What to do about Inactives?

[Judge Sam]

I need your help on what is the best way to get rid of inactive players.


Beforehand though, I need you to see all the perspectives, not just the perspective of an awesomely active player. For example, two people could both be incredibly active and sign on AIM 2 hours a day. But because one has work at night and the other has school during the day, they'd never be online at the same time (except maybe around Exiles or Imprisonments). Neither is "inactive" despite them never meeting. You may have perceived people to be inactive when they were not.


Second, I need you to see it from the perspective of a player who is thinking about applying to Spies. Probably the worst reputation a game series can have is that it removes players from it for no reason. Pulling out inactives is an *extreme* last result and not something I think about doing unless completely necessary. I want all rules and guidelines for removal of inactive players posted before the game begins so I can follow it to the letter.


So, unless I'm missing something, there are three ways to remove an inactive player (each of which happened once in Spies 3!)


Just pull them out - Like Sujata, after they have not voted two or three times or just disappeared for about a week without any notice, I would just announce that they are no longer part of the game.

The good thing about this is the players are happy (if it is incredibly clear that the person is gone). The biggest problem with this is that it disrupts the game plan. Pulling out 2 people affects it some, but pulling out just 1 throws everything off. If I could pull out 2 inactives at once I probably would, but of course that rarely happens and I can't guess that someone will or will not go inactive weeks down the road.


Imprison them - I like this one. Spies should be imprisoning inactive type people anyway. Unfortunately I cannot grasp the perspective of spies when this happens so I must ask for their opinion. I might move this type of removal to go to the first inactive. I don't really think this is a big loss for the Spies or the game if this happens, but I could be wrong.


Exile them - This has been the standard way for most of the series. It has it's ups and downs. It's based in the "self-vote" penalty and Survivor-type voting systems. Some people suggested that if someone gets enough self-votes they should be removed AND another player who got the most 'real' Exile votes should be pulled out.

I don't know how I feel about this suggestion, as it has all of the problems of scenario 1 (me just pulling them out) plus a negative of removing someone else from the game. I understand how Citizens want to choose someone to get further evidence, but most of the times this has happened it's been Citizens they've been trying to Exile and actually receive a bonus in disguise by having them not go.

One of the biggest things about this I don't like has to do with Spies 2. In Spies 2 if we did what has been suggested - pull the inactive then and vote out the person with the most votes - both Rodney and Nicole would have been voted out really early. The idea of having those two quality players gone so quickly would have changed the game completely, and I'm not sure for the better. Making a decision that could cause something like that to happen isn't something I like thinking about. But that's just one side to it.


It really sucks that there has to be so much effort and thought of getting rid of people who put little effort or thought towards the game in the first place. But that's the facts of it.

[Bruce]

I think just removing them is the best way to go about it, that way the spies' imprisonments aren't wasted on a player that isn't within their strategy and the citizens don't lose an opportunity to exile a spy because one of their own mofos didn't want to keep their commitment to the game.
If someone misses two votes in a row without notice they should be flogged and/or killed ;D Inactives suck!

[Reicheru]

Pull them out. Second choice, exile them. ABSOLUTE LAST CHOICE, imprison them.

Denying the spies an imprisonment in an episode where the players gets to use powers, make investigations, etc, could kill them stone dead. It could have happened so easily in Spies 2. Less so here, because of a distinct lack of investigations. Nonetheless, a missed imprisonment is about ten times worse than a missed exile.

Denying the citizens an exile benefits the citizens, because they never vote a spy off during those exiles. (Look at history!) I don't know why that is. Probably due to extreme crapness of citizens, but what the heck... That said, it also denies them some knowledge that could benefit them about who might be a citizen and who might not be. For example, say we'd gotten rid of Carrie in episode two. A LOT of preconceptions I'd had would have changed if I'd known she was a citizen. Instead I had to wait three rounds and two imprisonments to find it out. It also meant the spies had a "free" imprisonment.

My thoughts on Tyler still stand. I don't know why you couldn't have taken him out of the game BEFORE that exile. He'd not voted twice, you knew this by the voting deadline of episode 2. There was no reason whatsoever to keep him in the game past that point.

My thoughts on Jordan also still stand, which is that unfortunately I don't think that you had a choice. I probably would have done the same thing in your position. It just sucked for all concerned.

If you have ANY opportunity at all to remove an inactive without costing the players an imprisonment or exile, do it.

[Jack]

Pull out.

[Judge Sam]

My thoughts on Tyler still stand. I don't know why you couldn't have taken him out of the game BEFORE that exile. He'd not voted twice, you knew this by the voting deadline of episode 2. There was no reason whatsoever to keep him in the game past that point.

He was going to be pulled out, but then he returned the night before the Exile was due. He had conversations with people (posted one of them), came online for awhile, and completed the Race. So your last sentence makes no sense.

[Reicheru]

He hadn't voted or posted the required number of conversations though. My point is that he was going anyway, so why waste an exile on him?

Sorry Carrie... I know this would've meant your head...

[Judge Sam]

How was I supposed to know he wouldn't vote / post the 2nd conversation before the deadline? Lots of people come online and post things last minute.


I never make a decision to pull someone out around Exile time because that is the most direct interference I could do. I can't consciously decide between: "Should Tyler go, or Should Tyler and Carrie go" right around the hectic and nervous time of live Exile. That's terrible. What if Carrie was actually a Spy, and I had to make that decision? Then I would be choosing between whether a Spy was caught or not. You can see why I follow all procedures I write before the game starts so I don't have to make decisions like that.

