-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Upcoming Circus Maximus Changes
- Thread starter Mekkah
- Start date
- Status
Okay, moving to the Circus.
First change is in effect: say hi to the Office of Strategic Influence.
Don't worry about the current games being affected by the new tags or anything: they won't be.
First change is in effect: say hi to the Office of Strategic Influence.
Don't worry about the current games being affected by the new tags or anything: they won't be.
damn I feel left out :(
anyway as a host and player I am all for the three mafia categories, I am not a huge fan of being put into a game with random wifi user and fishin at the same time (just using fishin as an example, got nothing against you brah). I handpicked bcmafia because I put a lot of work into the game, and I wanted to see it played competently. this sounds elitist but other hosts can back me up on this - there's nothing worse than seeing alphabravo ruin your weeks or even months of hard work. I suggested this in the mafia user group but I think we need to bring back partner mafia, to teach new users about mafia and how not to fuck up etc. we could get a list of players qualified to be the partners (pulled from standard mafia games, users like Altair and dubulous, the regular mafia crowd if you will), gather the players to be the partners and open signups for the new players. this would take a fair bit of work on the hosts' part, and I want to see this held periodically to introduce players to mafia. after a user has demonstrated that they are capable of playing a game of mafia properly, they can join a beginner mafia and then go from there
any thoughts
anyway as a host and player I am all for the three mafia categories, I am not a huge fan of being put into a game with random wifi user and fishin at the same time (just using fishin as an example, got nothing against you brah). I handpicked bcmafia because I put a lot of work into the game, and I wanted to see it played competently. this sounds elitist but other hosts can back me up on this - there's nothing worse than seeing alphabravo ruin your weeks or even months of hard work. I suggested this in the mafia user group but I think we need to bring back partner mafia, to teach new users about mafia and how not to fuck up etc. we could get a list of players qualified to be the partners (pulled from standard mafia games, users like Altair and dubulous, the regular mafia crowd if you will), gather the players to be the partners and open signups for the new players. this would take a fair bit of work on the hosts' part, and I want to see this held periodically to introduce players to mafia. after a user has demonstrated that they are capable of playing a game of mafia properly, they can join a beginner mafia and then go from there
any thoughts
I discussed about this with Mekkah but i should also post my opinion here:
I think there isn't enough difference between expert and standard games to warrant two categories, if handpicked is still allowed in standard. I mean, here's what we have:
-beginner games, with basic rules and only beginners allowed except for special cases like partner mafia maybe
-standard games, everyone can join (maybe everyone who played at least one beginner game), some are handpicked
-expert games, are handpicked (ie only good players can join)
Considering the good players will also play in not-handpicked standard games if the distribution is 1/3/1, the only difference there is is basically a warning that expert games will probably be more complicated and be handpicked (ie best players), and that they will have an experienced host. All of that can also be true for a handpicked standard game, so why the separation?
Another thought I had was this: the current handpicking system is not good enough for hosts. It doesn't determinate at all what game will be allowed to be handpicked, and it's basically first come, first serve. If you happen to have a game that's placed right after a handpicked one started, you either have to use the priority system or wait for a few weeks to host.
So this is what I'd suggest to correct these two problems:
-three categories of players - beginner, intermediate, expert.
-the host of a game can decide what type of players he wants to let in, and that's approved or not by a mod (ie an unexperienced host won't be allowed to host an expert-only game); this allows for a game with beginners, intermediate and expert players
-the priority system is applied and there is no category of game that can always benefit from handpicking; i don't see why expert games should bypass that, if it does and at some point there are 50 expert players it's possible that 5 of them will always be left out which makes priority a necessity again; and it shouldn't be a concern for expert-only games anyway since in any case only experts will get in.
-the number of reserves depends on the type of game: if it allows beginners, then there are only 5 spots, if it allows intermediates then there are 7 and if it's expert-only there are 10
-in some cases, the ability to have a fully handpicked game can be given to a good host for a game that requires it, or as a reward after a successful game, etc.
As a requirement to become intermediate, a beginner should have played 3 beginner games OR won 1, and to become expert, an intermediate should have played 4 interm games AND won at least 1.
edit: yeah I talked with Alice and I agree with the below post in fact.
