The mini queue wasn't broken, it didn't need fixing, it was just improved.

I see nothing that needs fixing, and nothing you have said makes me think something does need fixing. A 70-30 split doesn't seem like something that needs a massive overhaul to me. If you want to convince me its better for the site, you need to show me what is actually broken first.

Long queue times, restrictive role selection, lack of interest, needless restrictions.

As far as I can tell all you are really suggesting doing is saying that normal games and newbie games should essentially be combined and the mini theme queue should be split into more of a mechanic based and flavor based queue. I just don't see a point in doing that.

If you're going to summarize it and say "I don't see a point in doing that" after I've spent time explaining why each change has a point, then okay.

1 - Normal games are less popular. Which has always been the case as far as I can remember and never been a problem.

2 - Normals don't match site standard of normal. Which may be up for debate, and again it would be very interesting to see the difference between what people who prefer normal call normal when comparing that to what theme players call normal. I bet there is a difference there
3 - It forces some mods to run "otherwise normal" games in the theme queue. Again, do you have data that shows how many theme games are by all rules normal? Or how many "non normal" roles are in theme games?

I just feel you are making a lot of claims but don't have anything to support it apart from how you feel.[/quote]
1 - I'll follow this up in my next post
2 - Sure, but why should this "30%" get to define normal and not the site as a whole?
3 - I did a quick gathering session the last time this came up and there were about 2-3 games per 10 IIRC that could fit that definition.

[xRECKONERx]

Here's a chart showing mini normals per year versus mini themes per year:


So, what does the disparity between the two look like?


So, no, the idea that a large majority of the site prefers themes over normals is not something that has always been around. From the time the queue was split in 2003, up until 2010, mini normals and mini themes were pretty even in terms of how many games get run each year (as in, in the 50% range, just about dead even). Since 2010, though, the disparity between the two has gotten bigger and bigger. 2014, as it stands right now, marks the biggest gap in the site's history, and recent trends upwards indicate this will continue. I believe this is because the "old guard" of MafiaScum users who preferred the plain, flavorless, role restricted normal games have slowly fallen off or left the site over time, and the current site population splits much more heavily towards preferring a different type of 'standard' mafia game.

[xRECKONERx]

Open Queue came out in July of 2010.

[xRECKONERx]

I don't think anyone is saying that a majority prefer normals. That's obviously not true. the argument is that a sizable minority prefer normals. And the question is whether you improve things by changing this up. Or, for example, are all you're doing is pulling the same players from the Mini Theme queue over to the Mini Normal one (or the Flavored Normal queue or whatever it is). That's not really a net win unless those games are better.

I never said the argument was about a majority preferring normals. LF claimed that the disparity (~70/30 split) between normals/themes had always been around. I'm showing him that's false.

Furthermore, I think this

does

improve things. I think queues should be about even in terms of pace/speed/games played. If a queue isn't producing enough games per year in comparison to other queues, something should be done for the health of the queue. This is especially true, since of those 30%, a large portion are first-time mods only modding in the normal queue because they

have

to do it.

[xRECKONERx]

I'm going to round up Open Games per year and Large games per year as well.

[xRECKONERx]

Why is it a problem if merely 30% like a certain type of game? I like symmetry considerations as much as the next guy but it's a silly thing to base policy on. I'll grant you the moderator point, but I think I'd prefer some variation on BBmolla's proposal if we wanted to work on that.

My point is that I don't know if normal games need their own queue, specifically. If we're funneling 7 games through the theme queue for every 3 games through the normal queue, wouldn't it be wise to find a way to make our queues more efficient?

[xRECKONERx]

Perhaps adding a "basic theme" queue would be a way to do this. Or, adding a "basic theme" game type, and just run a Mini game queue with one of each type of game in signups at all times (similar to how the Large and Micro queues are run).

[xRECKONERx]

wouldn't it be wise to find a way to make our queues more efficient?

make our queues more efficient?

more efficient?

efficient

efficient

efficient

efficient

[xRECKONERx]

When taking opens into account, the graphs change a bit:


(I fucked up the labeling on the second one, whatever, pretend 1 is 2003 and 12 is 2014).

The main thing I'm noticing is that the spike in opens in 2012 correlates more strongly with a dip in THEME games, not a dip in NORMAL games.

[xRECKONERx]

Both the mini normal/open queue combined barely total 50% of games played on the site, currently.

Perhaps the conversation should be more geared towards how we can possibly split the mini theme queue instead of how to redefine normals, although I feel like both conversations sort of wind up in the same location either way.

[xRECKONERx]

As for efficiency, I'm not sure what you mean reck.

If there is a way to make queues flow smoother, have shorter wait times, and generally improve the queue experience, why would we

not

do it?

[xRECKONERx]

(Also interesting is that less and less games seem to be played overall... I would guess the massive site crash in early 2012 lost us a sizable number of users.)

[xRECKONERx]

Well, the way you approach the game is functionally very different when discussing open and closed games... opens are more of a "put the puzzle together" type thing, whereas closed games allow for anything to happen.

[xRECKONERx]

I ran a Large Open through the Normal queue a little while back, though.

[xRECKONERx]

Right, but I'm saying I don't think saying "opens drained from mini normals and that's why their less popular" is really a valid stance, considering themes also took a big hit from opens.

After the initial spike from the open queue launching, there has been a STEEP decline in opens

[xRECKONERx]

The white list is absolutely there to rule with an iron fist. It's there to assure players they won't be blind sided by anything.

[xRECKONERx]

What? How is that relevant? The stated purpose of the NRG is not balance. Reviewing for balance is optional

[xRECKONERx]

I'm waiting for the survey to hit 100 responses before I publish results. We are at about 75 last I checked an hour and a half ago

[xRECKONERx]

Went through a bunch of games last night, don't remember how many

[xRECKONERx]

sigh

[xRECKONERx]

I feel like the BIG BOLDED QUESTION should make that easy but whatever

[xRECKONERx]

All Non-Micro Games Per Year

All Non-Micro Games as a % of Total Games Played

[xRECKONERx]

By a minimal amount (16%-18%)

It's also worth noting that the 2011-2012 numbers aren't entirely accurate due to all the games that were lost in the crash.

The number of Large Normals each year has gone significantly down (20-13-9-7), so it's not a stretch to think the mini normal queue absorbed some of that player dropoff.

[xRECKONERx]

Oh, we're only at 80 responses on the survey. -_- Things have slooooowed down.

I checked, I sent it to all completed 2014 Large Normals and all Mini Normals back to the start of 2014.

[xRECKONERx]

I'm very glad people waited 24 hours to voice concerns with the survey so that the data I'm about to post looks skewed instead of just taking it for what it is

[xRECKONERx]

reinoe please go jump off a cliff, but don't die, just lose limb function so you cannot post on this site anymore

[xRECKONERx]

Someone else can do it, I'm not wasting another eight hours putting something together and sending it out.

[xRECKONERx]

holy shit

it takes eight hours to send a survey?

I did not know

To design it, get the link, send it out, and go through each game to ensure I'm not sending it twice, yes. It takes awhile

[xRECKONERx]

@wgeurts: Let's pretend I'm a player who likes pure mafia. I don't want to deal with creating a good fake flavor claim. If we allowed flavors in normals, how would you enable me to play the game in a way that doesn't force me to know flavor/come up with a flavor fake claim.

uh, by providing flavor claims

next?

[xRECKONERx]

lol

reck is just bad at this then?

kindly go eat a dick :3

[xRECKONERx]

shouldve used project poll >_>

what the fuck are you talking about

[xRECKONERx]

Survey Results

Would you play in a normal game that featured light flavor?

• Yes: 59%
  
• No: 25%
  
• Maybe: 12%

Your ideal mafia game is:

• Normal mechanics with no flavor: 16%
  
• Normal mechanics with flavor: 40%
  
• Complex mechanics with no flavor: 5%
  
• Complex mechanics with flavor: 17%

How do you feel about the current whitelist of normal game roles?

• Too strict: 40%
  
• Just right: 46%
  
• Too relaxed: 6%
  
• No opinion: 7%

Do you feel like hydras should be allowed in normal games?

• Yes: 29%
  
• No: 59%
  
• Maybe: 12%

Do you think the normal queue is too slow?

• Yes: 52%
  
• No: 22%
  
• Maybe: 27%

How long have you been a user on MafiaScum?

• Less than six months: 6%
  
• 6months-1year: 15%
  
• 1year-2years: 17%
  
• 2years-4years: 26%
  
• 5 years or more: 35%

Will compile the essay responses later.

[xRECKONERx]

Hey, maybe the normal mini queue is too slow.

