/in-vitational Round 4 Discussion

This forum is for discussion related to the game.
User avatar
mith
mith
Godfather
User avatar
User avatar
mith
Godfather
Godfather
Posts: 9267
Joined: March 27, 2002
Location: McKinney, TX
Contact:

/in-vitational Round 4 Discussion

Post Post #0 (ISO) » Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:02 am

Post by mith »

(Because for some reason I think I don't have enough on my plate right now...)

The /in-vitational is a player/mod matching system which has been run three times previously. The general process is:
  1. All interested players and mods sign up. Mods optionally post what type of game they intend to run if selected.
  2. Once the list is final, all players send preference lists for players, mods, and a range of game sizes.
  3. ???
  4. The algorithm spits out a set of games attempting to maximize a happiness score.
  5. Play those games!
We have used a different algorithm each time we've done this, and will almost certainly come up with yet another one this time, so the main discussion point for this thread will be determining priorities for placement. The general rules (subject to weighting) are:
  1. "Don't" preferences are mandatory - players should never be placed in a game with players they don't want to play with, by mods they don't want to play under (whether because of the mod or because of the mod's proposed setup), or with too many or too few players.
  2. For a given potential solution, points are awarded for players being in a game with other players on their like list (possibly weighted - last time players could give their preferences a weighting from 1 to 3), with mods on their like list, and for being assigned to a game at all.
  3. We have also discussed giving bonuses for meeting at least X likes for a given player (to avoid games being formed where none of the players have opinions, just because of the assignment bonus). This might be in lieu of an assignment bonus (or your preference list may include something along the lines of whether you would like to meet a certain threshold, or whether you just want to be in a game and don't care that much about who is in it).
Issues that have popped up in previous iterations:
  1. Because the algorithm generally looks for an overall maximum happiness, it generally spits out one large game full of "popular" players with a really high score, while the "last" game or two have few matches and are formed as leftover games to include as many as possible. Providing significant bonuses to a player's first or second match may reduce this behavior somewhat.
  2. The low-score individual games are also sometimes due to players not submitting enough likes; I'm not sure there is any way around this, other than emphasizing that the point of this system is to match players who want to play together, whereas if you don't care about that part you can just join any old game in the queue.
  3. Replacements are a big problem - we usually can't use unmatched players, because of "don't" preferences. One possible solution is to allow players to join a second game as a replacement, if needed, and give a list of all potential allowed replacements for each game.
Feel free to comment with suggestions for what you would like to see in a matching algorithm, or just express your interest in participating. At this point, I'm not expecting signups to happen 'til after Thanksgiving at least, which means games starting early next year.
User avatar
Nexus
Nexus
He
miss
User avatar
User avatar
Nexus
He
miss
miss
Posts: 6650
Joined: July 1, 2010
Pronoun: He
Location: UK Hun

Post Post #1 (ISO) » Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:11 am

Post by Nexus »

I enjoyed modding last time round but think my game ended up being the apathy game, which was a shame.

Edit: The playerlist was cool but I remember being a little upset about the player apathy and amount of prods and replacements I needed.
Trans rights are human rights.
User avatar
chamber
chamber
Cases are scummy
User avatar
User avatar
chamber
Cases are scummy
Cases are scummy
Posts: 10703
Joined: November 20, 2005

Post Post #2 (ISO) » Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:18 am

Post by chamber »

So, based on the last time I helped with the algorithm, I'd make a couple notes here, for whomever does the work this time:

You should have people ask whether they actually want to be forced into a game, or if they'd rather not play if it's going to be below a given threshold.
You should make sure people have an understanding of how weighting works. (some may select few thinking it increases their weighting?)
You need to break up the big super game. I'm not sure the best way to go about this, miths suggestion may work.
Taking a break from the site.
User avatar
hitogoroshi
hitogoroshi
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
User avatar
hitogoroshi
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Posts: 3450
Joined: February 24, 2008
Location: shiftless layabout

Post Post #3 (ISO) » Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:02 am

Post by hitogoroshi »

This is a really interesting problem to think about.

I think the way to go about the "assignment bonus" is to have the likes and dislikes be fixed values (you can only specify hard veto, dislike, neutral, like, or really like, with the definition of really like being that really like + dislike is a positive tradeoff for you, corresponding to "point values" of -infinity, -1,0,+1,+2), but allow people to specify their OWN values for their baseline and for the compromises from their preferred game type they're willing to accept. And then we focus on trying to improve points over baseline, and don't put a player in a game if their total score isn't at least zero.

