Balance is Off And Players Are Partially At Fault

[zoraster]

sorry. i'll set it up for AOL compatibility next time.

5 Town Wins off the top of my head. It's possible it's a statistical fluke. I don't think that's likely though.

[Quilford]

This is fascinating. ty zoraster!

[borkjerfkin]

xenoblade came down to a 3p lylo choice and easily could've gone the other way.

Still this is pretty fascinating.

[Tamuz]

I'm not really sure small sample results based analysis is that great for measuring game balance.

On top of that the players are not to blame, it is not their job to force game-creation to prioritize balance over everything else, that is the mod and the mod communities fault. Don't pass the buck to players.

[Magua]

Thesis is that players find games where Town wins less enjoyable than games where Town loses, and that setup designers respond to that.

[Tamuz]

And yet the conclusion blames the town, rather than the designers.

[zoraster]

It's not except when players expect something they call balance that is not actually balanced. As for sample size, the size is now fairly large that we can say that the games overall are not balanced with a reasonable degree of certainty.

[SleepyKrew]

It looks like it's blaming everyone to me.

[zoraster]

Oh and the conclusion blames both the players and the mods. The mods are obviously and directly at fault, but they do not act in a vacuum.

[Tamuz]

I really don't think placing blame on the players is fair or valid in this case.

You assert, and I agree that player's prioritize enjoyment over balance, it is unfair then to say that player's expect balance (relative to their enjoyment).

I'd posit, this is a game we play for fun, the masses prioritize fun. I don't really see much of an issue here. The issue comes when you start blaming, it is in essence saying "You are all playing mafia for the wrong reasons." I really don't like that. Players of free online games should always prioritize enjoyment. If another priority is important and should be pushed it won't be by the masses, the elite (mods in this case) are the ones with the onus to balance the ideal and the popular priorities, not the masses. If the priorities are theoretically out of whack, again its the mod's who are failing.

---

If size is large enough you can do a p-test or some other confidence measure. But 5 town win examples, if I remember correctly, is

not

large enough

[Porochaz]

This irritates me. Its not really anyones fault as I don't believe there is anyone to fault.

Apart from anything else (ie. not my main point) Bastard mods have become a big thing recently. Id reckon that factors in a huge amount, and your running a theme game, depending on the player base they might focus too much on the flavour etc.

Besides, one of the main things stopping me from running a large theme at the moment, and I have wanted to for a long time, however quite frankly, I don't want anonymous surveys done about my modding and stats being collated to constantly tell me the stuff Im doing run. It's very downheartening for mods to hear "your doing this, this and this wrong" and the players as well in this case. Its a game, and whilst there does have to be a semblance of balance to keep the game fun this intensive analysing worries me. If there is a problem with my modding, I want players to PM me or post in the thread. Rather than secretly tell the list mod at the end of the game, because how does that solve anything in the end?

These results are interesting, I will accept, Id put it down to the culture we've developed of less analysis, more gut rather than balance, with all the hoops we have to jump through to get the game balanced I think its unfair to suggest that balance is to blame without looking at the setups themself.

[Mr. Flay]

Bastard mods have become a big thing recently.

These should also be broken out. "Enjoyment" is too vague of a term in a game this complex.

I do think the overall balance numbers are good information to have, Bastardy aside.

[Antihero]

Overall "enjoyment" has less to do with the setup and more to do with the player list.

Except for when the setup is buzzkillingly broken or awful.

[talah]

Then the question is, are players liable to respond to improvements which are out of their direct control?

[Faraday]

Apart from anything else (ie. not my main point) Bastard mods have become a big thing recently. Id reckon that factors in a huge amount, and your running a theme game, depending on the player base they might focus too much on the flavour etc.

I don't think there have been a particularly large amount of bastard games recently, certainly no more than other times. (I remember 3-4 going on quite quickly after each other a few years ago)

Besides, one of the main things stopping me from running a large theme at the moment, and I have wanted to for a long time, however quite frankly, I don't want anonymous surveys done about my modding and stats being collated to constantly tell me the stuff Im doing run. It's very downheartening for mods to hear "your doing this, this and this wrong" and the players as well in this case. Its a game, and whilst there does have to be a semblance of balance to keep the game fun this intensive analysing worries me. If there is a problem with my modding, I want players to PM me or post in the thread.

Rather than secretly tell the list mod at the end of the game, because how does that solve anything in the end?

How does getting feedback on what you've done wrong help? Um, isn't that kind of obvious. Also people are more likely to be honest when anonymous about stuff like this. I mean, it's not like you're force fed your stats, either. You can just "not know". Personally I think placing an emphasis on a higher standard of modding is a good thing.

[zoraster]

People DO expect balance in most games. That comes through loud and clear in the comments I receive on these surveys. I could start testing for salience of issues, but I don't want these surveys to become some arduous task. Players often know that balance is difficult to achieve, but they do care. Certainly not

all

game they care about it -- for example in my own The Fortnight it was purposefully designed

not

to be balanced in any traditional sort of way. Some others might also be designed without a care for balance, but the difference is that they generally don't start off with a premise of "this isn't going to be balanced." If they did, players likely wouldn't be upset when it's not.

So I don't think it's at all that I'm saying players are caring about the wrong things. I'm saying that in their head their idea of what constitutes balance isn't correct. In other words, I'm saying, "players care about balance. But balance isn't what they think it is." And I stand by that.

For what it's worth, I give moderators and option to hear their results. I never tell them without them saying okay. Honestly, with few exceptions, it seems most mods want to be critical of their own performance and want to hear the results, even when it's bad. I think that's important to self-improvement. I think you get a very different look at what players really think when you have an anonymous survey (well, anonymous to the mod, not to me) rather than just expect people to take the initiative to PM or write in post game chat.

Regardless, I don't just use this survey to yell at mods. I also use it to try and provide positive feedback for mods that have done well. Overall, mods are doing a good job:



Last, I'd argue that any game where the bastard game was not announced as bastard should still be included. If you announce beforehand you're doing some mod screw or whatever, okay maybe not. But of the results I have, I'm not sure any have been announced as such.

[zoraster]

People DO expect balance in most games. That comes through loud and clear in the comments I receive on these surveys. I could start testing for salience of issues, but I don't want these surveys to become some arduous task. Players often know that balance is difficult to achieve, but they do care. Certainly not

all

game they care about it -- for example in my own The Fortnight it was purposefully designed

not

to be balanced in any traditional sort of way. Some others might also be designed without a care for balance, but the difference is that they generally don't start off with a premise of "this isn't going to be balanced." If they did, players likely wouldn't be upset when it's not.

So I don't think it's at all that I'm saying players are caring about the wrong things. I'm saying that in their head their idea of what constitutes balance isn't correct. In other words, I'm saying, "players care about balance. But balance isn't what they think it is." And I stand by that.

For what it's worth, I give moderators and option to hear their results. I never tell them without them saying okay. Honestly, with few exceptions, it seems most mods want to be critical of their own performance and want to hear the results, even when it's bad. I think that's important to self-improvement. I think you get a very different look at what players really think when you have an anonymous survey (well, anonymous to the mod, not to me) rather than just expect people to take the initiative to PM or write in post game chat.

Regardless, I don't just use this survey to yell at mods. I also use it to try and provide positive feedback for mods that have done well. Overall, mods are doing a good job:



Last, I'd argue that any game where the bastard game was not announced as bastard should still be included. If you announce beforehand you're doing some mod screw or whatever, okay maybe not. But of the results I have, I'm not sure any have been announced as such.

[Faraday]

I think a lot of the problem with balance in town wins is that people see a lot of power roles or how they worked well when a town win and think "oh that made it easy", but don't realise you need a fairly large number of pr's to balance a large theme. I think there's something playersd in general feel very satisfying about winning through "pure" scumhunting, which is ideal but we're not good enough in general for that to happen.

Although I'd argue a number of my games have been town sided, if anything, and still been won by scum? Could it be that I'm not giving town enough power to "really" balance it? Possibly, but I don't think that's the case. Certain times there's no way to balance for certain things town players will do - e.g. fakeclaiming a daycop guilty, which effectively gives the mafia 2 free nightkills.

Have you any stats for enjoyment w/r/t how "close" a game is? I have noticed that players in dead qt's etc tend to get very involved when the in thread game is close and goes down to the wire.

[zoraster]

I don't. Kind of a hard stat to quantify easily.

[Benmage]

I think a lot of the problem with balance in town wins is that people see a lot of power roles or how they worked well when a town win and think "oh that made it easy", but don't realise you need a fairly large number of pr's to balance a large theme. I think there's something playersd in general feel very satisfying about winning through "pure" scumhunting, which is ideal but we're not good enough in general for that to happen.

Although I'd argue a number of my games have been town sided, if anything, and still been won by scum? Could it be that I'm not giving town enough power to "really" balance it? Possibly, but I don't think that's the case.

Certain times there's no way to balance for certain things town players will do - e.g. fakeclaiming a daycop guilty, which effectively gives the mafia 2 free nightkills.

Have you any stats for enjoyment w/r/t how "close" a game is? I have noticed that players in dead qt's etc tend to get very involved when the in thread game is close and goes down to the wire.

HOW MANY TIMES DO I NEED TO TELL YOU FARDAY

Balance for the damn r'tards. If the whole population is retarded. And town are going to represent 70-75% of the game, that's 2-3 times the retard potential.

Noone accounts for how shitty people play these days. SO yeah, I blame mods like Faraday for not accounting for shit play by town.

Scum is soooo easy to play its really quite sad.

[Benmage]

**I think part of the problem in this generation is a reliance on Power Roles to achieve town wins. Therefore the games become a lot more chance oriented... and mods tend too put to many PRs in to try and help, and games become wacky.
--Plus it has led to a degradation in scum hunting abilities.... twiddle twiddle till the cop tells us who to lynch. I think we should revolutionize the site, and ban cops.

Anywhose...

This was a balanced game insofar as I think it leaned town. The Wire
This game I think leaned scum, (town win).. Although probably balanced enough and certainly better than most, largely because it was just a low PR game. Yolo
This game's "balanced".. just shit town play lol.. (strong personalities ftl)Harry Potter
--Every Faraday asoif is scum sided 100%.

Just a little sample, I think it's the players moreso than the mods... but that might just be my experience. (albiet there's a couple mini's where its just like wtf, but didn't include because this is LG theme talk)

[N]

I think a lot of the problem with balance in town wins is that people see a lot of power roles or how they worked well when a town win and think "oh that made it easy", but don't realise you need a fairly large number of pr's to balance a large theme. I think there's something playersd in general feel very satisfying about winning through "pure" scumhunting, which is ideal but we're not good enough in general for that to happen.

Although I'd argue a number of my games have been town sided, if anything, and still been won by scum? Could it be that I'm not giving town enough power to "really" balance it? Possibly, but I don't think that's the case.

Certain times there's no way to balance for certain things town players will do - e.g. fakeclaiming a daycop guilty, which effectively gives the mafia 2 free nightkills.

Have you any stats for enjoyment w/r/t how "close" a game is? I have noticed that players in dead qt's etc tend to get very involved when the in thread game is close and goes down to the wire.

HOW MANY TIMES DO I NEED TO TELL YOU FARDAY

Balance for the damn r'tards. If the whole population is retarded. And town are going to represent 70-75% of the game, that's 2-3 times the retard potential.

Noone accounts for how shitty people play these days. SO yeah, I blame mods like Faraday for not accounting for shit play by town.

Scum is soooo easy to play its really quite sad.

How do you balance for an idiot fakeclaiming a daycop guilty?

[Benmage]

Design games "townsided." And play will make them balanced.

[Faraday]

--Every Faraday asoif is scum sided 100%.

A Feast for Crows was definitely town sided if you go back and check the setup. Multi ball (Clash of Kings, Dance with Dragons) is definitely harder to balance but I think clash was very swingy but balanced, too. (Although ew sk + mafia + mafia isn't something I'd do again.

I would agree that if you're going to "lean" one way you should try and lean towards a town sided setup, as town invariably find some way to fuck it up. I purposefuly tried to do that with The Wire, and I think the invitationals I ran were reasonably balanced as well.

It's hard though, because you get one chance and the results don't often reflect how balanced the setup is; so you get one shot and then one dumb move can just make the whole thing look much worse than it is. So, it's hard to know if you can learn anything from running a setup (Unlike opens which have data).

[Tamuz]

What was the response bias like, zoro?

That is, what percent of the responses were from prolific players who actually read and respond on MD and what percent were from Joe casual?