Survivor Review Board: Discussion

Drench · Post Post #2 (isolation #0) » Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:53 am

all large-scale games should be reviewed really: the culture round here would potentially be served better if it saw a non-reviewed game as inherently weaker than a reviewed one, as it is with mafia games above the line

not even large themes need to pass review committees--but they do need reviews, and these are of a comparable size

(also re challenges, if you let me just smoke this cigarette and go all sotto voce on you all while sitting on a stool with one leg going over the other, i think it's time for the scopey timed challenge renaissance we've all been waiting for)

Drench · Post Post #4 (isolation #1) » Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:59 am

In post 1143, Xalxe wrote:
In post 1142, Drench wrote:(also re challenges, if you let me just smoke this cigarette and go all sotto voce on you all while sitting on a stool with one leg going over the other, i think it's time for the scopey timed challenge renaissance we've all been waiting for)
Drench, I love you and I think you're the only one on this crusade so please stop it.

i didn't sacrifice a night of my life in 2008 only to fall asleep lose by 6 metres and be voted out in third to be spoken to like this

seriously though with significant innovation and a heavy move away from prioritizing endurance, they could be really good
i mean the amazing race was essentially one big fat scopey timed challenge and it was wicked as heck

Drench · Post Post #6 (isolation #2) » Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:15 am

it can be? but as i said there's posting shit endlessly for hours and then there's like an actual challenge with actual structure and shape and direction involved

the difference between the last challenge of mafiascum survivor (run a hundred metres) and the first of seafoam (get these boulders aside, and then climb the mountain, and then do the thing)

Drench · Post Post #8 (isolation #3) » Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:17 am

there's an art in making challenges full stop

i'll maintain there's such a thing as a good timed challenge

also i'm gonna call them interval challenges alright

Drench · Post Post #61 (isolation #4) » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:15 am

digression I'm so thrilled to have etched out a place in ms history with the leg box
sorry continue

Drench · Post Post #74 (isolation #5) » Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:27 pm

In post 67, Xalxe wrote:Alright, this has gone quiet so I'm going to put the Koopamod hat back on and propose a really simple solution: from now on, any large game, whether it be Survivor, Big Brother, or a new format must be either reviewed by somebody who is not playing or should have a co-moderator. Reviewers should be listed in the OP of any game threads as having signed off on the final version of the game. I think that if that policy is put into place, it'll help alleviate concerns that people have.

Topics for discussion:
- Can you, at any point, circumvent this process if you have proven you don't suck at things?
- Should any new idea be reviewed, even if it's not a large game? Example: I have a new board game I'd like to run, should someone be required to review it?
- Should there be some "approved" list of reviewers, or is a review accepted from anybody (at players' discretion, naturally)?
- Should I prevent a game from running until it has a review?
- Should I have a "naughty list" of mods who should maybe have a second reviewer, or is that just me being an elitist fuck?

Discuss.

- no, everyone is fallible and getting just one review isn't that hard
- draw a line based on number of people likely to be affected
- similar to how the mafia half does it? people who've run things to completion before can review similar stuff
- don't prevent it but more emphasis is needed to highlight that reviews are very very encouraged
- no that's a great idea believe in yourself alex