I think there isn't enough difference between expert and standard games to warrant two categories, if handpicked is still allowed in standard. I mean, here's what we have:
-beginner games, with basic rules and only beginners allowed except for special cases like partner mafia maybe
-standard games, everyone can join (maybe everyone who played at least one beginner game), some are handpicked
-expert games, are handpicked (ie only good players can join)
Considering the good players will also play in not-handpicked standard games if the distribution is 1/3/1, the only difference there is is basically a warning that expert games will probably be more complicated and be handpicked (ie best players), and that they will have an experienced host. All of that can also be true for a handpicked standard game, so why the separation?
Another thought I had was this: the current handpicking system is not good enough for hosts. It doesn't determinate at all what game will be allowed to be handpicked, and it's basically first come, first serve. If you happen to have a game that's placed right after a handpicked one started, you either have to use the priority system or wait for a few weeks to host.
So this is what I'd suggest to correct these two problems:
-three categories of players - beginner, intermediate, expert.
-the host of a game can decide what type of players he wants to let in, and that's approved or not by a mod (ie an unexperienced host won't be allowed to host an expert-only game); this allows for a game with beginners, intermediate and expert players
-the priority system is applied and there is no category of game that can always benefit from handpicking; i don't see why expert games should bypass that, if it does and at some point there are 50 expert players it's possible that 5 of them will always be left out which makes priority a necessity again; and it shouldn't be a concern for expert-only games anyway since in any case only experts will get in.
-the number of reserves depends on the type of game: if it allows beginners, then there are only 5 spots, if it allows intermediates then there are 7 and if it's expert-only there are 10
-in some cases, the ability to have a fully handpicked game can be given to a good host for a game that requires it, or as a reward after a successful game, etc.
As a requirement to become intermediate, a beginner should have played 3 beginner games OR won 1, and to become expert, an intermediate should have played 4 interm games AND won at least 1.
edit: yeah I talked with Alice and I agree with the below post in fact.
I agree mostly with Robin, but I think expert players should be chosen on a case-by-case basis by moderators. For instance, hi, I'm an idling scrub who signs up for 9 games over a few months and wins a couple through maybe a fluke, blind luck, my teammates ruling, good play in one game then flopping afterwards, mediocre play, everyone else sucking, etc. Am I an expert? No numerical amount can quantify skill. Of course, suddenly I become a lot better, and now I'm an expert. Now that I've put in the effort, I've started to become a fuck-up again. Great, I should be removed from the list. So I think moderators need to constantly review the list, even if we need more moderators. Furthermore, I think we need to finally make that blacklist. Idlers, if they play x games without idling a shitload, then they can be removed for good, record cleared, unless the end up on the list y or more times. Perennial fuck-ups stay on until mods and players / hosts the mods may choose to consult mostly agree they've turned over a new leaf.
On IRC:
{ 00:15:44 AM } <Mekkah> tbh i think the simplest way out
{ 00:15:48 AM } <Mekkah> is to just stop handpicking for standard
{ 00:15:49 AM } <Mekkah> =/
I agree with this. Our standard players should be perfectly competent, so with reservations and a list of upcoming games a la the tournament forum (which will let people know what to save their priority for), there will be no need for handpicking in standard. Expert probably doesn't need it either, but perhaps handpicking should be allowed in order to let standard players in on a case-by-case basis (i.e. approval from a mod).
On IRC:
{ 00:15:44 AM } <Mekkah> tbh i think the simplest way out
{ 00:15:48 AM } <Mekkah> is to just stop handpicking for standard
{ 00:15:49 AM } <Mekkah> =/
I agree with this. Our standard players should be perfectly competent, so with reservations and a list of upcoming games a la the tournament forum (which will let people know what to save their priority for), there will be no need for handpicking in standard. Expert probably doesn't need it either, but perhaps handpicking should be allowed in order to let standard players in on a case-by-case basis (i.e. approval from a mod).
this post probably won't be very much appreciated, but even so, fucking called it
this is exactly what the crowd of "don't push for more mafia" supporters predicted, and it is happening
i don't see any part of this that doesn't undermine to my understanding what smogon mafia is (or was) all about, though i think we went down the wrong road when circus maximus was created anyway
this is exactly what the crowd of "don't push for more mafia" supporters predicted, and it is happening
i don't see any part of this that doesn't undermine to my understanding what smogon mafia is (or was) all about, though i think we went down the wrong road when circus maximus was created anyway
I'm not sure I like this system of selecting tiers very much. I mean, I almost won BC mafia despite being completely clueless. I think there should be a MUCH higher standard for an "expert" rating-and I do not think that any arbitrary games played or games won statistics can really show how good someone is at mafia. I also think there is no reason to have such a system for beginners-to-intermediates either. Basically, how "good" someone is should just be determined by Mekkah/other mods, and not determined by some system because as much as I would like there to be a "perfect" set of requirements, I just do not think anything can accurately relays a user's skill.
