Re: Private Games (Opinions please!)

[Raziek]

I feel like we need a more effective way to organize these. At the very least we need to improve mod communication between Marshy, Stew and I on what has and hasn't been approved, but I'd like to see community input on things.

Should there be a private queue? Should things stay as they are? What needs revamping? Ideas in general to refine the system and prevent cluster****s?

 

[Ramen King]

I think there should just be a single mod dedicated to private games. That way they can keep organized who is hosting what and when. This will prevent the confusion such that resulted from me getting your approval and Inferno getting Stew's.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

At least it should be publicly known who's planning to host a private game at which time. The mods' job should be to decide whether it's experimental enough to qualify as private.

 

[Ramen King]

I should also have a VIP pass to host games whenever I want.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I mean, you can keep the private queue pretty much as is, or I can invite players I want to play my game and play in a private group/different website/etc, OR I can be extremely strict about who I allow into my queue games and stall the queue, ESPECIALLY if it's a small and the large is something like HxH.

Changing private games in every form I've seen suggested or elimintating them altogether defeats the point that they were originally created for: hosts with established player lists who would prefer not to pull people AWAY from DGames.

The board was created for mafia. There is literally nothing but tact that stops me from opening a game thread right now.

 

[Raziek]

And that's what we would call an organizational flaw, Ryker, because you shouldn't be able to just do that, because it's not fair to people in the queue, and it circumvents the whole point of the queue in the first place.

I don't see how your post is offering much in the way of constructive input other than demonstrating that ****bags can be ****bags.

There needs to be organization of some form, so simply letting people run games whenever they want is not an option.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I think the solution is easy though. Either Zen's suggestion with one mod being responsible for it or my suggestion with having games announced publicly would easily take care of the issue.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

And that's what we would call an organizational flaw, Ryker, because you shouldn't be able to just do that, because it's not fair to people in the queue, and it circumvents the whole point of the queue in the first place.

I don't see how your post is offering much in the way of constructive input other than demonstrating that ****bags can be ****bags.

There needs to be organization of some form, so simply letting people run games whenever they want is not an option.

Oh really? I see that once again I will be arguing Socialism vs. Capitalism, and with a Canadian, no less.

More when I'm off work.

 

[#HBC | ѕoup]

I think a private queue isn't needed, just create a limit on amount of games that can be hosted at a certain time, and include privates.

I think 5 would be a fair number.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

There should be a limit for how many private games can be run, not just games in total. It honestly shouldn't matter how many normal games are running, as a large amount of normal doesn't have the drawback of stagnating the queue, unlike running many private games at once.

 

[Rajam]

I think the problem lies in the queue system itself, not on privates. I think all games in the queue should instead be open for inscriptions, that way queue-jumping won't be a problem anymore. Efforts then should focus on tracking players' activity in order to prevent them from joining more games than they can handle.

If that's too extreme, I support Soup's idea. Overall, this private-games issue is derivated from players' activity and queue stalling, and I don't think creating a special system for privates will help that much. If something must be changed is the queue system, not creating something new for handling privates.

 

[Ramen King]

The normal queue buffers itself so there is no need to have a limit on normal games running. The private system would buffer itself as well. The problem is that they buffer/stagnate each other. So with unlimited private games running, the normal queue would stagnate. Therefore, only a limit on one (private games) is necessary. Generally one at time is pretty much fine with the exception of there being two occasionally. It should simply be up to the dedicated mod's discretion.

One problem that people seem to have is the spontaneity of new private games, as if the host just chose to make a game to by pass the queue. No doubt this has been done, but it is not a majority of the cases. People tend to feel cheated when they see a game just pop up from no where. Gheb's suggestion for it to be publicly known who plans to host should easily fix this. I really like the idea after thinking it over. The solution really is simple as he stated.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

A single mod for privates seems legit to me.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

I think there should just be a single mod dedicated to private games. That way they can keep organized who is hosting what and when. This will prevent the confusion such that resulted from me getting your approval and Inferno getting Stew's.

