Werewolf Game Log and Mod Queue

Baggly

Would anyone object to me adding a column for 'Open mod spots' for each upcoming game. Based on an ideal number of 3 mods (each set of mods can change the number of open spots for their game as they see fit).

Necro

Pter wrote: »

Would anyone object to me adding a column for 'Open mod spots' for each upcoming game. Based on an ideal number of 3 mods (each set of mods can change the number of open spots for their game as they see fit).

No objections from me anyways. January would still take a new mod wanting to learn the ropes for example, we're pretty stacked in terms of experienced mods

I'll likely volunteer to join one of those mod teams between October and February.

Doing my first co-mod now for the August game and I've put myself down to take the April game. I think I'll need to do another co-mod between August and running my own game next April.

suffering golfer

Pter wrote: »

Would anyone object to me adding a column for 'Open mod spots' for each upcoming game. Based on an ideal number of 3 mods (each set of mods can change the number of open spots for their game as they see fit).

Obviously everyone is different, depending on the amount of involvement planned, but surely 2 mods is sufficient for any game. How do you regard 3 as the ideal number?

Baggly

My experience modding games.

Also the majority of games played have had more than 2 mods.

As I said above each mod team can determine this for themselves.

quickbeam

suffering golfer wrote: »

Obviously everyone is different, depending on the amount of involvement planned, but surely 2 mods is sufficient for any game. How do you regard 3 as the ideal number?

Hey golfer! Nice to see you back. You in a position to play again? Love to see you on board again!

Things have changed a lot since the first few games that you played. Games are getting bigger and more complex. I really think 2 mods was sufficient in those games, and you'd probably still get away with it now, but experience says that 3 makes things a helluva lot easier now.

sullivlo

quickbeam wrote: »

Hey golfer! Nice to see you back. You in a position to play again? Love to see you on board again!

Things have changed a lot since the first few games that you played. Games are getting bigger and more complex. I really think 2 mods was sufficient in those games, and you'd probably still get away with it now, but experience says that 3 makes things a helluva lot easier now.

Just on this. And qb this is in absolutely no way directed at you!

As fantastic as the complex games are, we, as a group, need to consider some vanilla games. I have a game I would love to run, not themed, not complex, but the queue dictates that I can’t do this until some time towards the end of 2019.

As I mentioned in a previous post on thread, it is truly amazing that there is a high level of interest, but I do think we need to remember our roots and have a few easy games to attract fresh blood, and to just have a game where people can follow along and not spend half the time trying to get clarity on tasks, rules, roles... I haven’t played the previous few games and they have been impossible to follow as an outsider!

Thoughts? Comments? Critiques?

quickbeam

Absolutely, we should be doing more vanilla games, but no reason to wait until the end of the mod queue list. Chances are some of the upcoming mods would be happy to be involved in vanilla, and would be happy to have you on board (vanilla doesn't necessarily need to mean theme-less though).

One of my favourite games was XVb, the Vanillarama game - three werewolves, a seer and a vig only.

duffman13

Not a huge fan of vanilla games, the theme is what originally attracted me to play my first game as I hadn't a clue of anything else. That said a vanilla game is probably due soon.

New blood seems to come relatively naturally although maybe not often enough. Also from an outsiders perspective, I dont think any new player follows a full game before ever playing one. I could be wrong on that but most peoples first experience of the game on boards is to play one. Therefore games should be built for the enjoyment of the players (New and Existing) as opposed for people spectating.

quickbeam

duffman13 wrote: »

Not a huge fan of vanilla games, the theme is what originally attracted me to play my first game as I hadn't a clue of anything else. That said a vanilla game is probably due soon.

But you can have a theme and still be vanilla. Say, Eastenders, but just having Phil Mitchell as Vigilante, and Pauline Fowler as Seer, and Den, Max and Janine as three wolves and the rest as villagers. Same set up as the Vanillarama game, but still adding the Eastenders theme.