I would like to say that I really love the idea of separating games into skill tiers, because in the current system, new players like myself get continually destroyed by much more experienced players. The only problem I can see is whether or not there are enough players overall to run 5-6 games without most of the skilled players playing in 3-4 of them, because most of the 70+ sign ups are the exact same people, and encompasses pretty much every active user on Circus Maximus.
Edit: I didn't see Jumpluff had made basically the same argument as my argument in paragraph 1, sorry about that. I guess I'll just have to say I agree with her, then.
I don't see what you're talking about, Az. As far as I can tell, multiple games at once only improved the game as a whole. What's Smogon Mafia all about according to you?
Now to pick dissect Accent's post...
tbh I don't really see the difference between this and the old way. The host determines the intended skill level and gets his players accordingly.
Anyway, as I said, I think it would be easiest to restrict handpicking to expert only. Maybe allow more reserves for standard/intermediate games instead.
EDIT:
Now to pick dissect Accent's post...
Yeah, I agree the current way isn't at all sufficient. I won't pretend I saw the problems coming, but it always had an imperfect feel to me.
Then we should probably have an index of players and their skill levels somewhere. Also, I think hosts should be allowed to let in someone of a lower skill level if they think that player is good enough.
tbh I don't really see the difference between this and the old way. The host determines the intended skill level and gets his players accordingly.
If there's only one expert game going on at a time, then handpicked is a must imo - it's half the point of the whole Circus change: the demand to be able to host "elitist" games freely. If you're not getting in, there's four other games for you to try your hand at.
Expert issues outlined above aside, this seems rather arbitrary. I'd rather just allow people to reserve a % of their player lists...which also brings me to the idea that we really need to stop 25+ player games for standard play. They're small games for a reason.
Anyway, as I said, I think it would be easiest to restrict handpicking to expert only. Maybe allow more reserves for standard/intermediate games instead.
EDIT:
Well, I expect to attract some new players with the Beginners tier at least in the beginning, so the crowd should grow a bit (some people mentioned wanting to try or coming back to play for this). Even failing that, I don't mind people playing in more than one game at once, especially not considering some people always miss the boat when only allowed in one game: shitty role, early death, etc.UncleSam said:
I think this is a great idea, and I just want to add a little bit about subs.
I think the way subs are run right now in small mafias is generally opposing the main point here. For the most part, hosts can completely bypass priority and any other rules and just pick whoever they want to sub. Now as a host, this can be a good thing, but as a player, I feel like there should be some type of rules added for picking subs (probably along the lines of someone who initially signed up for the game and did not get in, but is still p1, etc). Obviously this would probably only work with the Standard or Beginner games, as hosts of Expert games will handpick their subs accordingly anyway.
I think the way subs are run right now in small mafias is generally opposing the main point here. For the most part, hosts can completely bypass priority and any other rules and just pick whoever they want to sub. Now as a host, this can be a good thing, but as a player, I feel like there should be some type of rules added for picking subs (probably along the lines of someone who initially signed up for the game and did not get in, but is still p1, etc). Obviously this would probably only work with the Standard or Beginner games, as hosts of Expert games will handpick their subs accordingly anyway.
I think that these ideas are great! Thanks for moveing this to the Circus Maximus fourm, and allowing input into the whole project.
From a newbie's point of view, I agree wholeheartedly with the system you guys are proposing.
However, I belive that players should not be ranked based on any numeracal value, but just on the interpretations of mods and more experienced players. That would mean that a list of 'tiers' would have to be constantly updated.
If subforms can be hidden from public view, than perhaps a subform should be made for the "Expert" games, with only the highest ranked players allowed to view it.
