Problems with the Queues

[popsofctown]

3 ongoing fully open micros

I'm counting a locked pre-game thread though, that's dirty pool

[OkaPoka]

what if the open queue was just terminated

[Alisae]

what if the open queue was just terminated

now this is an idea i can get behind!

[OkaPoka]

newbie queue

normal queue

micro queue

mini queue

large queue

[Alyssa The Lamb]

The open setup challenges are a good way to create new open setups to potentially throw into the mix, but the problem with them (and why I've personally stopped trying to create any for it in the past half a year) is because I've felt like it has sort of warped to be "how can we make x and y work at all, when x and y are very limiting factors" rather than "how do we take an interesting concept and make a good setup out of it"

I think the general quality of open game setups is pretty low and we have a tool to use to help with that problem, but its hard to do so right now

[gobbledygook]

NSG, I’m so dumb. I was signed up for two open setups in the micro queue.

I support this suggestion 100% now.

[nomnomnom]

The open setup challenges are a good way to create new open setups to potentially throw into the mix, but the problem with them (and why I've personally stopped trying to create any for it in the past half a year) is because I've felt like it has sort of warped to be "how can we make x and y work at all, when x and y are very limiting factors" rather than "how do we take an interesting concept and make a good setup out of it"

I think the general quality of open game setups is pretty low and we have a tool to use to help with that problem, but its hard to do so right now

Yeah it's kind of odd that we have so much spec on open games but none of them are being run? Kind of an enormous waste of effort if you ask me.

[Kerset]

The biggest issue with open queue is list of Approved Open Setups. 50% of open games are first time mods, which need to get mod experience and the easiest way to get through your first mod game is by hosting one of those boring setups. Nobody wants to play those games!!!!!!!!!!
Let open game review members pick interesting setups for first time mods!

[Alisae]

Announcement: With the conclusion of Team Mafia, I will once again enforce sign-up time limits. These games have 2 additional weeks to fill from this post.

ADDITIONAL 2 WEEKS
Excuse me?

[Alisae]

The biggest issue with open queue is list of Approved Open Setups. 50% of open games are first time mods, which need to get mod experience and the easiest way to get through your first mod game is by hosting one of those boring setups. Nobody wants to play those games!!!!!!!!!!

you actually bring up a valid point

If you don't want to design a normal, you can /in to mod a pre-designed normal, and get a setup that is far more interesting then what the open queue has to offer.

So now here's the question:
If you REALLY do not want to try your hand at making a mafia game, why would you mod an Open to be given a hand of 3 setups you really do not like, as well as mod in a queue that sucks, over modding a normal, and maybe being handed a cool setup?

[T-Bone]

Hey, I appreciate the sudden enthusiasm about the Open Queue. So here's where we are at. First, the Open Queue isn't going anywhere so obviously we will ignore any suggestions of that nature.

Second, I do want to change the Open Queue! It was last reformed by Llama in 2014/2015. It is well overdue for a change!

But, while I certainly have the power to make unilateral changes, I will not. I will only make changes with heavy community involvement. I want to change the Approved Open Setups. I want to add new ones to the list! But I cannot do it without heavy community involvement. I started asking for help on this back in August. The wiki group did some important work.

I also asked the Marathon Weekend crew to start testing Open Set-Ups. I also asked the folks who participate in the Open Setup Contest to try and run some of those set-ups. This is where enthusiasm died, and we've been stuck. So far no games have been run in an effort to test out any new set-ups for the Approved List.

Ultimately, I'd love to add new games to the Approved List and remove games people don't want to play. I cannot do that without help. So, if you'd like to help, I can use it. Join the Wiki Tiki usergroup, even if you don't know how to edit the Wiki.

As for other suggestions. Most likely we're not going to increase the games in sign-ups at once (full-time). Part of the function of the Open Queue is a service. I would like for people to view the Open Queue the same way they view the Newbie Queue, in that we are providing a place for first time Mods to get their modding experience, and potentially make some friends willing to play for them. Part of that of course will be to make the Approved Setup list better (as mentioned above). Maybe I can do more to advertise and support first time mods? I'd be happy to do so. Let's find a way to make that process better for players and Moderators.

