Werewolf Central

[Selrahc]

The horrendous mass auto lynching in WW classic three I think was more a case of incredibly early sign ups bringing people who no longer remebered they were in the game, or who had lost internet access in the time it took to start.

There are an awful lot of games going on right now though.

[Castaras]

I third the idea for WW games being limited.

I haven't played in many, but I've already got one excel book for all my WW games, and I've currently got 6 tabs, with three waiting to start. Although they're all loads of fun.

[Lucky]

Well, good to see people support my idea.

Seriously, we need to set up a schedule for these. It's too late for the games running now, but we really need to space out the time between the games. With at least a week, if not two, between the start dates of the games.

[Korith]

I offer an alternative

Turn the "auto-sign" list into an auto-notify list. If the auto-lynch problem in WWCIII came from the fact that people had forgotten they registered, the auto-sign could produce similar consequences.

I propose that, rather than limiting the number of games going on at once, we limit the number of games that participants can be in. I would suggest we cap people at 3 different werewolf games at one time. If they're dead in one game, they no longer count as being in the game for purposes of the limit.

Furthermore, I suggest that the narrators/co-narrators be barred from narrating more than one game at a time (it's a killer!) and from participating in another game while narrating (so that they can devote their full attention, and to reduce the chance of biased judgements)

[Shadow]

I've always agreed with the idea of limiting game starts.

Part of the problem, I think, is that too many people are on too many auto sign-up lists.
Instead of limiting the number of games running, maybe we should limit the number of active games anyone can participate in.
This would also leave more room for noobs to join a game without feeling overwhelmed, while at the same time gaining more players in general to add to the base WW games, thus actually crateting a reason for all the differeent variations.

Thoughts?

As I tend to hibernate in the winter (and Spring is finally here) my time will be limited from here on out.
I don't plan on playing in any more than two games at a time until at least fall.

[Atreyu the Masked LLama]

I disagree with limiting the number of games a person can be in. Its unpleasant if you are in the max, but wanted to be in a new one, only to miss the deadline and then the next day "GLARG! I was eaten by wolves!"

I don't think any rules need to be enforced, I think we need to use common sense as players. Raldor for instance, limits his games. You can, too. Just decide on your personal maximum and stick with it.

Its true that many of the games are similar but they are branching out and adding their own unique twists.

Rebels has a vastly different system
Empire has different win conditions (doesn't it?)
Pirates has new roles and other possibilities in the future. (we're looking forward to part III already, but the Peter Pan idea seems like such a great idea on 2 hours of sleep.)
Werewolf has apparently a plethora of different gimmicks and themes.
Alien invasion has new mechanics if it starts up again.
Bandits introduces a new monetary system. Fun times!

I think the only thing that needs to be systemized is starting times.

[Jontom Xire]

I third the idea for WW games being limited.

I haven't played in many, but I've already got one excel book for all my WW games, and I've currently got 6 tabs, with three waiting to start. Although they're all loads of fun.

Really? I do one excel spreadsheet per game and use multiple tabs - one general notes page and one for each round of voting, tracking the votes three ways. I used to just track the votes1 way but used to miss some important information - or have to do it from memory.

[Lucky]

I offer an alternative

Turn the "auto-sign" list into an auto-notify list. If the auto-lynch problem in WWCIII came from the fact that people had forgotten they registered, the auto-sign could produce similar consequences.

This could work, but it also means more work and more PMs sent by the narrators.
But really, if everyone's getting a role PM anyways, the problem of people forgetting about seems unlikely. I doubt notifying people would help much, since they're getting PMed anyways.

I propose that, rather than limiting the number of games going on at once, we limit the number of games that participants can be in. I would suggest we cap people at 3 different werewolf games at one time. If they're dead in one game, they no longer count as being in the game for purposes of the limit.

This I'm disagree with. While it really is becoming a problem with people getting auto-lynched, the people who get auto-lynched, more often than not, are not in more than 3 games. They just lose interest and/or forget they are in it.

