Myth-Weavers

Myth-Weavers (http://www.myth-weavers.com/forumhome.php)
-   General Discussion (http://www.myth-weavers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Game longevity/quality:Predicting. (http://www.myth-weavers.com/showthread.php?t=21271)

Plugsy Sep 1 '07 7:32am

Game longevity/quality:Predicting.
 
This was prompted by this game longevity thread.

How do you work out which games are likely to be long lasting and well supported by the DM. How do you tell what the consitency of posting by the players will be like. Not saying that they should have to post daily just that the should meet the posting rate specified.

Now I've only been here 31 days but I already know certain players whose presence in a game makes me want in. It's not those players I see as a problem, it's the ones who'd fit the same category that I don't know. The ones I didn't know about and so applied to the wrong game.

I haven't thought this through just waffled it straight on to the screen. I guess I'd like some kind of rating for ..............
..................daily posting reliability, same for 3 day and weekly and a DM reguklarity rating................................

Actually I just realised how complicated that could get.
I'll leave this up a see if anyone has more sensible ideas than I was getting

Cogadh Sep 1 '07 9:40am

I may be missing something, but that last bit sounds like you want the posts/day in the profile screen (or represented graphically as 'HP' to the left). You're at 11.67 posts per day. Though I actually go look at a DM/player's current/previous games to see how they play and make sure they don't just haunt the spam-magnet word association thread - but apparently I'm just silly...

leons1701 Sep 1 '07 10:18am

I never thought of checking to make sure that they aren't pumping their post count that way. (I know that's not why they do it, but it has that effect)

I normally won't even consider a game GM'ed by someone with less than 100-200 posts. I'm sure that may leave out some really awesome GM's, but I'm willing to risk it. GM unreliability is the number one killer of games I've been in, sometimes it can't be helped, but far too many GM's just stop posting with no warning whatsoever. Unless the ad particularly impresses me in some way, I usually want to see at least 600-700 posts before I'll bother to apply. More experienced GM's tend to be more reliable.

There are certain players I'm always happy to see in a game. There are also a few I know will never actually play, no matter how great their application seems. That just takes getting to know people by playing with them.

Plugsy Sep 1 '07 10:33am

Quote:

I may be missing something, but that last bit sounds like you want the posts/day in the profile screen (or represented graphically as 'HP' to the left). You're at 11.67 posts per day.
Difference is I'm not talking about measuring posts/day as that has nothing to do with games. I also didn't imagine something quite so automated as hp/xp (at least under the current release). More a measurement of meeting your agreements if you like, so yes I thought a bar chart with four or five bars, but anything may be helpful. Like I said I hadn't thought it through.

Quote:

You're at 11.67 posts per day.
Illustrates my point, 11.67 posts a day doesn't well represent my input. It doesn't really indicate anything meaningful.

Quote:

but apparently I'm just silly...
My point is missed there, I hadn't finished explaining when I hit submit instead of Preview (they're too close). I read it through as it had been rendered. When I edited some more and hit enter I found it had been locked for being "an argument in the wrong place".

Anyway I was trying to explain my point was specific about game cutoffs. Whilst reading back through a DMs games will tell me game quality, it won't tell me anything about the cutoff date/numbers/criteria. That can only be part of the ad for the current game ie the first post in the ad thread.

Plugsy Sep 1 '07 1:55pm

Quote:

There are certain players I'm always happy to see in a game. There are also a few I know will never actually play, no matter how great their application seems. That just takes getting to know people by playing with them.
Perhaps I'm just greedy and want a years worth of knowledge in my first fortnight:)

Seriously though,
I think that the site is vulnerable to an amount of noob player churn because of this issue. A player who arrives applies to say three games, makes the cut in two, one never starts and one stalls after 4 days. The keenest will stay but many won't, hose many represent a pool of potential committed players and DM's of the future, their commitment just needed time to develop through playing.

The strength of this site comes from it's (set aside the technology) users and new blood is the way to improve that. I feel we need to deal with the issues of early disappointemnt, if it is at all possible to do so. At the very least try to ameliorate it's impact on noobs in some way. Fortunately, things are now starting to come together for me in several games but it's taken four weeks. I could see some others just leaving.

Whilst it doesn't deal with the issue of how a noob makes game selections I would like to see a noob of the month award/poll. Available for maybe the first 2 or 3 months after joining. That would maybe allow some player to gain cred based on peer judgement.

Right now I'd give that award to Jedaki. I know he's been out of RPGing for a while (18 years), yet when the games he's been accepted to stalled he's stepped up to DM a game. Not only that but his game looks a real interesting concept. One new member a week of that quality would be a great omen for the future of the site.

Amnistar Sep 1 '07 3:25pm

I'd say the number 1 reason ( and possibly the only reason) that gams stall is GM fault. A good GM can go recruit new players if the players he's recruited have stalled the game, but if the gm stalls the game, players have a hard time finding a new GM to run the same game.

Spaxe Sep 1 '07 5:46pm

This post is more of a self-voicing.

I wouldn't bother applying to a game if the ad doesn't specify a posting rate that I find comfortable in. The next stage is how the GM writes. The third is about the story, then I would look at who had also expressed interest and decide.

I do agree that there are too many dropping sceneries and we need to stop it from happening not as often. I do know that a new game ad form is being coded right now to do that. ;)

Plugsy Sep 1 '07 6:47pm

Quote:

This post is more of a self-voicing.
Well I know I rambled a bit but I have no idea what that means, sorry. Did I do something wrong?
Could you clarify.

Edit: googled self voicing, none the wiser.

leons1701 Sep 1 '07 8:02pm

If I chose to run a game, I'd be quite willing to allow people with little to no posting history into it if their applications impressed me. But because the GM is the engine that drives the game, I won't waste my time with one that doesn't have some sort of MW experience. That's not a guarantee of quality, of course.

As a newbie, you really shouldn't be planning on running games. Play in some first and get comfortable with how the site works. I almost cringe when I see someone not only new to MW but admitting that they are new to PbP gaming planning some huge campaign that would be ambitious as a FtF game. Because it is almost certainly doomed to fail, and quite possibly take away their interest in playing at this site in the future.

Spaxe Sep 1 '07 8:30pm

Plugsy: Sorry to be unclear. I meant to say, it was more of a speaking for myself and not commenting on anyone else's post.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 8:47pm.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.