Smaller Ques for /Games

[Joe_Magus]

Before I start - Quabbleball is exempt from this due to the fact that 4 players per team is necessary.

I think that certain games in /Games could do with having a small minimum amount of players to start. Games such as Flying, Melting Floor and Spell Wars could be played with 3 people on smaller maps, making games more frequent. There are certain times on the server where It feels impossible to get a game cause everyone wants to play different things for Daily Activities ect.

Just a suggestion, what is everyone thoughts on this?

 

[Honey_Dwarf1]

I think the minimum for these games was 5 or 6 before, though I coukd be making that up. 3 doesn't seem like a massive difference, so I'm not sure it would really be worth it - also in spell wars and some of the bigger melting floor maps, even 4 players can not really be enough and games can last for quite a long time.
In flying, having 3 players would mean that everyone who finished would be in 1st, 2nd or 3rd and would get extra gold. I'm not sure what, if anything, this would mean, I just wanted to point it out.

 

[Joe_Magus]

I think you are completely wrong, I'm sorry the amount of times I've been stuck waiting for 1 person for flying, and also untrue as there are people who don't finish the race, so they wouldn't necessarily come 3rd. Also, this wouldn't necessarily mean that all races are just 3 people, only that they could start with 3 people. As I said for melting floor and spell wars - "Smaller maps"

You're disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing - It clearly would have benefit.

 

[kaela]

As you said, this is a suggestion, so anyone can offer their input. Daisy is simply stating her opinion on the matter.

I think that Daisy makes a good point. In flying, if you were to participate in a 3 player game it would mean you would automatically earn extra points on the leaderboard no matter what position you finished in. They could probably make it so that only first place earns extra points, but that seems like a lot of unnecessary work in order to speed up the process of filling up games.

In melting floor, however, I believe a three person minimum would be fine as long as they are given small maps. Selecting maps based on the amount of people playing the minigame is something that (I think) has already been suggested.

 

[Lilian]

Although I agree that waiting in minigame queues can be extremely exhausting, lowering the player minimum would cause the duration of certain games such as spellwars and melting floor to increase greatly. It would also, as stated before, allow players to automatically receive points in flying if queued for a three player game.

Some may argue that you can solve the issue with the duration of minigames by decreasing the size of maps to benefit the amount of players queued for the game. However, this has already been suggested and was declined due to the fact that it's "not really possible to have a different player limit per [minigame] map due to the server's tech."

It's also been pointed out that you could change the leaderboard system in flying so that points are only rewarded for players who finished in first, however this may upset certain players in exchange for a lower player minimum.

Although the long wait of minigame queues may be exhausting, I don't think decreasing the size of queues without creating even more issues is possible.

 

[Honey_Dwarf1]

Can I ask why you assumed I was disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing? You said yourself that you wanted our opinions, so I gave you my opinion on this.

Sorry, I didn't read that you suggested smaller maps for flying and melting floor. However, there was a suggestion previously (here) which was declined because it was not possible. I think that applies to this as well.

By giving my opinions in this forum, I am trying to help the staff team because I might be looking at things a different way or it could help them get an idea of what the community want. This forum is open to anyone to reply for a reason. That is so everyone can give their opinions on a suggestion. I was doing the same. I was not just 'disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing' and I don't know why you assumed that.

 

[Joe_Magus]

No like I said Kaela and Lily - you still need to finish the race to recieve more than 5 gold. So you don't "automatically" get more gold. And to be honest 2 gold isn't a lot to say you've been matchmaking for 30 minutes xD

And, Honey_Dwarf - I appreciate your opinion - that's why I came here and asked for it - Do I agree with it, no. It was how you said it wouldn't benefit the server at all. And you're wrong - you clearly haven't played the server at quiet times. Also Honey_Dwarf - if you want an example of a good reply - Lily's was really helpful, gave good points and was straight to the point

 

[kaela]

And, Honey_Dwarf - I appreciate your opinion - that's why I came here and asked for it - Do I agree with it, no. It was how you said it wouldn't benefit the server at all. And you're wrong - you clearly haven't played the server at quiet times. Also Honey_Dwarf - if you want an example of a good reply - Lily's was really helpful, gave good points and was straight to the point

On the contrary, Daisy's points are logical and line up with Lily's response. Just because you disagree with her opinion, doesn't mean you need to insult her reply and assume things about when she plays on the server. This thread is open to everyone who wants to contribute their opinion, and it is 100% valid for Daisy to state her thinking.