Necro

sullivlo wrote:

As fantastic as the complex games are, we, as a group, need to consider some vanilla games. I have a game I would love to run, not themed, not complex, but the queue dictates that I can’t do this until some time towards the end of 2019.

As I mentioned in a previous post on thread, it is truly amazing that there is a high level of interest, but I do think we need to remember our roots and have a few easy games to attract fresh blood, and to just have a game where people can follow along and not spend half the time trying to get clarity on tasks, rules, roles... I haven’t played the previous few games and they have been impossible to follow as an outsider!

I would tend to agree, even as a creator of some of the more complex games on the forum

My opinion is that there is currently enough demand to run two games a month. There's no reason why we can't ease from one game into the next with perhaps a week's break rather than 3, 4 or sometimes 5 weeks between games.

So for example, Jurassic Park could finish the Friday.
Sign up thread for a vanilla game goes up the Saturday.
Starts the following Sunday (12th August I think).
Vanilla game finishes the Friday of the same week, maybe before depending upon numbers etc.
Then the scheduled August game runs a week or so after that.

Perhaps, and I say this as someone who kicked up a little fuss re the number of my game a while back, but perhaps removing the numbered system entirely would help give off a sense that August (example) is Necros month so nothing else can happen at that time?

Just basic thoughts right now. Dunno if others agree/disagree but said I'd give them anyways.

duffman13

quickbeam wrote: »

But you can have a theme and still be vanilla. Say, Eastenders, but just having Phil Mitchell as Vigilante, and Pauline Fowler as Seer, and Den, Max and Janine as three wolves and the rest as villagers. Same set up as the Vanillarama game, but still adding the Eastenders theme.

I get that but i enjoy the buzz of being somewhat clueless, I'm strange like that. I enjoy the Necro style game far more than vanilla games. Again I do think there should be more off them, I'm just pointing out that the games should be built for the participants and not the viewers.

All of the above is just personal preferences which are constantly changing. At the start I wasn't a fan of anon games and now I prefer them massively. It's a good community on here which is constantly evolving through good discussions and feedback

Mollyb60

Necrominus wrote: »

I would tend to agree, even as a creator of some of the more complex games on the forum

My opinion is that there is currently enough demand to run two games a month. There's no reason why we can't ease from one game into the next with perhaps a week's break rather than 3, 4 or sometimes 5 weeks between games.

So for example, Jurassic Park could finish the Friday.
Sign up thread for a vanilla game goes up the Saturday.
Starts the following Sunday (12th August I think).
Vanilla game finishes the Friday of the same week, maybe before depending upon numbers etc.
Then the scheduled August game runs a week or so after that.

Perhaps, and I say this as someone who kicked up a little fuss re the number of my game a while back, but perhaps removing the numbered system entirely would help give off a sense that August (example) is Necros month so nothing else can happen at that time?

Just basic thoughts right now. Dunno if others agree/disagree but said I'd give them anyways.

The problem with having 2 games a month though is that it increases the complexity of the scheduling. If I've put myself down for the August game say but I'm not actually available to run it until the last week in August you'd have to shuffle around so that the other game comes before mine. And if my game happens to run into the start of September then it knocks off the schedule for the 2 September games and has a massive knock on effect. If you want a week between games then maybe it's better not to assign them to a specific month? Just assume a break of about a week between games and start running them from now on?

Or we break the year into 24 game weeks and let people sign up to run a week that suits them?

Mods of the next game - are ye having any problem with sign ups? It would be interesting to see the level of participation for the last few games to see if there is demand for a second game a month. Personally I don't have a problem with other people playing but I don't think I have the headspace for 2 games a month. my head would be fried.

Kolido

Personally I wouldn't be able to play 2 games per month, not that that make any difference but I'd be interested to know how many of the regulars would be. I think it would dilute all the games and bring the numbers per game down. Whether that is a bad thing or not depends on the game I guess.

IMO, having a vanilla B-game every now and again between themed game could work, but as a monthly thing, I'm not so sure.

beakerjoe

quickbeam wrote: »

But you can have a theme and still be vanilla. Say, Eastenders, but just having Phil Mitchell as Vigilante, and Pauline Fowler as Seer, and Den, Max and Janine as three wolves and the rest as villagers. Same set up as the Vanillarama game, but still adding the Eastenders theme.