I agree with this, too often have I seen Raz go "has someone approved of this" to a mod or the host. At the very least, there needs to be some form of communication. If Stew approves a private, he should message marshy and Raz saying "yo, this person's cool to host a private"

I should also have a VIP pass to host games whenever I want.

no me

i swear i won't put out **** like laspm again

promise

But anyway.

The thing with privates is that the second you put them in a queue, they're no different than a regular queue game except with a bull**** mechanic and a difficult sign-up process, both of which could be a turn-off to people playing. Honestly, privates should just be based on a "is this interesting enough for me to want to forego any current or upcoming games to join this one?" sentiment. Let interest decide whether or not it's a good game.

I wish the queue would adopt this kind of methodology. The large queue needs to be blown up and just allow privates to become the new large. If the flavor isn't good or the host isn't reliable, a large could stall the queue for months. I'm halfway convinced Tekken only filled because people wanted OS' game to run.

But even then you could see a small game sit in queue for a month and a lot of people could let it run. Gova once suggested turning the small queue into a double queue where you sign-up for it but fill one of two slots as the games get cycled out. This can let a stale/uninteresting game/flavor get pushed out in favor of ones that are more popular. It's pretty bad when people join games for the sake of getting it out of the queue.

 

[BarDulL]

I understand both points Ryker and Raziek are trying to make. I'm 50/50 because people should be able to not have to wait because of the queue for X host to host a game, but I'm 99% certain that "capitalism" would only end up leading to elitism, so in a sense I also think the queue is good for the health of Dgames.

As for privates, make a private queue (if there isn't one already, but it sounds like there's a lack of organization in regards to privates, so I'm assuming there isn't) with staunch and specific requirements so that games with minor mechanics won't be accepted onto the queue. Making the private queue visibly public doesn't seem like it should be an issue if it makes it easier for mods to communicate which privates are happening in which order, and hiding the host name for a game shouldn't be a problem if that's the reason why the private queue isn't public information already.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Private queue is the opposite of what privates were originally designed for. Testing **** was simply a common theme among games that had a pre-established player list.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

Actually, lemme add onto what I was saying above:

Allow any private to run as long as it can get a playerlist by a certain point in time. If it can't do that, it can't run. Simple, effective, keeps the integrity of privates while still providing a sense of order.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

^If that's your solution, get your damn playerlist before seeking approval. Private games aren't held to any standard of excellence so they don't need an approval based on balance.

 

[John2k4]

Actually, lemme add onto what I was saying above:

Allow any private to run as long as it can get a playerlist by a certain point in time. If it can't do that, it can't run. Simple, effective, keeps the integrity of privates while still providing a sense of order.

The problem I see here is that people will get the games to fill, and then be seeking two/three replacements right off the bat because of "filler people".

 

[#HBC | ѕoup]

Actually, lemme add onto what I was saying above:

Allow any private to run as long as it can get a playerlist by a certain point in time. If it can't do that, it can't run. Simple, effective, keeps the integrity of privates while still providing a sense of order.

:thumbsup:

 

[#HBC | marshy]

our communication is indeed ***. so *** in fact that this couldve afforded to be discussed by the modteam before a thread was made

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

^If that's your solution, get your damn playerlist before seeking approval. Private games aren't held to any standard of excellence so they don't need an approval based on balance.

Well then put 'em to a standard of excellence. Rather than sit here and turn this into a capitalism/socialism debate, you should put out what your idea of that is.

I also wouldn't mind if private set-ups were held to a degree of scrutiny before going live though. I damn well wish someone was there to tell me I'm a ****** before LASPM went up.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

our communication is indeed ***. so *** in fact that this couldve afforded to be discussed by the modteam before a thread was made

+1

Well then put 'em to a standard of excellence. Rather than sit here and turn this into a capitalism/socialism debate, you should put out what your idea of that is.