I'd be happy to do more 'events' to create a 3rd lane for moderators on temporary basis (like I did for Blitz Month in the Mini Theme queue). Other than doing a Blitz month in the Open Queue, I am stuck for ideas.

I can end the self-automation. That isn't working and I should have ended it sooner.

Anyway, ultimately, whether we can make significant changes to the Open Queue or not will depend on community involvement. A lot of people have proposed some ideas, and I'd want to discuss them. But, I'm not willing to make unilateral changes to the queue on my own.

[Alisae]

I would like for people to view the Open Queue the same way they view the Newbie Queue, in that we are providing a place for first time Mods to get their modding experience, and potentially make some friends willing to play for them.

Is this ultimately your vision for the Open Queue?

[zoraster]

tbh, I just want a queue that is exclusive to only the moderators with the highest rep. Something sorta like a VIP queue.

I'm not sure if this is serious, but what's the point? To identify VIP mods? We don't really need a queue to do that if that's really something we wanted to do.

It's not like we need a queue to get these types of mods through faster. Very few of the queues have a backlog of moderators. Not even the Normal queue does right now.

[gobbledygook]

Do people still consider multiball fun anymore? There’s a lot of multiball setups in the Approved Open Minis. Donner Party might need to be looked at again. Site culture has moved away from janitors in practice, even though the sheer amount of killing in that game seems like it might be fun.

[Not Known 15]

Games that have found to be imbalanced should probably go away:
Lovers Mafia(scumsided)
Scumhunter's Speed 8p(scumsided)
Purgatory(townsided)
Complicated setups should NOT be approved to be run by a first time mod.

[BBmolla]

Someone brought up fun, we should probably go through and remove ones that people don’t feel are fun?

The part where the system fails is the playtesting of new setups for fun/balance and I have yet to see a solid solution for that.

[BBmolla]

It wouldn’t be a terrible idea to have a sort of retired approved setups for old setups that are balanced and fine but set aside to allow newer setups to run

Like with Magic the Gathering and card games how sets get rotated out sort of thing

So stuff that the site isn’t as keen on, like multi ball, can be run in theory but is not presented to new mods.

Something like that

I’ll see if I can spend some quarantine time going through open setups

[BBmolla]

The open setup challenges are a good way to create new open setups to potentially throw into the mix, but the problem with them (and why I've personally stopped trying to create any for it in the past half a year) is because I've felt like it has sort of warped to be "how can we make x and y work at all, when x and y are very limiting factors" rather than "how do we take an interesting concept and make a good setup out of it"

I think the general quality of open game setups is pretty low and we have a tool to use to help with that problem, but its hard to do so right now

Is there a way we can make rules to fix this for the contests

Cause like literally the format is the way it is because I made a suggestion and based it off of what I’d seen for hero contests for Dota (lol). I feel it’s sort of morphed over time, my initial idea was more making different roles work sort of thing.

If we can have more specified rules for these contests maybe they’d be more beneficial?

Or maybe a new system where a group comes up with the guidelines for next month?

My point is if that’s not working we can fix it, the whole point was to generate new setups and if it’s failing us there we should change it

[OkaPoka]

viewtopic.php?f=115&t=78412
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=78659
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=79015
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=79378
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=79648
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=79967
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=80275
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=80567
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=80887
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=81077
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=81326
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=81492
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=81808
viewtopic.php?f=115&t=82082

We have lots of different setup contests that we can go through

[northsidegal]

@TBone-

I can't help but feel that, while changing the list of Approved Open setups should help the open queue somewhat, it doesn't really do much to stop the issue of queue blockage. I also think that it just leaves some other issues floating, like that of a lack of ability to test new open setups in an expedient manner.

