How much commitment do we require?

[AnonymousGhost]

What are the things that a player should be doing for you to say that a player is playing the game? (to what extend should they read the thread, what kind of quality of posting do you expect, what quantity of posting do you expect, how aware should they be about what's going on, how much do you expect them to think about the game, etcetera)

I try to keep a very broad definition of what 'good' participation looks like when I'm involved in a game since play styles exist. It's why we have a word for it.

If a player is doing nothing but naked voting, then that's participation. Granted, it's not how I would play, but it's a type of participation and that's how they're going to play. I can't change that, so why bother stressing out?

I think where I would draw the line of 'bad' participation is if the player isn't keeping up and does nothing but "catch up" posts e.g. [after being prodded] "caught up. what's going on? I think X is scum and I think Y is town." [gets prodded again] "haven't caught up yet. what's going on? still think X/Y are scum/town, etc. etc.".

In that case, it's clear that you don't have the time necessary to commit to the game, so please just recognize that you can't commit and replace out. Let someone else play who could commit more than you could.

What are the things that a player should be doing for you to say that a player is playing the game well?

Again this is a very broad and subjective question. And again, there's the factor of different play styles coming into play. Haha~

Anyway, I think that a player is 'playing well' as long as they aren't purposefully throwing the game or creating a toxic atmosphere for the rest of the players.

Posting something like "fuck you all, I'm going to prodge the rest of this game LOL" is obviously not very sportsmanlike and I would say that people like this aren't playing the game "well". I would say that this type of attitude is borderline between 'not playing well' and 'not playing/just wasting a slot'.

If you really hate the player list, or anything else in the game, don't make it a nightmare for everybody and simply replace out. I can guarantee you'll be happier that you won't have to "deal" with whatever it is. You'll be happy, the rest of the players will be happy, the mod not be happy that they have to replace a slot... so mostly everyone wins. Sorry mods.

How much time would you expect a player to spend on each of the points above?

I would say as long as the player isn't

consistently

being prodded, then I'm fine with it. There are some days when I can't commit well thought out and magnificent wall posts because I'm either too tired, too lazy, or I don't have enough time.

The most important thing to remember is that mafia is just a game and there are more important things in life than playing a game. On the one hand, if you've signed up to play the game, then I would expect - in the something (this word escape me ATM) of sportsmanship - you recognize that you have the ability to commit to this game. If not, then why did you sign up in the first place?

How would you expect that time to be distributed throughout a week?

I expect people to do the best they can.

Shit happens. That's life. It's not predictable when we want it to be. All I expect from people is to give a good effort if they've decided to play and to replace out if they recognize that they can't.

To what extend do the answers to these questions differ between individual games?

I'd say that some the answers to these questions actually differ between individual players, rather than games.

Is there a difference between what you would like the site to require, versus what games on this site actually require?

I don't think so?

[AnonymousGhost]

@Kublai - MathDino summed it up in the Geriatric ruleset discussion thread. Open 715 - the most recent finished/completed Geriatric game - was riddled with lurking from the town. Two out of three of the scum - myself included - were the highest posters in the game. MagnaofIllusion has said, and I find myself agreeing with him, that there should be no excuse to get prodded in a Geriatric game because it's not "spam central".

i should note that there are a few players that i would consider the "perfect-world" geriatric player

Kmd4390 is a major example

to summarise:

- due to real life, he literally can't keep up with too much posting since it takes that much longer to read the game

- despite real life, he still checks in whenever he can and puts thought/effort into his play

- he never replaces out or lurks out, and there's never the sense that he's dead weight

appealing to players like Kmd is the stated goal of the geriatric ruleset, and i think that goal is a noble one

the problem is that in reality, it appeals to players who shouldn't really be playing mafia anymore anyway

there aren't many players like kmd and there certainly aren't enough kmds to fill a geriatric game

i would consider AGhost to be another Kmd

what i mean by "shouldn't be playing mafia anymore" is "their heart isn't really in the game of mafia and they think that getting rid of the newfangled spamposters will make mafia what it once was to them"

or they think that geriatric games will be easier

AGhost and Kmd are some of the highest effort players i've ever seen despite the fact that they're less active/online than average

[AnonymousGhost]

I'm not blaming the ruleset.

However, I think MathDino does have a point when he says that Geriatric has the potential to attract a crowd of players that should reexamine whether or not they have the time to commit to a mafia game.

(Actually, I think that all players should ask themselves if they commit to a game, regardless if it's Geriatric or not. But that's my opinion. /shrug)

Is that the ruleset's fault? Absolutely not. That's on the players and that's where I think a "correction" needs to be.

Taking a moment and asking yourself "Do I have time to play this game?" is the sportsmanlike thing to do. It's like reading the ruleset. You do it because it's what's expected, yet not required, of you. You do it because it's fair to everyone else in the game. Examining whether or not you have the time or commitment to play a game is basically the same thing. By asking yourself that question, you may have saved yourself and everyone else the time and effort of having to examine a nearly absent slot.

Pedit:

That. I don't know for sure.

On the one hand, maybe the town wouldn't been more active. On the other hand, maybe they would've been more active. I think it depends on the players, rather than a game by game thing.

That'd be an interesting and worthwhile thing to see.

Off the top of my head, there was only one town lurker - who eventually got replaced - who gave off the impression that they "lacked" the ability to scum hunt? Granted, they were a newbie to the site and have since then site flaked, but that's probably a whole other can of worms. Or maybe not. I don't know. /shrug

[AnonymousGhost]

@Michel

Barring major changes from their schedule, a player theoretically shouldn't have to replace out.

Does that always happen in practice? Not necessarily.

A player with no major changes to their schedule might get bored or frustrated, for instance, because no one's listening to them in the game. Hence, they give low effort. Obviously the fact that no one's listening to them is a bit out of their control, since you can't force someone listen to you. They could have a number of reasons for sticking around despite this environment and may or may not put forth a good effort depending on how everyone else is receptive to their posts.

[AnonymousGhost]

Given that prodding generally happens after 48 hours without posting, that implies a commitment at least once every two days, and more likely daily, correct?

That's correct.

As long as the only time you're involved in the conversation isn't "USERNAME is being prodded.", I'm overall fine with their play commitment. Why stress out over something you really don't have control over?

Given a player with that type of activity, what kind of playing style would you expect them to have in order to keep up with the game?

Like I said before, I'm not particularly picky about what type of play style they bring to the game since that's something that's entirely out of my control.

Stress less, you know?

If people gave an hour per day on a game, that could bring in a wide variety of play styles. It also would depend, I think, on how much - quality and/or quality included - you can get done in that amount of time. A wall poster might post two to four big posts, but a one line poster might post twenty to thirty times. The amount of activity during that hour would probably also depend on whether or not the individual is catching up or interacting with other players online at the time. I'm much more active when I'm engaging with someone in real time, versus when I'm 'catching up' to answer questions or offer comments.

[AnonymousGhost]

Given your reaction here, I get the impression that such a style would be considered huge overkill.

There is no kill like overkill.

I use a rather different prodding system in Micros, where inactivity from a single player can have a large impact, and in which even expected amounts of inactivity are marked with prods. That's very unusual as rulesets go, though, and it took some difficulty in getting player expectations into the right place.

Do you think your prodding system would be effective for games larger than micros?

A single player's impact could theoretically be 'bigger' in a smaller sized game, but depending on the player that impact could either grow or diminish regardless of game size.

[AnonymousGhost]

@Michel - When you use the word 'normal' are you referring strictly to normal games in the Normal Queue/New York Forum?