Otherwise, I'm really excited about the new Office subform, and I hope it gets put to use soon. Perhaps a sticky should be made with a link to the three Smog articles (like in the Mafia group)?
From a newbie's point of view, I agree wholeheartedly with the system you guys are proposing.
However, I belive that players should not be ranked based on any numeracal value, but just on the interpretations of mods and more experienced players. That would mean that a list of 'tiers' would have to be constantly updated.
If subforms can be hidden from public view, than perhaps a subform should be made for the "Expert" games, with only the highest ranked players allowed to view it.
Otherwise, I'm really excited about the new Office subform, and I hope it gets put to use soon. Perhaps a sticky should be made with a link to the three Smog articles (like in the Mafia group)?
As Mekkah is already well aware, I've been somewhat vocal about this subject for a while now.
These changes are definitely a step in the right direction, but I still think the Expert game system is flawed. Under the system implemented now, the same 25 or so players that get handpicked for the first Expert game will probably just get picked for the next one and the next one and so on and so forth. I don't believe that the skill level between an expert player and an above average player is all that large, and I believe that, in most cases, the difference comes down to experience. Obviously, there are exceptions on both ends of the spectrum, but if this system stands up it will be very difficult for any one new to become an Expert player. Sure, an above average player can probably win and do pretty well in the Standard games by playing with the mediocre users over and over again, but he/she probably doesn't really improve. And that player probably wouldn't get picked for Expert games because he/she's been playing all the mediocre users!
I still believe that the subforum is the best idea. Instead of having just one Expert game at a time publicly, I think there should be two Advanced games hidden in the subforum, with somewhat broader, though still limited, access. There could still be three games going on in the regular forum, which should all have a basic structure. The Advanced subforum would be a good place for experimental games (like Lynchpin or Unicycle) as well as elevated play.
I like the beginners game because I think that's all most new users need to get acclimated. I know that when I first started playing mafia, I enjoyed success because I had a partner that I was constantly discussing strategy with. Of course, there are practicality issues with this as well, like timezones and overall availability, but I think, if done right, this could lead to great things for Circus Maximus.
These changes are definitely a step in the right direction, but I still think the Expert game system is flawed. Under the system implemented now, the same 25 or so players that get handpicked for the first Expert game will probably just get picked for the next one and the next one and so on and so forth. I don't believe that the skill level between an expert player and an above average player is all that large, and I believe that, in most cases, the difference comes down to experience. Obviously, there are exceptions on both ends of the spectrum, but if this system stands up it will be very difficult for any one new to become an Expert player. Sure, an above average player can probably win and do pretty well in the Standard games by playing with the mediocre users over and over again, but he/she probably doesn't really improve. And that player probably wouldn't get picked for Expert games because he/she's been playing all the mediocre users!
I still believe that the subforum is the best idea. Instead of having just one Expert game at a time publicly, I think there should be two Advanced games hidden in the subforum, with somewhat broader, though still limited, access. There could still be three games going on in the regular forum, which should all have a basic structure. The Advanced subforum would be a good place for experimental games (like Lynchpin or Unicycle) as well as elevated play.
I like the beginners game because I think that's all most new users need to get acclimated. I know that when I first started playing mafia, I enjoyed success because I had a partner that I was constantly discussing strategy with. Of course, there are practicality issues with this as well, like timezones and overall availability, but I think, if done right, this could lead to great things for Circus Maximus.
I agree completely. Now, there's actually a very simple and fair way for subs: people are to be substituted in in the order they were randomized. For example, I randomize the player list for someone else's game, using random.org's list randomizer. The top say 25 get in, everything below it is a substitute, in the order they're put in.
Of course this is fair, but has some practical issues...when you need to sub someone out, you often want someone to get in quickly. So you send a PM to the first random dude on your substitute list, all while the game is being held up. It takes a while, so you send the next guy a PM...and then the first guy suddenly responds, etc. It's a mess. Some sort of time limit for each sub to respond could be in order, but I think there could be more practical solutions out there.
I like the propositions here, but 1 thing bugs me. Right now I don't see any other change between "standard" and "expert" expect for the game being more complicated, and thus needing a more experienced host, othervise the players could be the same. Correct me if I am wrong (seriously, do it).