[Reicheru]

That's true. Which is why I think the deadline itself should be the cutoff point. There's got to be a point at which you can say, "OK, this person isn't contributing." The point at which he's failed to vote a second time would be the logical one.

I actually wish there wouldn't be "penalty votes", because in the end, who would they penalize? In cases like Tyler, not him - just the other people in the game with him who have to deal with the mess an inactive causes.

Unfortunately without penalty votes, you've got a whole new problem - because there's less incentive for semi-active players to post conversations or votes. So it's a tough one. But hey, that's why you're the host!

[Judith]

Before accepting someone to be in a game, you should monitor their activity for a couple of days. Then cast them if they suit a good activity level.

[Tenchi]

Interesting point Sam gave...

What if a Spy idles out? I was planning to go on a very big leave if this game got to Episode Ten (school is starting here, and I have to do thesis!). How will the spy be removed? Will he/she be announced as a spy? How will the Spies cope up?

[Judge Sam]

judith said:

Before accepting someone to be in a game, you should monitor their activity for a couple of days. Then cast them if they suit a good activity level.

I do this. Not for days, but for weeks.


Off the top of my head, here are some people who I recall seeing on AIM tons:

Claire
Miles
Jack
Jennipher
Taylor
Leena
Matthew (he is on allll afternoon/evening)
Brooks #1 was online nearly 24/7
Tyler (I talked to him a few times on AIM and saw him online a bunch)
Raphael
Jakub
Anneliese


Here are people who I rarely, if ever, saw on AIM (and I kept my AIM on 24/7 for it to log log-in / log-off times):


Bebe
Arthur
Jordan
Reicheru (time zones)
Bruce


edit: I'm taking off Tenchi, I remember talking to him at least two times before the game about it now. My memory is hazy, I know I talked to Bebe and Reicheru about the game that's just a general feeling that they weren't on as much as others.


As you can see, while it helps sometimes in other times it isn't much of an indicator. =/ Some people just don't have much use for AIM, others stay on AIM all the time but just don't visit the site.


Still I do add them to my buddy list and like to talk to everyone at least once before the game begins. Some people I talk to a bunch and others I don't see on AIM.

[Judge Sam]

Oops, forgot to answer Tenchi: If a Spy idles out it's the exact same thing as a Citizen. Whenever someone is removed I reveal their Identity anyway.


I am actually taking a good look at this now as I am now working on rules clarifications for Spies 4. Thank you for your opinions, I appreciate them.


From what I can tell players strongly prefer that I just remove inactives. Better yet if I have enough applications and it is early in the game I could replace them with someone who wants to play. That would probably be the best way, though it does have its little problems too. Would anyone be against this, say in Episode 1 or 2? Even if the person did things to suggest their Identity before disappearing?


I think in future games I will "build in" a number of inactives. That means the game will be planned as if I am already going to remove 1 or 2 people from it. That also has problems but I think it could work.


The main problem is the even/odd dynamic. I am stubborn about wanting an odd number of votes at Exile in the late stages of the game and I'm not giving that up lol. The problem is, let's say I did what you guys suggested and removed a player. This worries me though as my removal is for the most part subjective. Rarely are there clear cut cases, in fact I think there has only been one so far. If it isn't an obvious decision then obviously that has lots of problems and possible resentment.


Plus if I remove someone and it changes the gameplan of the game, that means I have to change it again to get the right numbers. To you guys who want me to remove people: that means that I have to add an event that eliminates an extra player or add an event that cancels an elimination event. I have to add this in the middle of the game already knowing what's going on. That's not good.


I'm not worried about explaining it to you guys, you guys I know know how Spies works and are understanding of the difficulties. I'm worried about explaining this sudden mid-game change to a new player, one that hasn't even heard of Spies yet but will see an advertisement in a few months and get really into the game. Then mid-game I change something that could possibly disadvantage them and they wonder why I would do something like this! (to them, of course, it is always me doing a personal attack on someone whenever this stuff happens lmao )


Plus removing people makes the game shorter lol. Gosh now I'm back on square one!


I will have to think of this more and lay out the positives/negatives and just pick the one that is the least negative I guess. I really want to work on this so if you have any more ideas please share. Sorry for boring you with behind the scenes junk if you don't care.

[Shane]

Sam, maybe you should come up with a plot for adding in an extra Exile or a challenge to save someone to use in the mid-game if someone gets removed and the numbers are off. If the situation never happens, just carry that over to the next Spies game. Kind of like your tiebreakers in Survivor, just keep it all secret and move it on to the next game.

[Judith]

If someone seems really inactive, I think what you did with Brooks and Josh was really effective. Just replace them with another applicant but use the same character. It may give that person a disadvantage, but it seems to be the best way to make an effective, undistruptive change.

[Tenchi]

admin said:

edit: I'm taking off Tenchi, I remember talking to him at least two times before the game about it now.

Still I do add them to my buddy list and like to talk to everyone at least once before the game begins. Some people I talk to a bunch and others I don't see on AIM.

We talked before the game.

For the record, I don't use AIM much. I'm usually on MSN and YIM. (Clicky those small icons at the left to contact me )

Also, I like Shane's suggestion. A fair way to even out the numbers is to make a challenge that could possibly even things out. For instance, a challenge where the winner is not revealed. If the winner is a Citizen, they receive something like Shane's power (mass-saving from Imprisonment).

[Claire]

tenchi get your booty on aim, screw the other stuff.