I don't understand your reasoning for not wanting to increase to three games in signups at once, but I can imagine some reasons myself. That being said, what about at the very least changing to be like the Normal queue, with one slot for Micros and one slot for Minis / Larger games? This should immediately increase the amount of games being played in the open queue -- we can see at this very moment how many open games are being run in the Micro queue when they could potentially be in the Open queue. You may consider it a mere trick of accounting, shifting games from the Micro queue to the Open queue and not really increasing anything at all, but by having Micro Opens be run in the Open Queue that would otherwise be in the Micro Queue, other Micro games will reach signups faster. (The same could actually

also

be said about the Mini-Theme queue: it's only just occurred to me, but Undertale Semi-Open is being run in the Mini Theme queue rather than the Open queue. It's a heavily themed game, yes, but still an open one.)

Either in addition to or instead of that change, I would still suggest some sort of expedited way to run experimental setups -- potentially it could be a monthly or bi-monthly "event", if you are against a permanent slot. I believe we have been "stuck"--as you say--to test new open setups primarily because of long mod queue times. I don't think it's an overstatement to say that the average waiting time between signing up to mod in the open queue and having your game just enter signups is an entire month or more. We see that Large Theme Games that aren't even really Themes but are just Large Opens get run in the Large Theme Queue all the time -- I would hypothesize because of the queue times. I know that personally that's why I ran Baton Pass in that queue, and I expect that that's why a game like Gameshow Mafia might have been run there as well (this might just be due to moderator preference or because Large Themes are perceived as more of "big events" than just large open games, but I digress). I feel that I should also bring up the Marathon Weekend Open Setup group, who were able to blaze through a ton of prospective setups given the fast nature of marathon games.

The point I am trying to make here is that, the way I view this situation, one cause (a slow or blocked game queue) is having multiple negative effects: a

literal

lack of ongoing open games, a lack of ability to test new open setups, and a diaspora of setups that otherwise would have been run in the open queue.

[northsidegal]

Also, if I might make a suggestion: I think that you should still offer first time mods a random suggestion of three setups, but just make it clear that they're free to run any approved open setup that they want. Like I said, choice overload and all that. One thing that I think pre-designed normal setups has definitely proven is that some people just want a setup to be chosen for them, and are primarily focused on modding it rather than coming up with it. It's not difficult to just pick a random one from an Approved Setups list, sure, but having those immediate three options there is, I think, a benefit.

[OkaPoka]

what if design contest winners get fast tracked approval?

[northsidegal]

I'm going to copy paste my posts from when we went through the current Approved Open setups back in late August:

Spoiler:

okay, there wasn't really that much to add from what i could see. if anything the issue would just be some setups not having wiki pages

anyways, a few micros that i want to put forward for definite consideration:

The Coalition
8-Ball

Variable Setups:

Half Mast Nightless
Pop Goes the Nightkill

i could see the argument of not enough data for the last two, but i think the setups are pretty well designed and have had decent enough test runs that it's not a huge issue greenlighting them.

Vengecop is another one that'd i'd like to put forward that's variable, although I think it works best at 13 players.

I'm just gonna go through most of the setups listed in the "approved" category and give some thoughts on them.


The One I Cannot Kill — I don't think this one has actually been approved? I think it's probably in this category by mistake, although I do think it's a pretty good setup. Two scum wins out of the two runs I'm aware of, but I'm not sure that's entirely representative. Room for testing it further given the marathon weekend coming up.

Vengeful Mafia — A classic. More of a marathon-type setup than is often played, but I don't think there's any major problems that would warrant removing it?

Lovers Mafia — Largely the same as above. About 65% scum wins to town wins, but again – mainly a marathon-type setup. I think that this shares the problem of many of the lovers-type setups in that literal random voting has shown to be as good as if not more effective than actually scumhunting.

Carbon-14 — A classic and sitting at 48% town winrate going off of the wiki history. I'm not making any comments on the setup itself, but at least based on the winrate it seems fine.

No Lynching Town — Don't think this setup has been run for years, making it a decent candidate for getting cut in my opinion. If we want the open queue to improve from its current pace, the setups being run should be modern ones that people actually want to play and (while not always) have some kind of experience with.

Nomination Mafia — Honestly don't have many thoughts. It's been played once recently? Doesn't seem

terribly

unbalanced, looking at the history?