[xRECKONERx]

assuming each is a unique response n=93

^

[xRECKONERx]

I've posted IN THIS THREAD and suggested maybe the problem should be fixed by splitting up the theme queue further. Read or get the fuck out.

[xRECKONERx]

That sure isn't what your first post says.

I take it then you have completely abandoned your idea of the normal queue needs changing?

Seriously fuck off if you're just going to argue for the sake of arguing. It's fucking petty.

[xRECKONERx]

Llama, I think you need to take a step back. At this point it's pretty clear you are just arguing for what you want instead of actually bothering to take in the results of that survey.

Of those players that responded over 50% preferred flavoured games with normal mechanics, and yet they have no queue, it's likely the hardest game type to actually find a game for. That is clearly a huge issue, instead you chose to highlight that 30% of the players that like mini normals like the way they are currently setup, a large drop from your previous claim that 30% of players that liked minis liked the way they were currently set up. Furthermore creating a new queue that divides the theme queue, splitting off flavoured normals, would likely reduce the current normal queues numbers by a solid 50%, significantly exasperating the reason any of this was brought up in the first place, long mini normal mod queue times.

I do think the question of ideal queue length is something that needs to be thought about more. I suspect most people would be of the opinion that shorter queues are better, without first giving it thought, I don't think this is true though. After thinking about myself, I think the primary issue is ensuring that the mods and players both have a similar investment in the game. In my experience playing games takes much more effort than modding them. A mod's investment then can't only come from the work they are putting in while it's running if we want them to take it seriously and provide a good game. I think queue time's are a means of ensuring that mod's are actually invested in the product they are putting out because they only get 1 chance every X time period. In this light I think queue times would ideally likely approximately mimic game run times. I haven't done the math yet, but for mini normals I expect this to be in the 1.5-2month range. Much less than we currently see but more than most would set as their ideal I suspect.

Wouldn't the existence of a 'normal theme' or 'basic theme' queue (normal mechanics with flavor) hypothetically decrease the mod wait times for normals? A mod could choose to run a basic theme or basic normal as their first game, and the dedicated player core that likes normals as they are would still have the normal queue. I expect it would, at the very least, not increase normal queue times as I expect a similar percentage of players/mods to leave the normal queue for the basic theme queue.

The new mod requirement tier would look like:

Tier 1: Open, Mini Normal, Mini Basic (term can be whatever)
Tier 2: Newbie, Mini Theme, Large Normal, Micro
Tier 3: Large Theme (either Theme or Basic)

I expect the mini theme queue will see a bigger loss of players/mods than the mini normal queue. It may not completely solve the 3 month long wait time problem with mini normals, but it would at least give players and mods another option if they wanted normal roles with flavor.

I'm doing a really poor job of articulating this due to cold medicine, but I think the gist of it is... if people don't want their sacred mini normals touched with flavor or an extended whitelist, we can leave it be. We can create a queue that gives the majority of respondents what they want -- normal roles, with flavor -- by increasing the whitelist for basic themes and allowing flavor. I predict, based on this survey, that we'd wind up with each queue comprising a more even split of total games run. Probably not dead even, as I think the mini basic/mini theme queues will still edge out the others in popularity, but it's more likely to bring things up to an even keel.

And if we implement this idea and go forward with it, and six months or a year from now we see that mini normals are just completely dead, then it is empirical evidence that the normal queue isn't popular enough as-is. Best case scenario, the queue times smooth out and queue demands get better. Worst case scenario, we have better data on what queues are working and what queues aren't, and can make a more informed decision.

[xRECKONERx]

Frankly im a bit pissed that Reck put out something without really trying to get more of a consensus on what things should be brought up.

Fucking cry more, Jesus. I put together a poll because I had time and was curious. It didn't meet your standards, but frankly I could not be less concerned about what you want or desire.

[xRECKONERx]

seems the obvious solution from my perspective is to allow flavor in "normal" games
require all roles be randomly distributed across game slots so that flavor claims have no impact on gameplay
request that mods spoiler flavor text for people that get annoyed by flavor and cant be bothered to scroll past it

job done

This was suggested last time I brought this up and the counterpush was, "But players are idiots and will still try to flavorbreak"

[xRECKONERx]

i'm receptive to shaft.ed's idea (and yours before), but it needs a NRG-side randomization, and the actual roles would need to be standard named (e.g. "You are Darth Vader, the Town Gunsmith")

this was almost verbaitm my suggestion

[xRECKONERx]

Hmmm

What about those people who don't want flavor in Normals?