I also liked Dougs idea, but I see a slight issue if it is implemented: What makes a player "good" enough to be put in the list allowed into that "secret" forum? And how would it be recognised? A mafia-player badge, a small list of players who have access, just a PM gongratulating that you got access? What about people who prefer to make games instead of playing them, how would their access be decided?
The ideas are good, but there are some stuff that needs to be refined.
I also liked Dougs idea, but I see a slight issue if it is implemented: What makes a player "good" enough to be put in the list allowed into that "secret" forum? And how would it be recognised? A mafia-player badge, a small list of players who have access, just a PM gongratulating that you got access? What about people who prefer to make games instead of playing them, how would their access be decided?
The ideas are good, but there are some stuff that needs to be refined.
One could ask in the signup thread if they are willing to be subbed into the game (example signup post: P2, willing to sub). Then you would randomize an another list of those who are willing to sub, and show it publicly (player list+sub list). The few first people in the "sub list" would have to follow the game keenly and be ready to sub anytime. With this there would be a few people always ready to sub in, and everyone would get an equal chance of getting in as subs regardless of priority.
My 2 eurocents.
My 2 eurocents.
This idea sounds the best. I'm assuming here that the subforum for strategic talk would be open to all.
However, I'm concerned about how you'd pick the "Expert" players. As somebody who's relatively new to Smogon Mafia, I may feel that I am good enough to be allowed in the Expert games (I don't, but this is an entirely hypothetical scenario), but the hosts won't let me in due to lack of experience. As these games are undoubtedly the most interesting to host and play in, I would want to be in these games, and will not get the same feeling out of watching them, if you know what I mean. Additionally, it is my belief that hosts of intermediate games should not be allowed to handpick more than, for example, 10 people. This exact number would be for the mods/admins to decide, but I'm going with this at the moment as an example. I'm presenting this idea because hosts will pick the well-known players. People like me, who are new to mafia but not content to being confined to beginner games with people who regularly fuck up, will not be handpicked because we are relative unknowns. If the number of players hosts are allowed to reserve/handpick (we should, imo, combine this into one number) is restricted, than people like me will be able to get spots in Intermediate/Standard games.
Just my two cents, and I hope to have more good mafia games in the future!
However, I'm concerned about how you'd pick the "Expert" players. As somebody who's relatively new to Smogon Mafia, I may feel that I am good enough to be allowed in the Expert games (I don't, but this is an entirely hypothetical scenario), but the hosts won't let me in due to lack of experience. As these games are undoubtedly the most interesting to host and play in, I would want to be in these games, and will not get the same feeling out of watching them, if you know what I mean. Additionally, it is my belief that hosts of intermediate games should not be allowed to handpick more than, for example, 10 people. This exact number would be for the mods/admins to decide, but I'm going with this at the moment as an example. I'm presenting this idea because hosts will pick the well-known players. People like me, who are new to mafia but not content to being confined to beginner games with people who regularly fuck up, will not be handpicked because we are relative unknowns. If the number of players hosts are allowed to reserve/handpick (we should, imo, combine this into one number) is restricted, than people like me will be able to get spots in Intermediate/Standard games.
Just my two cents, and I hope to have more good mafia games in the future!
I completely agree with Polelover and handpicking 10 people seems reasonable enough. Having no limit on the handpicking would make the transition from Beginner to Intermediate/Standard much more difficult for the player.
Would you allow an obvious newbie into intermediate if he'd played 3 beginner games? I would suggest the following: reasonably successful village leader OR mafia win OR Wolf comes rather far OR wolf win or something like that, OR if the person manages to play rather well in early games, or decently consistently, or if the mods decide. Also, expert should be case-by-case (yes, I know this has been said before) or upon 5 victories,
I also would suggest 2 beginner level (find the strong ones quicker), 4 intermediate, an other category (Diplomacy, RPSI, chess, ... speaking of those, why not try two of some of those games at once?), and Expert, 2 games. Perhaps an intermediate player could sign up for expert, but at P2-4, not P-3. Same for beginners in intermediate. Also, perhaps one game one lebel below one's own level, but at reduced priority (2-3, never P1 to make it fair).
We need a tier list for mafia players. Mekkah can probably do it.
I think the three main separations are based on the quality of the game:
Beginner, like ew's basic mafia, will have simple roles, with 1-2 twists.
