And most of my posts there are simply venting rage at the banking jackals who rape and pillage with impunity.
We use the money for good.
And most of my posts there are simply venting rage at the banking jackals who rape and pillage with impunity.
We use the money for good.
I need money for other things as well, so I am so in favour of this you have no idea.So if we are going to start bribing people, we are going to need to put together a team and knock off a few banks to fund the project.
And the truth is revealed.
You are a bankster. It all makes sense now.
I did that just last game. Is this really the reason we've been driving away existing and potential players?About zombiesm. Ironhead, what I think annoys people is your insistance that everyone motivate every vote every day and especially the first two days. If there is nothing to go on then whatever you say your first vote will be either random, meta gaming or possibly driven by role playing. Saying which it is doesn't really add anything. If you just wait a day or two into the game before bitching about this I think people would listen more.
We have the same problem that we had in June 2008. It has become a sclerotic, anemic game that will not attract people.Ironhead, we simply do not get... the problem.
Your opinion has been duly noted. I am interested in hearing some other opinions as well.You are delusional. Just because some people do not agree with your approach to playing does not mean the games are not good or the players suck. Kriszo's game was as good as any, We had all of our active players in and a simple setup. It was a superb game. Nobody is coming in here and then leaving because they do not like the way the village handles itself. The reality is that they are simply not coming in here period.
If you want to argue about voting strategy fine. But please, the game does not suck just because it is not played the way you want it to be played. People are not stupid or bad players ruining the game just because they agree with my approach and help me get information.
Nobody is coming in here and then leaving because they do not like the way the village handles itself.
Please don't feel you need to respond to this; no one wants to see this devolve into an indictment of your playing style.Werewolf has become chess.
One of the reasons I'll be leaving after this game is over.
Please don't feel you need to respond to this; no one wants to see this devolve into an indictment of your playing style.
I WISSH U WUD LEEEAAVE WWEEERWOLLF FORREVERE!
I did that just last game. Is this really the reason we've been driving away existing and potential players?
The first rule for getting yourself out of a hole is to stop digging. I'm offering us a plan for doing just that; this WW community is in the same straits it was back when Skarion hosted that stupid Austin Powah game (to his credit, Skarion had the sense not to blame it on not enough people noticing the game). If you are unconvinced that there is a problem, then keep digging.
Remember -- people who surf the Paradox forums are a high-probability population for surfing other forums that offer WW (or forums that are dedicated entirely to WW; it is no longer the novelty it was even 5 years ago). What do we offer here at the Paradox forum that they cannot get elsewhere? A few positives that I like about this forum include unrestricted private messaging, fast turnover of games, excellent camaraderie, and open-mindedness about rule tweaks. But I fear the negatives will repel those potential new recruits; negatives such as me pleading with players to vote with their heads, not their cocks (or so johho888 identified).
Food for thought; are our positives enough of an incentive to entice potential players to our forum and not the next URL down the block? What does everyone perceive as our negatives or shortcomings?
Exactly -- it was either live within the confines of one thread in the OT forum; or live without boundaries here at the subforum with one thread at OT. That was how we wanted it -- to have more than just the one thread they were restricting us to.We weren't forced here. We wanted it. We had asked for it. Just look in the WW Social Group for all the discussions we had. It's all recorded there from December 2008 to now.
Exactly -- it was either live within the confines of one thread in the OT forum; or live without boundaries here at the subforum with one thread at OT. That was how we wanted it -- to have more than just the one thread they were restricting us to.
I had a long response written wherein a compared the number of players in each big game since we started playing in this forum -- and then I clicked the wrong button and it disappeared into the ether forever.And finally, we will see if your hypothesis is correct. After this game I will probably have to take a break for a bit. Perhaps all these people that have been run off by my horrible, game destroying style of play will appear out of nowhere when I am gone. Perhaps now that they know there will be no vote switches they will all be ready and eager to become active Werewolf players.
No, no, that's not correct at all. We had EIGHT threads, or maybe it was NINE. Whatever it was, it was far too many, and Blade! locked up every single one of them. As I recall, after a couple of days he unlocked one so we could finish the big game. While we were finishing, a couple of us initiated negotiations with him to apologize and see what we could do to police ourselves. He indicated that he and Stonewall were trying to decide whether or not to ban WW entirely; in the face of possible extinction, we proposed a subforum. Blade! advocated for us and got us a subforum. All WW threads moved over to the subforum except for that one big WW game; when it ended, Blade! said we could keep one thread in OT, for advertising new games.We had TWO threads, not one.
No, no, that's not correct at all. We had EIGHT threads, or maybe it was NINE. Whatever it was, it was far too many, and Blade! locked up every single one of them. As I recall, after a couple of days he unlocked one so we could finish the big game. While we were finishing, a couple of us initiated negotiations with him to apologize and see what we could do to police ourselves. He indicated that he and Stonewall were trying to decide whether or not to ban WW entirely; in the face of possible extinction, we proposed a subforum. Blade! advocated for us and got us a subforum. All WW threads moved over to the subforum except for that one big WW game; when it ended, Blade! said we could keep one thread in OT, for advertising new games.
Remember the zeitgeist of the time; we were tapdancing on the last nerve of the mods. I distinctly recall a thread started by one of the OTers asking the mods to ban WW from OT, and it had overwhelming support - several pages of OTers clamoring for us to get the boot (not that we helped ourselves; I think the input that WWers had on that thread was "vote jonti", "no, vote Lemeard, heh heh")
But I want to make two points here; first, we were still getting games of 40 or more players even a year after the subforum opened. There were ebbs and flows; some games of 25 or less, followed abruptly by games of 35 or so. Reviewing these games, I am seeing the names of shitloads of rookies who have since disappeared: New players were recruited into this subforum; the subforum is not the problem. The problem is we could not retain them..
The following still play here from time to time:
Eu_proof, Hellvink, Jingles, PhilleP, tweek, Justinian_A, hebelecan, The Arch Mede, Yi0717, Jerard, Emperor Walter, Saintis, Sudaxe, JDMS.
About 40% of the names you listed.