Sure the Eastenders game was vanilla..... :cool:

Necro

Mollyb60 wrote: »

The problem with having 2 games a month though is that it increases the complexity of the scheduling. If I've put myself down for the August game say but I'm not actually available to run it until the last week in August you'd have to shuffle around so that the other game comes before mine. And if my game happens to run into the start of September then it knocks off the schedule for the 2 September games and has a massive knock on effect. If you want a week between games then maybe it's better not to assign them to a specific month? Just assume a break of about a week between games and start running them from now on?

Or we break the year into 24 game weeks and let people sign up to run a week that suits them?

Mods of the next game - are ye having any problem with sign ups? It would be interesting to see the level of participation for the last few games to see if there is demand for a second game a month. Personally I don't have a problem with other people playing but I don't think I have the headspace for 2 games a month. my head would be fried.

I like that option I think. I'm one of those people who know my roster up until December 2019 so I can see exactly when I'll be free to mod vs free to play.

The thing about boards is that every game gets over 20 players, hell we even had to extend our original limit by 5 to allow for demand in Fr. Ted.

From talking to some organisers of WW/Mafia on different forums, that's a massive number (which is testament to the work that is being done here).
Most forums run games for 13 or less on a semi-regular basis.

So even if some of the games aren't the 20+ player monsters that most of ours are these days, imo it might be beneficial to have a few smaller games.

If sully wants to run a vanilla game we shouldn't be prohibiting her as per the schedule till 2019, we should be trying to find ways to accommodate her. I'd say the same for anyone re: a one night game too.

Also totally accept the point some people aren't able for two games a month and that's fine too.

Edit: Just to state I'm not suggesting anyone is trying to stop anyone else from running games, moreso that our own schedule procludes that ability in it's current form.

Necro

Imo, a second, looser game schedule for one nighters/vanilla-esque games might be an option. It doesn't have to be an 'every month' type of thing (although, heh - I suspect in time it probably will be). Merely a tool for people to run basic games without affecting the current schedule.

And in some of these cases, COP may not have to be utilised - you could go back to the likes of QuickTopic - or even discord as was tested by a few here before for backrooms.

Baggly

I think the best way to see if a vanilla game in between other games is going to work is to have one and see.

I also think we have had a lot of themed games in the past 12 months, and that upping the proportion of vanilla games is a good idea too.

Without transparency on the themed games though, its not workable to do more vanilla games without increasing the amount of games we play. Each mod team will have signed up possibly with a theme in mind, so i wouldnt think its fair to dictate to them that they cant do that theme because the month they chose falls on an odd numbered month (or whatever criteria we use).

I think game mods should be declaring their theme / vanilla vs complicated when they book in to mod a game, tbh. At the moment, everyone is signing up without info on future games and planning a themed complex game; i think if we have a little more transparency, people may sign up to schedule more vanilla games.

Baggly

Just to clarify some of the terminology for myself as well;

Vanilla = no theme beyond baddies being wolves, goodies being villagers, limited/non complicated roles
Themed = could be basic roles or complex roles, OP & flavour is themed
'Necro' style = Complex roles, OP & flavour is themed

Would that be right?

Mollyb60

Pter wrote: »

I think game mods should be declaring their theme / vanilla vs complicated when they book in to mod a game, tbh. At the moment, everyone is signing up without info on future games and planning a themed complex game; i think if we have a little more transparency, people may sign up to schedule more vanilla games.

I would have no issue with this at all. If you have a theme, no harm in putting it up. Might encourage people to get on board early. Obviously if a theme hasn't been agreed yet then no need to pin down a team. But as soon as one is decided on then I see no reason not to note it for other mods.

Kolido

Just to clarify, when you say we announce what kind of game we are doing, we just say Themed, vanilla, or complex. We don't need to reveal what theme it is?