Standard, will be like most of the mafias we've played so far, with a few exceptions. Your game isn't good enough for you to select the players to play it.
Expert should not however be an 'expert' game per se, merely a determination based off the quality of the game. i.e.: is it good enough that the host should be able to hand-pick players. I don't exactly like the term 'expert,' because it implies the same people will get chosen again and again. While to a large extent this will may be true, I think the top level should be used for top-quality mafias, rather than top level players.
Any idea on how experimental games will be handled under this system? I presume they'll be added directly into standard, would this be correct?
I think the three main separations are based on the quality of the game:
Beginner, like ew's basic mafia, will have simple roles, with 1-2 twists.
Standard, will be like most of the mafias we've played so far, with a few exceptions. Your game isn't good enough for you to select the players to play it.
Expert should not however be an 'expert' game per se, merely a determination based off the quality of the game. i.e.: is it good enough that the host should be able to hand-pick players. I don't exactly like the term 'expert,' because it implies the same people will get chosen again and again. While to a large extent this will may be true, I think the top level should be used for top-quality mafias, rather than top level players.
Any idea on how experimental games will be handled under this system? I presume they'll be added directly into standard, would this be correct?
Well as a relatively new mafia player I think that tiering the games will be very helpful to new players and make games more enjoyable for old/veteran players.
It's not really fair to either side of the spread to make first-time players play in the same game as someone who's played 6+ games because the skill levels are too different.
First-time players can make deadly mistakes for their factions (I have an extremely relevant example to this but I don't want to say it in public at the moment because it's still progressing) and veteran players can get annoyed at their incompetance.
Of course it's extremely important to encourage new players to play, because you can not under any circumstances rely on a certain grouping of users for any sustainable period. People go and expecting veterans to stick around forever maintaining a higher quality of game isn't really reasonable.
Emphasis should be put on teaching beginning players how to false claim, detect false claims, play/ally themselves the best and overall not screw up, so they can ascend to being better players faster than normal and add to the competant pool of players.
I don't think the Expert/Advanced games should be put in a hidden subforum where nobody else can see simply because it's very helpful for first-time players to watch other games progressing and gain some semblance of reasonable false claims, bad false claims, and judgment choices as executed by experienced players.
The games should by no means be open to beginning players participating or posting but they should not be cut off from viewing by new players. What better examples do you have on how to play properly and strategically than games played exclusively by players deemed a cut above the rest?
I don't think the standards for upgrading from Beginner to Standard games should be too harsh or tolling either, because then beginners will get burnt out playing "the same" basic game.
I like the idea of having a Partners mafia every 2 or 3 beginner games, and if a beginner successfully plays in that game and their experienced partner believes they are ready to advance to Standard play, they are upgraded.
This seems like a good method because it would not place too much emphasis or pressure on the mods to make the decisions (though I believe the mods could do this easily I also think they get burnt out or disinterested if there is too much focus on a mod's decisions and role and anything irl pops up for the mod) and would allow players who have decidely been named experienced to select players they feel should advance.
Perhaps there could be Partners mafia every 2 cycles (2/3 games go by and the next 2/3 games go by) for an upgrade from Standard to Expert as well. Expert players could be assigned to Standard players selected by mods to be examined for prowess in the game and a high potential for success in experimental/highly advanced mafia play.
Expert should have to change at least 2/3 of the players each game, to prevent the same 25 people from playing each time. Or some division that requires a majority change in the players. It will get boring having the same "experienced" players play each other over and over because their individual strategies will become too well-known, unless people are able to change significantly enough how they play each game to keep things 'interesting'.
I think having an Expert mafia would also prevent the 'good players' from being namekilled n1/etc, as they are in mafias now. It doesn't seem very fun for them to be always taken out asap because they are better than the rest - if players who were good were isolated with other 'good' players there would be no large divide and motivation to namekill.
As far as experimental mafia games, the most drastically different games should be reserved for Expert, however Standard should get an irregularly-designed game as well. There could be joining requirements (have played in 5+ games/won 2 games/etc) for experimental games in Standard to prevent any old mafia player from joining, but to still allow those who have an interest in testing games but aren't up to Expert quality to do so.
