I hate the algo. I hate the very idea of the algo.
I realize I'm a noob and that I've only played in one and a half games, but I think it's pretty clear that the algorithm trivializes the game. I'm certain that I'm not the first to post something like this.
Casting games amount to bizarro Big Brother. The algo makes all of the nominations for the duration of the game. So no player interaction there. The algo also boots off one inactive player each round. So that's eight players kicked by the algorithm. And then the finals are entirely determined by the algo, so that's four more players dependent on it. That means that in a 20-player game, only eight players are eliminated based on player input, and when you factor in the way the nominations are handled, then the players' influence is diminished that much more.
I want my success in the game to be based on strategic game-playing instead of almost solely on my level of activity.
I imagine that the mission for the site is somewhat balanced between offering a true game experience and offering a social community. It's the difference between finding players and finding playmates. You could either offer a full, true reality game experience, dictated solely by the players, or you could water it down and develop your community by having your algorithm pick off the quiet ones.
I consider myself a gamesman - I would rather play the damn thing that worry about fostering a community. But I'm on the far end of the spectrum.
However, I think the concept of the algo is way too far on the other side of the spectrum. If the algorithm is convoluted and mysterious, then nobody's actually playing a game. Who the crap understands what plussing and negging actually does for you anyway? If the algorithm is going to favor the active players in a casting game, then they're going to make it to the end regardless. Then you've got nothing but a glorified chat room.
Forgive me if I'm off base here: Shouldn't we be trying to build a COMMUNITY of GAMERS? Find that middle ground? Eye em aych oh, the algo as it is doesn't respect the games it moderates, and substantially diminishes my enjoyment of them.
That's not to say that the idea is all bad. Yes, eliminating inactives is always going to be good for a game. Just don't pick off an "inactive" every round if the concept isn't strongly and distinctly defined. Maybe boot someone if they haven't posted for 24 hours? 12 hours? I don't know, just come up with something definite.
End casting games with a jury vote! Holy cow this is huge! Who wants a random finish among four players? Why don't you just let the algo resolve ties?
There seems to be a lot of emphasis on speed here, while still maintaining a uniform duration. Every casting game is 9 days, 12 hours each. It's reasonable to want these games to go quickly, but I don't think it's unreasonable to let players determine their own pace. Provide a minimum and a maximum time window for each phase of the game, and proceed based on whether or not all necessary input is collected within that window. Then you might be able to string together a REAL NOMINATION PROCESS in your casting games. I won't get into all of the details of how I see that one working - maybe a future blog post.
I realize I hold no clout here, but I've got a lot of ideas of how the gameplay side of things can be improved here. Much more than just a single blog post.
Randomize, I'd love to see that algo of yours. I'd love to understand exactly how it works. I'm a programmer myself - I'd love to see that code. I've had considerable hosting experience in the online world and I take these games quite seriously. I'd love to bounce my ideas off of you. I'd love to learn the site's limitations and restrictions. I'd love to learn your vision for this ambitious project.
I'd love to give this place a nice cleansing spell-check.
that is a lot to read, but i got the just of it. keep playing castings until you get enough karma and T$ to get the yellow level. then you can play Rookies games, the algo has les to do with those games. good luck.