Kids With Guns — Largely the same as above. Been played once recently, no obvious winrate problems and in this whole diatribe I'm trying to keep somewhat away from analyzing the specifics of the setup itself. I don't think this setup has ever been played in the open queue.

Less Pressure — Another one that hasn't been played in years and that I've never heard of.

Scumhunter's Speed 8p — Fairly bad town winrate.

True Love — Another that seems to have not been played in years. I also don't think very highly of most of the "lovers" setups.

09:12 — Played somewhat often recently, near as I can tell it's balanced enough. Good setup.

2d3 — The old newbie setup. If it's good enough for the newbie setup it should be good enough to be approved, but do we want it in the rotation? That's a genuine question, not a rhetorical one – I really don't know.

3d3 — 2d3's prototype. I don't think this has ever been played and I think it's not actually approved. Don't think it should be.

Alternating 9P — Fairly bad town winrate, but played recently enough.

Backup6 — Modification of Matrix6, played once. Really, when it comes to a lot of these setups, it's going to come down to what philosophy you have as to the approved open setups list. I don't think there's much

wrong

with this setup, but there's still the question of whether or not it's worth including.

Chosen Mafia — Fairly popular, with a pretty balanced winrate. I also personally think it's well-designed.

CultD3 — Not an approved setup.

Desperation Day — I think it's fairly well designed, although it hasn't been played much at all, recently or in total.

Double Day Unlimited — Has been run recently, but probably has winrate issues given two town wins out of seven runs.

Even-Odd Killers — Another one that I'm pretty sure is not approved.

Forest Fire — Great setup. Played fairly often recently and fairly balanced.

Grey Flag Nightless — Winrate issues. Town won for the first time fairly recently, not sure if that's evidence enough to point towards anything.

JK9 — I don't think anyone has played this in a while. I would say it's also a pretty swingy setup that only makes the 2d3 problem of early scum deaths being a death sentence even worse.

Matrix6 — Old newbie setup, pretty much same thing to be said here as with 2d3.

Purgatory — Played fairly recently, town has won all three games. Not much of an opinion here without looking more closely at the setup itself.

The Coalition — There by mistake, not actually approved (although I think it should be).

Twin Trap — Pretty balanced winrate history, a few games played recently. Not a bad one to keep.

Overall, I think the following setups should be removed for sure:

• No Lynching Town
  
• Less Pressure
  
• True Love
  
• 3d3
  
• CultD3
  
• Even-Odd Killers
  
• JK9

These are setups that I think have reason against their inclusion, but I'm less sure about:

• Scumhunter's Speed 8p (winrate issues)
  
• 2d3 (for the sake of keeping interesting setups in the queue)
  
• Backup6 (same as above)
  
• Double Day Unlimited (winrate issues)
  
• Grey Flag Nightless (winrate issues)
  
• Matrix6 (interesting setups)

Removing all of those setups would, if I counted correctly, still leave us with 12 micro setups before even adding any new ones, which I think is a decent size.

The amount of times that I said "this isn't actually an approved setup" should also point towards reformatting the way the wiki is structured being a good idea. Perhaps having a category

specifically

for approved open setups would be a good idea – it's easy to just place newly created micro setups into the "micro open" category without realizing that that category is meant to be only for approved setups.

For the sake of time I'm gonna be a lot more concise on the mini setups and focus on problem setups.

Faith Plus One should be out, if it's still even in. Hope Plus One as far as I'm concerned is a superior version.
Hard Boiled has a breaking strategy and should be replaced by Noir, designed specifically to correct that breaking strategy.
Another Mathdino original, Polygamist should probably just go.

Enemy of My Enemy has only been played three times, with the last time being years ago.
Masons and Monks has

never

been won by town. This was reworked a bit in that same thread that I linked to for polygamist, but in it's current state it should go.

Switch (Setup) should go, and Sharing is Caring is another one I'd like to put forward for consideration.