Furthermore, I suggest that the narrators/co-narrators be barred from narrating more than one game at a time (it's a killer!) and from participating in another game while narrating (so that they can devote their full attention, and to reduce the chance of biased judgments)

I agree with the first point wholly. If you're narrating a WW game, you shouldn't be narrating a second one as well.
I also semi-agree with the second point, but I just have trouble seeing it being used.

[Castaras]

Really? I do one excel spreadsheet per game and use multiple tabs - one general notes page and one for each round of voting, tracking the votes three ways. I used to just track the votes1 way but used to miss some important information - or have to do it from memory.

I find it simpler for me just to put all the information I need on one page. Mostly because I prefer seeing all the information in one place.

[Shadow]

I disagree with limiting the number of games a person can be in. Its unpleasant if you are in the max, but wanted to be in a new one, only to miss the deadline and then the next day "GLARG! I was eaten by wolves!"

You know, on second thought, agree with you.

That's why I asked for thoghts!

I'm already limiting myself throughout the spring and summer.
I figure working 60 hours, spending time with my girl, spending time with my friends, spending time with my family, playing two WW type games, playing two PbP games and actually finding time to ride my mountainbike will be enough.

[Alarra]

I disagree completely with the idea that you cannot be in any other games when you are narrating them. A lot of people do perfectly fine narrating as well as playing another one.

Narrating more than one? Probably not the best idea, but I don't think that we need to make it an official rule. It depends on the person. Look at yourself....could you narrate more than one game....AND give each one the attention it deserves? For most people that would be a no....but some people could.

And limiting the number of games people are in? I don't think that's a good idea either. Some people have time and can join all of them and keep them straight and give them the attention they deserve, and a lot of the games are very different.

That being said, I definitely think staggering start dates is a must.

Currently....I feel that I am in far too many games, and I am relieved that Aliens seems to have fallen through and that I'm dead in VI, so that's something I'm going to refrain from trying to do in the future, but I don't think it's something we should force people to follow.

[Joosbawx]

That's actually probably the best way, Alarra. I know that I don't want to be the one that has to police who's playing gin what and died when so is free to join that except for they're narrating this. Ugh!

If people just decide what they want to play in, and stick with it, then that's best. Also, with what Death did at the beginning of his game, it eliminates some of those that forgot about the game before roles are assigned.

[Gnome Barbarian]

I think you just want to Narrate more than one game. Pirates and my WW but understandable my WW is going to be the best.

[Alarra]

Hey, I turned down narrating a third at once. It's not my fault people want my organizational skills.

[Castaras]

I might try and restart Alien Invasion, if people want it to start sometime. I'll wait though, since there seems to be other games going on at the moment. And only if PGCoD doesn't mind.

[Gnome Barbarian]

I know...Your organization skills are unequalled and that is why I asked you to be my co-narrator. You are the Goddess of Perfectly Organized Pudding in the Playground.

[Supagoof]

Hey, I turned down narrating a third at once. It's not my fault people want my organizational skills.

That and your GM ability to PM more then 5 at once, plus your ability to edit threads that aren't yours. In a D&D world, you bring a lot of bonuses to the table.

I'm definitely up for starting a a timed start to games. Since there are many versions with more cooking up in the back of people's minds, I'm sure.

As for limiting people, leave that up to them. You need to decide if you can commit to X number of games. It shouldn't be the narrator's job to continously PM you to make sure you realized the game has started. They have a lot to do.
There are things that a narrator can do to assist with this.

A. Label the start time in the name of the thread.
B. Send the PM to each player giving them a role, even if they are a villager. Sometimes it's easy to group all those who are un-assigned a role into the "All the rest are villagers" category, but that creates the "I never received a PM letting me know the game had started" excuse.
C. Change the title of your thread as it corresponds to the game. Enrollment. Started. Closed. Ended. Etc....

I propose this again. Start a thread a week. If you get eliminated from one WW game, then at most you'll have to wait 6 days before the next one starts. Thus if you always want to be in X number of games, you can. If a mass auto-lynch happens, oh well. 6 days is not a long time.