I'd like to have a separate queue altogether so I don't have to hear LlamaFluff bitching anymore, but spoilering the flavor also fixes the problem.

[xRECKONERx]

Hmmm

What about those people who don't want flavor in Normals?

I'd like to have a separate queue altogether so I don't have to hear LlamaFluff bitching anymore, but spoilering the flavor also fixes the problem.

I didn't see this in the OP.

Can you link me where you outlined the queue split?

Llama, I think you need to take a step back. At this point it's pretty clear you are just arguing for what you want instead of actually bothering to take in the results of that survey.

Of those players that responded over 50% preferred flavoured games with normal mechanics, and yet they have no queue, it's likely the hardest game type to actually find a game for. That is clearly a huge issue, instead you chose to highlight that 30% of the players that like mini normals like the way they are currently setup, a large drop from your previous claim that 30% of players that liked minis liked the way they were currently set up. Furthermore creating a new queue that divides the theme queue, splitting off flavoured normals, would likely reduce the current normal queues numbers by a solid 50%, significantly exasperating the reason any of this was brought up in the first place, long mini normal mod queue times.

I do think the question of ideal queue length is something that needs to be thought about more. I suspect most people would be of the opinion that shorter queues are better, without first giving it thought, I don't think this is true though. After thinking about myself, I think the primary issue is ensuring that the mods and players both have a similar investment in the game. In my experience playing games takes much more effort than modding them. A mod's investment then can't only come from the work they are putting in while it's running if we want them to take it seriously and provide a good game. I think queue time's are a means of ensuring that mod's are actually invested in the product they are putting out because they only get 1 chance every X time period. In this light I think queue times would ideally likely approximately mimic game run times. I haven't done the math yet, but for mini normals I expect this to be in the 1.5-2month range. Much less than we currently see but more than most would set as their ideal I suspect.

Wouldn't the existence of a 'normal theme' or 'basic theme' queue (normal mechanics with flavor) hypothetically decrease the mod wait times for normals? A mod could choose to run a basic theme or basic normal as their first game, and the dedicated player core that likes normals as they are would still have the normal queue. I expect it would, at the very least, not increase normal queue times as I expect a similar percentage of players/mods to leave the normal queue for the basic theme queue.

The new mod requirement tier would look like:

Tier 1: Open, Mini Normal, Mini Basic (term can be whatever)
Tier 2: Newbie, Mini Theme, Large Normal, Micro
Tier 3: Large Theme (either Theme or Basic)

I expect the mini theme queue will see a bigger loss of players/mods than the mini normal queue. It may not completely solve the 3 month long wait time problem with mini normals, but it would at least give players and mods another option if they wanted normal roles with flavor.

I'm doing a really poor job of articulating this due to cold medicine, but I think the gist of it is... if people don't want their sacred mini normals touched with flavor or an extended whitelist, we can leave it be. We can create a queue that gives the majority of respondents what they want -- normal roles, with flavor -- by increasing the whitelist for basic themes and allowing flavor. I predict, based on this survey, that we'd wind up with each queue comprising a more even split of total games run. Probably not dead even, as I think the mini basic/mini theme queues will still edge out the others in popularity, but it's more likely to bring things up to an even keel.

And if we implement this idea and go forward with it, and six months or a year from now we see that mini normals are just completely dead, then it is empirical evidence that the normal queue isn't popular enough as-is. Best case scenario, the queue times smooth out and queue demands get better. Worst case scenario, we have better data on what queues are working and what queues aren't, and can make a more informed decision.

[xRECKONERx]

I'm not very excited about further fragmenting the queues for marginal gains.

Would you consider the Micro queue to be a marginal gain?

[xRECKONERx]

I would actually prefer a new queue altogether to my original proposal. I think the expanded whitelist/more creative freedom with flavor would be a huge boon to the idea over just "let's randomize flavor names".

P.EDIT: Well, sure. But my point is that at the time, the benefits of a micro queue were unknown and seemed marginal... after all, how many sub-9p setups were actually run, so how beneficial is it really going to be? It turned out to be very popular. People flocked to it after its release, and the demand we only slightly knew about beneath the surface ended up running deeper than we thought. That's how I think it'll go with a new, basic theme queue.

[xRECKONERx]

To be fair, I saw the "change the normal queue into a newbie game hybrid" and "expand the normal definition and create a basic theme" as two separate suggestions for two separate problems. They got rolled into the same proposal as a comprehensive change.