Baggly

I don't know I'm just adding to the discussion. I wouldn't have a problem declaring the theme, but others prefer to keep it to themselves.

suffering golfer

quickbeam wrote: »

Hey golfer! Nice to see you back. You in a position to play again? Love to see you on board again!

Things have changed a lot since the first few games that you played. Games are getting bigger and more complex. I really think 2 mods was sufficient in those games, and you'd probably still get away with it now, but experience says that 3 makes things a helluva lot easier now.

Thanks, still doing the odd lurking. Not really able to commit to any games until late 2018 due to location though. Things seem to have come along a long way since the early days. Think the WW forum is almost 2yr old now?

Games may be becoming too tough for little ol me

Necro

Pter wrote:

I think game mods should be declaring their theme / vanilla vs complicated when they book in to mod a game, tbh. At the moment, everyone is signing up without info on future games and planning a themed complex game; i think if we have a little more transparency, people may sign up to schedule more vanilla games.

I dunno. I mean I signed up to October 2019 cos I know I'm free. I have nothing in mind regards theme yet though. Probably Halloween but I might do vanilla, might do themed (these can be combined btw), might do Necro style (love that this is now a thing btw)

I really don't agree people need to declare their plans, particularly when the schedule is now backed up over a year in advance.

As I said, a second, much looser schedule for vanilla and one nighters is the way to go imo.
Tbh I'd love the option of seeing the next big game is two weeks or more away, I might be off for a few days so I can put on a short game for others to get their fix in the interim.
Using discord or QuickTopic for backrooms without disturbing the current mods planning or set up.

Mollyb60

Whats the problem with revealing a theme? You're gonna have to reveal it eventually when the sign ups start?

Necro

Mollyb60 wrote:

Whats the problem with revealing a theme? You're gonna have to reveal it eventually when the sign ups start?

Well for October 2019 as an example I haven't even thought about it yet :pac:

Mollyb60

Well yeah fair enough if you haven't come up with one yet. But if you have a theme decided on, I don't see why you wouldn't just stick it onto the schedule. Why does it need to be a big secret?

Necro

Mollyb60 wrote:

Well yeah fair enough if you haven't come up with one yet. But if you have a theme decided on, I don't see why you wouldn't just stick it onto the schedule. Why does it need to be a big secret?

It doesn't, but that imo is up to the mods running the game. As soon as we start telling people how we do things here and make hoops for some to jump through such as having to reveal a theme we become like..

That other place.

*Shudders*

Take a look at the stringent, frankly ridiculous methods that site have for allowing people to mod games. All overseen by games managers who can actually reject someones game if it doesn't fit 'their standards'.

Let's not get carried away with being regulatory about the process is all I'm saying.

sullivlo

Pter wrote: »

Just to clarify some of the terminology for myself as well;

Vanilla = no theme beyond baddies being wolves, goodies being villagers, limited/non complicated roles
Themed = could be basic roles or complex roles, OP & flavour is themed
'Necro' style = Complex roles, OP & flavour is themed

Would that be right?

I think it just needs to be vanilla/complex. A vanilla game can be themed and work really well without adding any flavour or complex roles. I don’t think you need to declare a theme ages in advance, unless you want a specific theme...

Mollyb60

Games Managers, lol. Is that a paid position coz I would totally be up for doing that job?

I don't think it's a massively strict rule (and I think we actually discussed this before IIRC) but I don't see the harm in it. For example, myself Kolido and SM were thinking of doing an EastEnders game for our November slot. Would've been a right pain in the arse if we'd had it planned before the game we just finished. I think someone had told Kolido though that that was the theme so he was able to steer us off it. But it would've been much easier if there was just a list we could refer to.

Like I'm sure everyone knows that our Star Trek anniversary game is gonna be Star Trek themed. It doesn't take away from the fun of it that people already know the theme. So if anyone else was planning on a ST themed game they know that we have it booked. And it's not a "rule" that we had to adhere to. Just handy to know. Have I just talked myself into allowing mods to decide for themselves? I think I have. :pac: