General Mafia General Chat

[Nick]

what would be the point of the break then???

Light is more simple? So that would make it a break lmao

also 2 role madness? How’s that gonna work? I only ask this because say you have 2 sign ups for the games. Is it so people in one game can’t be in the other? Because that won’t fix the clogging fully.

also people focusin go on that much role madness (especially newer) will burn them out. I’d just be careful.

if you stick a light game in there it’s less stress to worry about everything.

 

[Nick]

it'd still require some sort of break with 3 games running

otherwise it'd be the same story as my current sign ups

So you are worried about drainage with more games but you are adding another role madness game? What

 

[AL sama]

One question: What does it hurt giving it a try?

Worst case scenario: No one is interested, we don't have them anymore.

was talking about breaks

 

[Dragomir]

If anything, light games would drain people less than a ToS/ToL game cause as Nick said, players won't be swamped dealing with the complex roles and mechanics that they have. Sure, light games will require more reads but every mafia game requires reads, it's not gonna be such a huge gap in how many reads you have to use as you're implying.

 

[Dragomir]

also 2 role madness? How’s that gonna work? I only ask this because say you have 2 sign ups for the games. Is it so people in one game can’t be in the other? Because that won’t fix the clogging fully.

No, it'll just work like it was on OJ. 2 games go up at the same time and people can signup for both if they'd like.

 

[Zemmi]

was talking about breaks

Before the topic of light games came up I was already talking about that calendar needing breaks between games to make room for the regular calendar and not overwhelm the players.

 

[Nick]

No, it'll just work like it was on OJ. 2 games go up at the same time and people can signup for both if they'd like.

But that doesn’t really work for his reasons. That’s gonna overwhelm people more honestly. Especially when people can’t join a TOS game because they are already in a role madness game

 

[Nick]

Like I’m experienced and I know 2 role madness is a lot. That’s gonna burn people out, especially if you have a TOS game going with or without breaks.

I mean look at the last role madness game. You had 10 subs I believe? You really think you can run 2 at a time and keep the game active and busy?

 

[AL sama]

So you are worried about drainage with more games but you are adding another role madness game? What

if I could I'd really continue running 1 game tbh

we didn't even end s2 yet and s5 is filling up

 

[Ratchet]

it'd still require some sort of break with 3 games running

otherwise it'd be the same story as my current sign ups

I feel like the player counts will regulate that, and honestly, the community will regulate itself too. It's not like a game has to be constantly running. If it's to share a calander with ToS, then sign ups could go up after a ToS game finishes, and vice versa. As for your current sign ups, I mean, it has only been a couple of days. Ultimately, if the demand is there then it'll run, if not then it can be mostly retired outside of cases where there are lots of active and willing players in a certain month or something. And if it detracts from other games then it can be benched again.

In terms of positives, it can help new players not be completely lost on how to play, and also help players get some hosting experience.

 

[Nick]

if I could I'd really continue running 1 game tbh

we didn't even end s2 yet and s5 is filling up

But I wouldn’t host more games just because people want to make and host. You’d only do it if you have enough players to participate in the games.

 

[Dragomir]

But that doesn’t really work for his reasons. That’s gonna overwhelm people more honestly. Especially when people can’t join a TOS game because they are already in a role madness game

The reason why we're doing that is to speed up the calendar. We're aware of the potential drawbacks that can occur but we'll see how it goes after season 3.

 

[Ratchet]

if I could I'd really continue running 1 game tbh

we didn't even end s2 yet and s5 is filling up

The other alternative to that would be what we did with Traditional on OJ - a host may only occupy one slot at any one time, and two if Co hosting. Coaching slots are independent of this.

 

[Zemmi]

The other alternative to that would be what we did with Traditional on OJ - a host may only occupy one slot at any one time, and two if Co hosting. Coaching slots are independent of this.

You mean like how we only allowed each player x amount of games in a season to make sure everyone had a fair chance to host?

 

[AL sama]

But I wouldn’t host more games just because people want to make and host. You’d only do it if you have enough players to participate in the games.

already tried that and it created a bug enough mess

I argued against it almost alone

 

[Zemmi]

You mean like how we only allowed each player x amount of games in a season to make sure everyone had a fair chance to host?

I misread lol, that is exactly what you said.

 

[Ratchet]

You mean like how we only allowed each player x amount of games in a season to make sure everyone had a fair chance to host?

Right. I used "1" and "2" arbitrarily, the point being a limit on queuing games so the lead time to hosting isn't like 1-2 years.

 

[Nick]

The reason why we're doing that is to speed up the calendar. We're aware of the potential drawbacks that can occur but we'll see how it goes after season 3.

Right and as I said to al, last role madness we had like 10 subs. So are you gonna be able to keep everything active with 2 games. 2 games mean less subs. Example is TOS, it’s hard to even get someone to sign up for that because people are busy or already in another game and can’t do 2.

it’s not based because people wanna run more games, it should be based if you have the players to do it. Your section though so always your guys decision as you said

 

[AL sama]

You mean like how we only allowed each player x amount of games in a season to make sure everyone had a fair chance to host?

that rule is here too

 

[Nick]

already tried that and it created a bug enough mess

I argued against it almost alone

I think you are gonna struggle with keeping the activity with 2 games like that. But who knows I guess