This hopefully could help make it immune to being meta-gamed by people falsely reporting preferences - if someone says that "I will only want a game with my five favorite players" and so sets their baseline to -15, they can do that, but it's also pretty likely they just won't get a game, because having a negative baseline means that it's only smarter to include the player instead of exclude them if at least some of the likes are reciprocated. If that makes sense, I'm kind of typing in a hurry but I think it could be made to work.

Would we want a "WOTC" system wherein the system is willing not to assign a player to the game if doing so necessarily means the playerbase as a whole gets less happy?
"Don’t buy a dozen eggs if you just want a hardboiled egg. Don’t buy a head of lettuce if you just want a salad. Don’t buy eggs and lettuce if you want egg salad because those are not the right ingredients." -Julius Bloop
User avatar
callforjudgement
callforjudgement
Microprocessor
User avatar
User avatar
callforjudgement
Microprocessor
Microprocessor
Posts: 3972
Joined: September 1, 2011

Post Post #4 (ISO) » Wed Oct 26, 2016 12:15 pm

Post by callforjudgement »

I don't generally have huge preferences for people I want to play with (and when I do, I normally just look for a game they're playing and replace into it). So if I participate in this as a player, it'd be because people want to play with me, rather than the other way round. Is there some way to participate as "include me if it makes other players happy, otherwise leave me out"?

I'd be willing to join this as a mod, though. I'm not sure I have anything much to recommend myself in terms of actual modding practice, but I've become somewhat typecast in the sorts of setup I run (small, mostly vanilla, often symmetrical using unusual mechanics for balance) and many people seem to like playing in them.
scum
· scam · seam · team · term · tern · torn ·
town
User avatar
mhsmith0
mhsmith0
Balancing Act
User avatar
User avatar
mhsmith0
Balancing Act
Balancing Act
Posts: 10830
Joined: March 7, 2016
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Post Post #5 (ISO) » Sat Oct 29, 2016 7:05 pm

Post by mhsmith0 »

not sure if I'd be /in to play, but am def /in to mod
Show
http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Mhsmith0
Conq: you, sir, are great at being town.
BATMAN: Only jugg was the only one we didn’t scum read at least not me
Quick: There is little to no chance this slot is Power-Wolfing.
SR: I want to give him a day
Life is simply unfair, don't you think?
User avatar
Yume
Yume
She/They
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
Yume
She/They
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 3533
Joined: April 20, 2016
Pronoun: She/They

Post Post #6 (ISO) » Sat Oct 29, 2016 11:00 pm

Post by Yume »

I wanna play
Show
Whatever the chains placed upon me
Whatever the prison, my soul has the key
No money can buy, no power can still
No burden can break the unshakeable strength of my will

Mah best game

My alignment is what JJH says it is.
User avatar
Infinity 324
Infinity 324
they (pl.)
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
Infinity 324
they (pl.)
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 18337
Joined: April 7, 2013
Pronoun: they (pl.)
Contact:

Post Post #7 (ISO) » Sat Oct 29, 2016 11:21 pm

Post by Infinity 324 »

I'd also like to play
Show
new GTKAS

<3 you are valid

plural system, we may or may not sign
User avatar
Aeronaut
Aeronaut
He/Him
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Aeronaut
He/Him
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7236
Joined: September 8, 2013
Pronoun: He/Him
Location: Boston, MA

Post Post #8 (ISO) » Sun Oct 30, 2016 5:01 am

Post by Aeronaut »

i'd play
2023 W/L | 1-0
User avatar
Realeo
Realeo
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Realeo
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 5238
Joined: February 11, 2016
Location: Indonesia

Post Post #9 (ISO) » Sun Oct 30, 2016 5:20 pm

Post by Realeo »

In post 0, mith wrote:Because the algorithm generally looks for an overall maximum happiness, it generally spits out one large game full of "popular" players with a really high score, while the "last" game or two have few matches and are formed as leftover games to include as many as possible. Providing significant bonuses to a player's first or second match may reduce this behavior somewhat.
Have a maximum standard deviation? If the standard deviation of happiness is over a limit, it's off the table?
"The debate on whether short multi postings or a long wall of post is good or not is like a debate on gun control--we would never understand each other and we have to make peace with it." -Realeo

