Planned Changes: Newbie Game Deadlines

[Sunlit Diamond]

*lurks back from lurkerdom for anecdotal commentary*

I'm not a newbie anymore, but newbie games are my favorite.

I don't think seven days is long enough, but ten days I think could be reasonable.

I've had to drop out of more games than I've completed (which is why I've been MIA for so long, because SHAME) because RL would not allow me to maintain consistent attention for the duration of a game with multiple extensions, etc. It's frustrating as fuck; if vaguely shorter deadlines might help me get into playing regularly, I'd really love that.

*lurks back into lurkerdom*

[Sunlit Diamond]

What if it was simple policy that when someone is getting replaced, the game is paused and locked until a replacement is found?

As for how to deal with the people themselves... For SEs and ICs who are repeat offenders, maybe a timeout from newbie games until they've completed a game in another queue?

[Sunlit Diamond]

Fair enough!

[Sunlit Diamond]

Wanted to address the modkill thing even though it's probably a non-issue...

People being modkilled for any reason other than gross violation of the rules would really bother me.

From the being replaced side: I replace out because I DO care about the games I'm in and I'm cognizant that for whatever reason, I can't play to win condition for longer than I can reasonably ask my co-players to wait for me to return (usually it's a 7-10 day time frame where work pummels me six ways from Sunday, and then I'm free again). I replace out so my team can have someone who CAN commit.

From the "someone else is replacing out" side: For the most part we do not get to choose who we play with, especially in the newbie queue, so why should my team pay the price for another player's inability to commit to the game? I would end up feeling pretty resentful and not having fun. (I think it would also encourage a certain level of out of game animosity to people who replace that would make future games difficult for them.)



I do think the time between person disappearing and person being replaced is too long, even with 14 day deadlines. If it drops to 7 that definitely needs to be reduced by some quantity. I get the arguments about 24 hours, but 36 still seems too long. Can't win, I suppose.

[Sunlit Diamond]

From the being replaced side: I replace out because I DO care about the games I'm in and I'm cognizant that for whatever reason, I can't play to win condition for longer than I can reasonably ask my co-players to wait for me to return (usually it's a 7-10 day time frame where work pummels me six ways from Sunday, and then I'm free again). I replace out so my team can have someone who CAN commit.

You should only join games where it's not going to be a problem for you to be absent for that long of a period, or figure out a way to squeeze in enough time here and there in that time frame so that you can meet activity requirements at least enough to not be replaced. I've played mafia games while working ~120 hours and was working ~80 hours until this week, so I can appreciate how difficult it is. Is really something you need to think about before you join the game, imo.

I do think about that before I join games, which is why I haven't played in something like five months. The problem is that those surges in busy (and in my mental capacity to deal) are pretty close to unpredictable. I know better than to join a game when I'm *already* busy, but...for example, right now my work is dead as a doornail and looks like it will stay that way until September. Do I cross my fingers and jump into a game since it looks quiet, or do I just unilaterally declare I can't do something I enjoy because I MIGHT get busy?

Sorry, but the former is going to win.

[Sunlit Diamond]

*shrug* I'll do me the best way I know how. I'm trying something new this time, so we'll see how it goes.

Anyway, this is off topic for this thread.

[Sunlit Diamond]

we can't be afraid of holding people to a higher standard even if the bench is a bit thin.

It's entirely possible that having higher standards would create a stronger bench, as well, since meeting those standards would instill a different sort of of pride in players that would inspire others to join them.

[Sunlit Diamond]

but then you're running the risk of replacing normally-active players who've had an emergency and haven't had the chance to tell the thread about it.

I agree that lower prod/replacement times makes more sense than shortening the day phase.

However, in regards to the specific quote above: I don't think that's enough of a risk to shy away from making this change. I think it would be more beneficial to occasionally replace a normally active player than it is to let games stagnate waiting for people to return. This is especially true if the replaced player is given an opportunity to explain themselves in dead thread/endgame so they don't get mauled in the court of public opinion for something outside their control.


I also wonder if it wouldn't make sense to put an active games limit on SEs and ICs. It doesn't have to be crazy tight, just...hey. You're committing to help newbies. Please actually commit to doing that. It's also a proactive, rather than reactive (i.e. queue ban) way to help up the expectation on SE/IC participation.

[Sunlit Diamond]

While I can't discount that it may have to do with newbies for some, I think the game setup used and the replace out rate have more to do with it for most, Pulsaris.

I'm just speculating though, because the newbie queue is my favorite.