Replacing out

[T3]

hmm, yeah i agree that long deadlines are pretty ingrained into this site. separating into blitz games and queues hasn't really taken off and i suspect that's possibly because the ms competitors have "taken" the blitz seeking populace so to speak.

some alternative solutions to short deadlines might be setup related solutions perhaps? like try and create setups that are less phases? more killing roles? maybe have some deadline formula based on number of players alive so you don't have a day 4 that lasts 2 weeks etc.

+1 on the last idea.

[T3]

I've been thinking about this for a while and I want to revive this thread, specifically because I've been looking around on MU and I like their replacement policy

[T3]

I feel like there are just so many replace-outs on this site. In a recent mini normal that I modded 7 of the 13 players replaced out: viewtopic.php?t=90494, I'd say that on average about 15-25% of players in a given game will replace out, and sometimes you get hell games like this with 11 replace-outs with 15 players. viewtopic.php?t=90168 - I would very much support a rule that says that you can't join a game for 2 weeks after replacing out but I want to hear what others think.

[T3]

I don't know, I kind of like the fact that MU forces players to interact with people they don't want to anymore. As long as no one is breaking any rules then isn't it just part of mafia that sometimes things get heated and emotional?

[T3]

Anyone happen to have stats on DGB's claim that replace outs are very disproportionately done by scum?

I want to say that someone did a study on newbie games and found that scum are 50% more likely to rep out in newbies. In my experience, yeah, rep outs are very disproportionately done by scum tho.

[T3]

I still believe replacement requests should have good faith assumed unless good faith cannot be assumed.

I also believe players should be able to contact the game moderator if someone is being toxic and making the game unfun for them.

I think that if someone isn't having fun and can't figure out how to advance their win condition they should still be punished for replacing out. Obviously you shouldn't be punished for a one-off bad rep-out but I think that it's harmful to the game that players can replace out in these situations. What Norwee described in 75, for example, is exactly what I want to avoid.

[T3]

I absolutely agree that if someone is being toxic that's bad, and you should not be forced to play with the toxic player, but that seems like an issue for the moderators.

I've never gotten involved in an emotional conflict in a mafia game so I can't speak to that, but I've had many games in which I haven't had fun because of the gamestate, or due to constant mechtalk, or because I'm being scumread when I don't think I deserve it, but I've still persevered and kept going with the game. It's

my problem

that I'm not having fun, and I'm not about to harm the experience of the other players because of that.

[T3]

self-replacing should be assumed as good faith unless it's being used as metagaming, at which point it isn't

Yeah, I mainly brought this thread back to discuss self-replacing

[T3]

One factor that might limit engagement is the raw amount of time that is required to keep up with active game threads. If you fall behind for a couple days, it's very plausible in a lot of games that there will be dozens of new pages you'll have to read in order to be able to contribute anything of value.

This is the biggest one here I think. I don't like the idea of hard post caps though... maybe more nights is actually the best solution.

[T3]

In the next Mini Normal I mod, I'm going to ban players who have replaced out in the past 2 weeks from signing up. I hope I get reasonable queue times but I don't think I will. Maybe.