I'm mabye a serious player, but I'm capable of joke. Ok?
User avatar
mastina
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
User avatar
User avatar
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
False Prophet
Posts: 16670
Joined: October 7, 2016
Pronoun: She/Her
Location: Between Snohomish and Monroe, WA
Contact:

Post Post #10 (ISO) » Sun Nov 06, 2016 2:59 pm

Post by mastina »

This is definitely a thing I enjoy more as a player.
hiplop
hiplop
Jury Darling
hiplop
Jury Darling
Jury Darling
Posts: 12498
Joined: March 23, 2011
Location: full of self
Contact:

Post Post #11 (ISO) » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:06 pm

Post by hiplop »

in probably
third best scummer of all time
User avatar
Ircher
Ircher
He / Him / His
What A Grand Idea
User avatar
User avatar
Ircher
He / Him / His
What A Grand Idea
What A Grand Idea
Posts: 15170
Joined: November 9, 2015
Pronoun: He / Him / His
Location: CST/CDT

Post Post #12 (ISO) » Mon Nov 07, 2016 3:51 pm

Post by Ircher »

would I meet requirements to mod?
Links: User Page | GTKAS | Ratings
Do you have questions, ideas, or feedback for the Scummies? Please pm me!
Hosting: The Grand Neighborhood [In Signups: 6/9]
User avatar
callforjudgement
callforjudgement
Microprocessor
User avatar
User avatar
callforjudgement
Microprocessor
Microprocessor
Posts: 3972
Joined: September 1, 2011

Post Post #13 (ISO) » Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:28 pm

Post by callforjudgement »

In terms of the algorithm:

Perhaps it'd make sense to do the /in-vitational queueing in two stages, one with nonspecific signups (as player or as mod, that's it), and after that, to post the whole list and ask people to (probably secretly) rate how much they'd like to play with each player (I'd suggest a +2, +1, +0, -∞ system). That's likely to resolve the issues of players not giving enough "I'd like to play with player X" preferences. (I don't think I could list many players who I'd particularly like to play with, but on the other hand, given a list of players, I'd almost certainly give many of them positive ratings.)
scum
· scam · seam · team · term · tern · torn ·
town
User avatar
Kmd4390
Kmd4390
I lost a bet.
User avatar
User avatar
Kmd4390
I lost a bet.
I lost a bet.
Posts: 14493
Joined: July 2, 2008

Post Post #14 (ISO) » Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:55 pm

Post by Kmd4390 »

Of course this comes up right when I stop playing. You guys are gonna force me back too soon lol
KMD is the coolest dude who ever lost a bet to me - vonflare
User avatar
Realeo
Realeo
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Realeo
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 5238
Joined: February 11, 2016
Location: Indonesia

Post Post #15 (ISO) » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:19 pm

Post by Realeo »

In post 13, callforjudgement wrote:In terms of the algorithm:

Perhaps it'd make sense to do the /in-vitational queueing in two stages, one with nonspecific signups (as player or as mod, that's it), and after that, to post the whole list and ask people to (probably secretly) rate how much they'd like to play with each player (I'd suggest a +2, +1, +0, -∞ system). That's likely to resolve the issues of players not giving enough "I'd like to play with player X" preferences. (I don't think I could list many players who I'd particularly like to play with, but on the other hand, given a list of players, I'd almost certainly give many of them positive ratings.)
This algorithm is superior in terms of data handling and computation. I endorse this solution.
"The debate on whether short multi postings or a long wall of post is good or not is like a debate on gun control--we would never understand each other and we have to make peace with it." -Realeo

I'm mabye a serious player, but I'm capable of joke. Ok?
User avatar
Realeo
Realeo
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Realeo
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 5238
Joined: February 11, 2016
Location: Indonesia

Post Post #16 (ISO) » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:20 pm

Post by Realeo »

And it look nice on Google Form. No more data nightmare.