If you don't care to read all that, it would leave the Micro Approved list as follows:

Spoiler:

Returning Micros:

Vengeful Mafia
Lovers Mafia
Carbon-14
Nomination Mafia
Kids With Guns
09:12
Alternating 9P
Chosen Mafia
Desperation Day
Forest Fire
Purgatory
Twin Trap

New Additions:

The Coalition
8-Ball
Half Mast Nightless
Pop Goes the Nightkill

Keep in mind that this was compiled in late August last year, so it's probably missing some new setups.

[OkaPoka]

so standard to fill games is 2 weeks


what if we make it so you have to hit breakpoints? like it must be at half capacity at one week or its pulled, that way we can "cycle" through the queue faster? Also if mods are looking for experience, maybe we create some way for new mods to find out whats in demand? Like a game request thread/discord?

[northsidegal]

so standard to fill games is 2 weeks


what if we make it so you have to hit breakpoints? like it must be at half capacity at one week or its pulled, that way we can "cycle" through the queue faster? Also if mods are looking for experience, maybe we create some way for new mods to find out whats in demand? Like a game request thread/discord?

I'm going to quote Something_Smart on that, he had a pretty good analysis on the subject in a similarly themed thread:

Spoiler:

*Dongempire Friends & Enemies & Enemies 2/11 - PULLED 3/1 (5p in 18d)
ChibiBear Donner Party 2/11 - 2/23 (12p in 12d)
*ejjinami Nomination 2/26 - 3/2 (11p in 4d)
brassherald Fire and Ice 3/6 - 3/14 (13p in 8d)
Kaiveran Two-Fold C9++ 3/16 - 4/3 (16p in 18d)
mcqueen Hope Plus One 3/16 - 4/10 (13p in 25d)
Jingle Panic Room 4/7 - 4/18 (11p in 11d)
*Clemency Duck Duck Goose 4/8 - PULLED 6/3 (11p in 56d)
schadd_ House Party 4/25 - 5/18 (14p in 23d)
BuJaber Wayward Bullets 6/2 - in signups, unlikely to fill (3p in 18d)
*NotAJumbleOfNumbers Grey Flag Nightless 6/3 - in signups, likely to fill (8p in 17d)

(* = first-time mod)

Assuming Wayward Bullets is pulled and Grey Flag Nightless fills:

Signups per day, FILLED GAMES:
*0.47, 0.52, 0.61, 0.89, 1.00, 1.00, 1.63, *2.75

Signups per day, PULLED GAMES:
0.17, *0.20, *0.28

Proportion of first-time mod games that filled: 2/4
Proportion of non-first-time mod games that filled: 6/7

This is an analysis of only games in the new queue thread. It might be worth it to extend this a while back into the previous thread to get a higher sample size, but I do think this is helpful.

Ideally, what we want is a way to recognize a game that will get pulled without waiting three weeks of it clogging up the queue.

We might be able to say something like "if a game doesn't have at least 4 signups after 10 days, it gets pulled immediately."

Another thing that might help, according to these data, is to revisit how first-time mods work. In my opinion, the setups Dongempire and Clemency were trying to run are both bad, and I'm not surprised they didn't fill. Usually you need either a high-profile mod or an interesting setup to get fast signups, and it's not surprising that the two games with the lowest fill ratios (mcqueen and NotAJumbleOfNumbers) are a first-time mod and someone who hasn't modded in years. Maybe this means first-time mods shouldn't be allowed in the Open Queue at all, or maybe the list of approved setups needs to be shortened to only ones that have been run successfully many times (Friends and Enemies, Fire and Ice, Stack the Deck, C9++, etc.).

My final idea is related to that. We want mods to be running setups that players want to play in, so maybe there should be more player involvement in what setups get run. Could be as extreme as an open game where the players vote for what setup to play after the game fills, or it could just be a monthly poll of what setups players want to play, to be posted for anyone considering modding an open.

Also I notice that nearly a full year ago he also noticed that it's faster to just run experimental opens in other queues:

Experimental Open setups can just be run in the Mini Theme queue, to be honest. That queue usually moves way quicker, and open setups sometimes get run in there anyway.

I mean, this really shouldn't be happening, right? It's just not efficient, right?