But what counts as a start? Is it enrollment? is it when the game starts? I'd prefer to say enrollment, and make the enrollment period a week. Then, we systematically have one game enrolling at a time, plus one game starting each week. Of course, start time (kill narrator, PM's sent) could be weekly and work well too, as long as we say enrollment is open to at least 7+ days.

Since the games last 3+ weeks, I know after one ends we want to start the next one right away (It's exciting and fun), but I think if we just relax, wait out until our next start time (pending on schedule setup), then we'll not only stop the craziness, but we'll also be able to build more robust games. (Better stories, more thoughts on improvements or twists, etc....).

I also propose this. According to Llama's list, we have 7 games. (I putting 2 in for WW, 1 for WW and 1 for WWC). So, every 7th week one of those should start. If someone comes up with a new version they want to try, they would get added after the 7th week, turning it into an 8 week rotation. (And if they can convince one of the other versions to switch their spot in line, that would be fine too.)

My two cents.....

[Joosbawx]

I could live with the above without any difficulty at all.

[The Valiant Turtle]

I like a lot of what I'm seeing. I definitely agree with turning the auto-sign up list into an auto-notify list. That really just seems like common sense.

I also agree with just limiting games by starting time, and it doesn't really matter how you define starting time. One a week is good, but it probably depends on how many people we want in the average game. If you limit it to one every other week, the games are probably going to have a lot more people signed up. Personally I think 25-30 people makes for a good game, and perhaps even less than that. Mafia II was pretty riveting and had a pretty small number of players. If you start one only every other week I have a feeling the numbers would get alot higher.

In order to make it easier for multiple narrators to update a post is there any reason we can't make a few narrator accounts and any co-narrators can share the password? I've checked the forum rules and I don't see anything against sharing accounts. For example, me and Supagoof could create a Bandits_Narrator account so that either of us could update the first post and if necessary create a distinctive avatar (although mine is pretty distinctive I think). When it's over we can just hand off the account password to the next narrators. The same could be done for the other WW games of course.

[Alarra]

No. While that would make it easier to update the first post of games, having alternate accounts will soon be not allowed at all. Sharing accounts like that could end up with someone abusing them as well. And what happens 6 or 7 rounds in when a previous narrator decides to login and change things in their favor? Not that I'm saying that's likely to happen, but it's something to consider.

And I think that 'start time' should be defined as when the game actually starts, not sign-up. For example, say WW VI were to end, sign-up for WW VII, could begin right away, but it would have to wait to actually start until its assigned spot in the rotation. And I very much do like the idea of having a rotation.

[The Valiant Turtle]

This is just to let you know that my post on page 8 has been updated with the winners listed for most of the games.

[inky13112]

I agree that auto sign up should be changed to aut notify, as people lose interests in these boards and games all the time, but if they don't ask to be taken off the sign up lists they continue to be added to games over and over, and a role PM doesn't help someone who never goes to the boards notice anything.

If we do change to auto notify, I'd like to be taken off all the lists, as I'm not going to add more work for the narrators when I can notice the games myself without clogging my PM box.

Paranoia Mk. 2 got canceled, and the computer won paranoia one. Heh thanks for posting that, I got to read the paranoia threads and finally understand all this 4th degree! Blue Serpent! nonsense. [insert smiley face, too lazy to hit go advanced and put in a real one]

[Alarra]

I still don't understand the 4th degree! blue serpent! rivalry with decken and dld? weren't you both in the 4th degree? and in my sect of it? Or am I confused? I know it was me and the two of you on a team, until I betrayed you.

And I'm a fan of autonotify rather than sign-up.
And yeah, I don't think it's necessary to be on an autonotify list. I do however, think that all narrators need to post here when a game is recruiting.

[inky13112]

Basically Captain Van der Decken was really a blue serpent person, and he was spying on your side. DLD really really trusted him, so when it turned out he was a liar, a fun little rivalry was born. Apparently you fell for it too. For the Blue 4th Degree!

[Eldritch Knight]

Actually, Van Der Decken was under my command. As I recall, I asked him to go deep cover. It worked, didn't it?

