What Sesc said. I mean, I honestly don't think that the mods would have a problem removing Zeit given he's been AWOL so long, but even proposing a nomination is a lot to ask, given that they'll be the final judge of who they find fititng for the job.

---------- Post automerged at 11:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 PM ----------

Regardless, I've been doing my literal best to keep this subforum running smoothly, and will continue to do so.

 

i will probably comment on the stuff later but is it possible to have this one unlocked instead?

https://forums.darklordpotter.net/showthread.php?t=27318

i was hoping to have the games put in here

or at least change the title of the cult one to "filler/mini games"

---------- Post automerged 11-05-2014 at 12:00 AM ---------- Previous post was 11-04-2014 at 11:58 PM ----------

actually can the cult thread be merged onto the filler one that i linked? if that can happen that would also work out

 

Oh, this was moved like by itself. Edited for sense in its new home.

Oh and in other exciting news:
"Okies, sign-ups for the second Lyrium & X (person who will help with vote counts bc sometimes I can't count) modded filler game (unless Kalas states Batmafia will start in like 1-2 days time).

The theme will be:
Filler Game: War in the White House Bunker

An apocalypse has rendered the outside world harsh and dangerous. Three generations ago the president of the USA, his family, staff, and some other citizens who were in the right place and time sequestered themselves in the nuclear bunker. They hoped to wait out the chaos and violence in the outside world but the world did not regain its balance.

Now, there are two heirs to the presidency....both coming from a respected political line and their loyal secret service agents. There is also an assassin who only wants to get out of the bunker...regardless of the horrors that may wait outside...and the only way to make it happen is to kill both heirs which will auto-trigger their agents to suicide."

Days will last 48 hours this round due to holiday stuff. Nights 24 hours. Same mechanics as described here.



Sign-ups are in the filler thread here.

 

Glad to hear Sesc is back in business and can relieve Lexi of the some of the pressure of dealing with us.

 

decided to bring this over here cus i feel this is where it is most relevant/should be discussed

---------- Post automerged at 02:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:06 AM ----------

My 2 cents on the idea:

Personally I am more against it due to the fact that me as a mod dislike having that. I would put it that we have a choice of having if reviewed or not. If it doesn't then it should be specifically advertised that it has a chance of being imbalanced.

 

I expect every setup to be checked by at least one competent player, even if the mod themselves is very competent. The only problem I see with that is if there is no one willing, which, clearly, there is.

I'm a newb here, however.

 

Ika, I'll be honest with you, I don't have a lot of faith that your game would be balanced. The only time I would be ok with you not having someone competent that I trust reviewing a game, is if the person making the game was a person I trusted and has a ton of completed games under their belt. (Like Eido, for example.)

 

I have already given the clear stance that my game has a potential to be unbalanced. If you would like to discuss this further I would rather have it in my signup thread or via PM. I dont feel like this is exactly the appropriate thread to have the discussion about my setup and that it is derailing from the discussion at hand.

If you would like to talk more on my stance in general here or why I disagree with your suggestion (the making it mandatory) i'm more than open to discuss my belief and my opinions on the suggestion.

 

Lexicat, lexium, lexikins, I actually love the idea of reviews but its mostly because I don't feel competent and I worry about messing things up. Bill and Delphine and ika gave me feedback and it was clear I need to reserach balancing and stuff like that.

However, a lot of people on here are more competent and ika mods games on other places. He also did a fun thing and introduced this site to some new people which it would be nice to have (for example like if Batmafia 2 could have run in its full glory).

It should be optional (review). Also someone wise told me to put more smiley faces in things and try to be nicer. We're kind of similar that way except your a genius and I'm Pinky

P.S. Why you no mafia anymore? Like you, fonti and Titus are my dream\nightmare scum team.

 

House brought up Wisdom of the Crowds (WoTC) earlier. Here's the mafiascum definition:

Poll time: Who would actually be interested in using the WOTC method? Why shouldn't we? If we did use it, what would the cutoff be? Should votes be private?

I like the idea of a limited system, that the mods can decide whether to use or not, with a minimum threshold of at least half of the signups and private votes. Obviously, I would use it.

 

Eh, I'm ok with this system, so if it's agreeable, I will.

Why shouldn't we? We don't exactly have the player base large enough to be turning down players yet, so that might be something to consider.

Should the votes be private? If you want. I'm perfectly comfortable owning up to my statements, so I don't mind if they're public.

Is that all there is to your system?

 

If the mod of the mafia game doesn't want a certain player because they are inactive or disruptive (i.e cunty/useless/derp/d/etc) that should be up to the mod of the game. If you personally have a problem with someone signing up, don't sign up for the same game as them. I think that's reasonable.

If you turn this into a voting process of who gets to play in certain games people it will turn into pointless drama. Seriously this is something for fun, turning it into a democratic popularity contest is somewhat absurd, Fonti.

 

Personally i don't think we have enough people here to be able to refuse to play with too many players.

Lee, Playing Devils advocate...what if you'r already signed up and someone you have issue playing with signs up later in the game? Suck it up and play or have to drop your spot?

 

And there's your problem.

It's supposed to be for fun, agreed. If this is being brought up at all, it means several people are not having fun, something that has been brought up countless times against specific players. So if it's an issue to be addressed, it should be.

When there's a tumor, you remove it.
You don't try to find reasons for it to stick around.

That's what it boils down to.

 

So here's a suggestion: someone (Merrill) runs a game of mafia for proper DLPers that is oriented around having fun. The idea is to take mafia back to its roots as a party game between friends.

Where this means:

- Simple rules/mechanics
- Ideally, no QTs
- 24 hour day/nights maximum to keep it low-commitment
- Players don't take things too seriously
- Only real DLPers can play

Basically, a game like the original mafia games we had together before the forum was flooded with strangers who aren't part of the community and make no effort to join it.

The "real DLPers" requirement would be at the discretion of the game creator, and would be something like this: if the creator doesn't recognise your name, you can't join the game.

 

I can see both sides of the rest, but regardless, this:

Whatever you do, don't make it public. That's just poisonous and unnecessary.

 

This. This. This.

 

That's probably a solid argument for keeping it private, so, I change my mind - if this does happen, keeping it private is probably for the best.

I respectfully request obs to this.

---------- Post automerged at 02:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:59 PM ----------

D'oh. Ninja'd.

 

Devils advocate?

Ok guys, lets be real. Fonti hates Ika's guts for various reasons, and you guys dislike Lyrium for your own reasons. If you think disallowing people to play based upon a voting system will fix anything, you're deluded. That isn't a solution.