There should also be rules set for Beginner mafia as to what kind of roles/game designs can be put into play - no fake role PMs unless it's explicitly stated role PMs may be incorrect, no extremely abnormal or game-deciding roles, and carefully balanced factions. Come Partners mafia for the testing, roles like these could be introduced.
It's kind of overwhelming for new players when 'extreme' roles are in the game and you are confused as to what exactly the role does or why you do something but it's never what you expect.
Also, Beginner games should be hosted by someone with experience imo. The host needs to help new players learn to fake role PMs etc and be involved with helping new players. You can't have the blind leading the blind after all. Standard should be open to anyone who's played mafia and wants to host, but Expert (obviously) and Beginner should be slightly stricter with hosts.
It's not really fair to either side of the spread to make first-time players play in the same game as someone who's played 6+ games because the skill levels are too different.
First-time players can make deadly mistakes for their factions (I have an extremely relevant example to this but I don't want to say it in public at the moment because it's still progressing) and veteran players can get annoyed at their incompetance.
Of course it's extremely important to encourage new players to play, because you can not under any circumstances rely on a certain grouping of users for any sustainable period. People go and expecting veterans to stick around forever maintaining a higher quality of game isn't really reasonable.
Emphasis should be put on teaching beginning players how to false claim, detect false claims, play/ally themselves the best and overall not screw up, so they can ascend to being better players faster than normal and add to the competant pool of players.
I don't think the Expert/Advanced games should be put in a hidden subforum where nobody else can see simply because it's very helpful for first-time players to watch other games progressing and gain some semblance of reasonable false claims, bad false claims, and judgment choices as executed by experienced players.
The games should by no means be open to beginning players participating or posting but they should not be cut off from viewing by new players. What better examples do you have on how to play properly and strategically than games played exclusively by players deemed a cut above the rest?
I don't think the standards for upgrading from Beginner to Standard games should be too harsh or tolling either, because then beginners will get burnt out playing "the same" basic game.
I like the idea of having a Partners mafia every 2 or 3 beginner games, and if a beginner successfully plays in that game and their experienced partner believes they are ready to advance to Standard play, they are upgraded.
This seems like a good method because it would not place too much emphasis or pressure on the mods to make the decisions (though I believe the mods could do this easily I also think they get burnt out or disinterested if there is too much focus on a mod's decisions and role and anything irl pops up for the mod) and would allow players who have decidely been named experienced to select players they feel should advance.
Perhaps there could be Partners mafia every 2 cycles (2/3 games go by and the next 2/3 games go by) for an upgrade from Standard to Expert as well. Expert players could be assigned to Standard players selected by mods to be examined for prowess in the game and a high potential for success in experimental/highly advanced mafia play.
Expert should have to change at least 2/3 of the players each game, to prevent the same 25 people from playing each time. Or some division that requires a majority change in the players. It will get boring having the same "experienced" players play each other over and over because their individual strategies will become too well-known, unless people are able to change significantly enough how they play each game to keep things 'interesting'.
I think having an Expert mafia would also prevent the 'good players' from being namekilled n1/etc, as they are in mafias now. It doesn't seem very fun for them to be always taken out asap because they are better than the rest - if players who were good were isolated with other 'good' players there would be no large divide and motivation to namekill.
As far as experimental mafia games, the most drastically different games should be reserved for Expert, however Standard should get an irregularly-designed game as well. There could be joining requirements (have played in 5+ games/won 2 games/etc) for experimental games in Standard to prevent any old mafia player from joining, but to still allow those who have an interest in testing games but aren't up to Expert quality to do so.
There should also be rules set for Beginner mafia as to what kind of roles/game designs can be put into play - no fake role PMs unless it's explicitly stated role PMs may be incorrect, no extremely abnormal or game-deciding roles, and carefully balanced factions. Come Partners mafia for the testing, roles like these could be introduced.
It's kind of overwhelming for new players when 'extreme' roles are in the game and you are confused as to what exactly the role does or why you do something but it's never what you expect.
Also, Beginner games should be hosted by someone with experience imo. The host needs to help new players learn to fake role PMs etc and be involved with helping new players. You can't have the blind leading the blind after all. Standard should be open to anyone who's played mafia and wants to host, but Expert (obviously) and Beginner should be slightly stricter with hosts.
- Status