Image
"The debate on whether short multi postings or a long wall of post is good or not is like a debate on gun control--we would never understand each other and we have to make peace with it." -Realeo

I'm mabye a serious player, but I'm capable of joke. Ok?
User avatar
mith
mith
Godfather
User avatar
User avatar
mith
Godfather
Godfather
Posts: 9267
Joined: March 27, 2002
Location: McKinney, TX
Contact:

Post Post #17 (ISO) » Tue Nov 08, 2016 5:45 am

Post by mith »

In post 13, callforjudgement wrote:In terms of the algorithm:

Perhaps it'd make sense to do the /in-vitational queueing in two stages, one with nonspecific signups (as player or as mod, that's it), and after that, to post the whole list and ask people to (probably secretly) rate how much they'd like to play with each player (I'd suggest a +2, +1, +0, -∞ system). That's likely to resolve the issues of players not giving enough "I'd like to play with player X" preferences. (I don't think I could list many players who I'd particularly like to play with, but on the other hand, given a list of players, I'd almost certainly give many of them positive ratings.)
All the previous /in-vitationals have been done in two stages; we don't take preferences until signups are complete.
User avatar
Cephrir
Cephrir
he/him
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
Cephrir
he/him
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 25238
Joined: October 11, 2006
Pronoun: he/him
Location: Seattle-ish

Post Post #18 (ISO) » Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:59 am

Post by Cephrir »

is there a way to be reminded when this is in signups i have every intention of making bad choices
"I would prefer not to." --Herman Melville,
Bartleby the Scrivener
hiplop
hiplop
Jury Darling
hiplop
Jury Darling
Jury Darling
Posts: 12498
Joined: March 23, 2011
Location: full of self
Contact:

Post Post #19 (ISO) » Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:09 pm

Post by hiplop »

^
third best scummer of all time
User avatar
ZZZX
ZZZX
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
ZZZX
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 10778
Joined: July 7, 2013

Post Post #20 (ISO) » Tue Nov 15, 2016 11:34 am

Post by ZZZX »

interesting enough i'd say.
Implosion: I see ZZZX was
redacted
. For shame, people. For shame.
The Bulge: ZZZX is ZZZX
Get to know a ZZZX: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=58733
User avatar
Fishythefish
Fishythefish
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
Fishythefish
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4362
Joined: November 2, 2008
Location: England

Post Post #21 (ISO) » Sun Nov 27, 2016 2:31 am

Post by Fishythefish »

In post 0, mith wrote: Issues that have popped up in previous iterations:
  1. Because the algorithm generally looks for an overall maximum happiness, it generally spits out one large game full of "popular" players with a really high score, while the "last" game or two have few matches and are formed as leftover games to include as many as possible. Providing significant bonuses to a player's first or second match may reduce this behavior somewhat.
  2. The low-score individual games are also sometimes due to players not submitting enough likes; I'm not sure there is any way around this, other than emphasizing that the point of this system is to match players who want to play together, whereas if you don't care about that part you can just join any old game in the queue.
  3. Replacements are a big problem - we usually can't use unmatched players, because of "don't" preferences. One possible solution is to allow players to join a second game as a replacement, if needed, and give a list of all potential allowed replacements for each game.
You could get round large, "popular" games by dividing the score for each game by the possible number of likes (ie the number of players in the game squared).

I thought last time that it might also be sensible to put more weight on each player being happy; one player with 4 likes and one with 0 in a game is not as good as both having 2. One simple way to do that would be to square root the number of likes for each player.
User avatar
LicketyQuickety
LicketyQuickety
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
LicketyQuickety
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 12785
Joined: May 14, 2015
Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.

Post Post #22 (ISO) » Mon Dec 05, 2016 1:30 am

Post by LicketyQuickety »

I might want to /in as a player if I see enough people I have played with join. The problem is, I have not played with a ton of people from this site; a lot of the vets I have played very little with and it seems this type of thing is geared toward those players. On the plus side, if I "/in" and I am not assigned to play in any of the games, I know that people don't like me here. This might look pessimistic, but it is info to work with.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!

You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
User avatar
Davsto
Davsto
He/Him
Farce of Habit
User avatar
User avatar
Davsto
He/Him
Farce of Habit
Farce of Habit
Posts: 5279
Joined: June 29, 2015
Pronoun: He/Him

Post Post #23 (ISO) » Sun Dec 18, 2016 11:52 am

Post by Davsto »

/in

Maybe something like this will help get me back into mafia
User avatar
Skybird
Skybird
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
Skybird
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 2880
Joined: June 20, 2014
Location: In the woods

Post Post #24 (ISO) » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:05 am

Post by Skybird »

/in

This looks fun.
GTKA Skybird!

AFK between 7am and 7pm central time due to work
Post Reply

Return to “Mafia Discussion”