I also wouldn't mind if private set-ups were held to a degree of scrutiny before going live though. I damn well wish someone was there to tell me I'm a ****** before LASPM went up.

I don't have time for more than one liners at the moment.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

our communication is indeed ***. so *** in fact that this couldve afforded to be discussed by the modteam before a thread was made

yeh agreed

I don't have time for more than one liners at the moment.

workin' hard or hardly workin', aye?

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Little bit of both.

 

[Raziek]

our communication is indeed ***. so *** in fact that this couldve afforded to be discussed by the modteam before a thread was made

You know damn well it's impossible to ever get ahold of all 3 of us at the same time, and playing telephone tag via PMs is far too cumbersome and time-consuming.

Hence me choosing to put this in a public forum for discussion, since it does very much affect our playerbase.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

xonar mod imo

imo


:obv:

 

[Radical Fiction]

You know damn well it's impossible to ever get ahold of all 3 of us at the same time, and playing telephone tag via PMs is far too cumbersome and time-consuming.

Hence me choosing to put this in a public forum for discussion, since it does very much affect our playerbase.

So why the hell are choosing to make THIS tangent of discussion public knowledge as it doesn't affect our player base. Delete your post and mine, IMO.

~Ryker

 

[#HBC | Kary]

Decide whether the game needs to be a private;

Communicate with your playerlist before you intend to start the game; let them know you have a game in the works

Don't have multiple players starting privates at the same time

Tell all of the dgames mods you intend to host a private

problem solved?

-drunKary

rock AND roll?

 

[BarDulL]

Annnnnyway, has this thread served its purpose yet, or are we going to make a poll with options or something? Or are mods going to get it figured out?

@Kary - Small problem with your solution: there still needs to be coordination between the mods as to whether or not a private game meets requirements, as well as where the private game stands in queue with other games. Apparently there are some communication issues.

 

[John2k4]

I remember waaaaay back when Washed sent out invites for TWEWY mafia. Without revealing much, the whole setup was great for a private in my opinion.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

I remember waaaaay back when Washed sent out invites for TWEWY mafia. Without revealing much, the whole setup was great for a private in my opinion.

That one's still in the works. Balancing the idea for it is legitimately a ***** and there's a couple of nuance things I need to work out so the game flows well and isn't just one completely broken town throwing **** at one completely broken mafia.

 

[DtJ S2n]

Let me weigh in real quick after reading absolutely none of this.

Private queue is literally the worst idea of all time.

 

[#HBC | marshy]

this is why i modded s2

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

this is why stew is my favorite mod

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I agree that a private queue is dumb. I really don't see why you don't just let one mod take care of private games though.

 

[#HBC | marshy]

just lost a post. this site is so *** sometimes

basically a lotta good suggestionsve been offered here and im down with whatever. the 1 mod over the private games seems alright cuz itll cut down on confusion and miscommunication. if the mod appointed over it has trouble deeming a game experimental enough to justify it being a private then he can just ask one of the others for a second opinion. pretty much what is done now when we want a second pair of eyes for balancing a setup

and yeah the games should have a playerlist set or at least a good majority of it for the sake of it hitting the ground running cuz no one wants to see a thread pop up and a mod saying "guys come join my game" with a stalling queue. but i always thought that was obvious

i think the thread has served its purpose of producing good ideas for us mods to steal and take all the credit for and would love to get this DEMOCRACY nonsense ****ed outta hear with a possible modparty in its place celebrating this threads success. balls in your court raz/s2

 

[#HBC | marshy]

we also could approve nothing but worst **** privates so people never want to play/host them again

 

[Radical Fiction]

I don't have an opinion, so I'll just make an inflammatory comment about how much of a *** Gheb is.

-Swiss

 

[Ramen King]

would love to get this DEMOCRACY nonsense ****ed outta hear

Vwelcum brother