[Supagoof]

You know, I did some checking. Most of the WW games have lasted at most 6 weeks. So with 7 types, at a week a piece, we could easily make this work.

I shall look up some more stuff tomorrow, and figure out a proposed order for start, based on future games and where the current ones are at.

As for the every other week, a good thought. However since the games are able to grow and shrink without much difficulty (add a role, drop a role) I do not see why a game a week will not work. This may also help those who sign up for every game with figuring out a balance to how any games they can play. With the rotation and average game length, only the very skillfull of players could possibly be in 6 games at once. And I doubt if you devote that much attention to a game to last to the end that you would be able to do that to 6 games at a time. Though some of you are quite the masters.

Google spreadsheets is pretty nice for coordinating between narrators, so even if PMs are sent to only one and not the other, it can be easily remedied by sharing the spreadsheet.

[DarkLightDragon]

I still don't understand the 4th degree! blue serpent! rivalry with decken and dld? weren't you both in the 4th degree? and in my sect of it? Or am I confused? I know it was me and the two of you on a team, until I betrayed you.

You are confused.

***memory lane***

And you also had police powers. Which you used to betray me (JX told me how I died and said it was someone from my own society with police powers).

What was funny too is Death, the Blue Serpent leader, made a deal with me to gang up on Decken (Selrahc ended up getting killed, but he was also Blue Serpent). And I got to control his votes in exchange for letting him live.

He was like "We must eliminate 4th Degree!" And I was like "Yeah... right..." *shifty eyes*

One more thing? The 4th Degree leader was the very first player to get killed (we are still the chaaaaaaampions!).

***end memory lane***

And now... 4TH DEGREE!

[Death, your friend the Reaper]

What was funny too is Death, the Blue Serpent leader, made a deal with me to gang up on Decken (Selrahc ended up getting killed, but he was also Blue Serpent). And I got to control his votes in exchange for letting him live.

He was like "We must eliminate 4th Degree!" And I was like "Yeah... right..." *shifty eyes*

Look, look, I was just trying to join up with you until I could backstab you, I knew a lot, yet couldn't get enough of my team to actually be active. (I also believed I only voted with you once as well) At the moment all those "troops" of mine where inactive. I had no one to support me.



It was a lonely time.

[Selrahc]

I knew a lot, yet couldn't get enough of my team to actually be active.

Yeah... the chain of command broke right down. We knew a few Blue Serpents. All of whom were inactive throughout the game, and were autolynched.

Sigh.

[Supagoof]

As promised...

{table]Week Start|Game|Version|Players (Left)|Start Date
4/1/2007|Pirates|2|Recruit|1-Apr
4/8/2007|Mafia|3|Recruit|8-Apr
4/15/2007|Ye Oide West|1|Recruit|16-Apr
4/22/2007|Rebellion|1|13|13-Mar
4/29/2007|Werewolves|6|22|27-Feb
5/6/2007|Aliens|1|24|9-Feb
5/13/2007|Empire|1|30?|12-Mar
5/20/2007|Werewolves Classic|3|31|22-Mar[/table]Does this work for a schedule? As for Paranoia, I'm not certain where it would fall on this list, probably before Rebellion, if we wanted to add it on and someone was going to narrate it.

Start date is when recruitment closes and the game kicks off it's first day/night.

Player (Left) are the number of players according to the first page that are left playing the game (for those that have an updated first page.....). My counts for those that didn't have the amount on the first page may be innacurate.

I ordered mostly by players left, then by start date. Some games (Aliens) haven't yet started due to technical difficulties, so there are a lot ofplayers left, even though the start date is way back when.

Mafia - I'm not certain if this is re-cruiting yet, or who would be running the next version, but I'll update that when I know more.

So, yay or neigh on this schedule. I figure with the number of players in the games, if we have 15 of one or the other that would be the majority.

Yays - 9
Neighs -
Thog - 1

I vote yay, of course.

edit: @V Thanks Kyrian - I fixed the formatting.