Also, thank you Lily and Daisy for pointing out that the suggestion for smaller maps was declined. I was actually looking for it earlier and couldn't find it.

About finishing the race to receive extra gold: Even though it is a possibility that players don't reach the end in time , more often than not I see 3+ players reach the finish line per game. Less experienced players often either play it once and move on, or continue to play the minigame over and over until they can complete the course every time. It is more likely that every single player in a 3 person flying game receives extra points on the leaderboard than it is that one player lags behind and only gets the standard 5 gold.

 

[Joe_Magus]

Insult her reply? How please? and again trying to say I don't value her opinion, again I do - why do you think I am here asking peoples opinions? are you not contradicting your own argument by not then being okay with my opinion of thinking her opinion is wrong?

And Daisy's points, were that it wasn't a massive change and therefore wasn't necessary - When the whole idea was based around not making a big change to the current system and only to make it easier for people who play the server, when there's 60 people on, to get a game.

Daisy's other point, was the point you all brought up, which was that someone would always get 3rd and therefore 7 gold. which as we've later discussed, Most people will complete the race and get 3rd. I say again though - 2 gold isn't really massive when sometimes you find yourself matchmaking for 30 minutes. Although I don't think it would be a massive change to balance the rewards.

I made the assumption about the time that Daisy played due to her instant disagreement for the idea and the fact that she didn't address the problem like Lily did in her post - where she addressed the problem, and that it IS a problem. Gave her points, backed it up and concluded. And I met that post with an open mind - but when you jump in there with 1 slightly valid point, and then saying that it wasn't a big enough change to be worth it. I don't feel like you have built up a big enough argument to then just disagree. The fact Daisy came later with the link about making smaller maps being technically different then fair enough there's a little structure to disagree with areas of the idea. But to come in with the first comment as it was, wasn't substantial.

I'm sorry you feel like I don't value your opinion. At no point have a said this. Instead have then given my points in return - like you do in a debate. But I'll keep in mind people can be easily offended.

 

[kaela]

My apologies. I was jumping to conclusions, and I'll try to avoid it in the future. I feel as though this thread is turning into a bit of a debate, so let’s instead work together to produce an agreement.

The reason why I offered only one point is that I agree with you on most of your arguments. I would love it if we could lower the queue size on melting floor and spell wars, however taking into account that map size cannot be adjusted based on the number of players in the queue it doesn’t seem possible. The only thing I have concerns on is flying, so that’s what offered my opinion on in the above post.

I agree with you that 2 gold is very little in comparison to the time it often takes for the game to fill up. I have very little evidence on this as the flying leaderboard is a true mystery, but I am assuming that third place counts towards your overall score, given the way that the leaderboard is displayed on the website. This means that coming in third, even if it only gives an extra two gold, still counts towards points on the leaderboard. Most players don’t particularly care about their ranking, but I just wanted to point this out.

 

[nathan1e]

My apologies. I was jumping to conclusions, and I'll try to avoid it in the future. I feel as though this thread is turning into a bit of a debate, so let’s instead work together to produce an agreement.

Agreed. A forum is here for the sake of sharing opinions, but it becomes rather toxic when a forum like this turns into a place where people keep having a go at each other, rather than actually discussing the thread topic.

I'm going to be frank, even though I'm nathan, by simply stating that I agree with the fact that what you propose as "the problem" is indeed a problem, whereas what you propose as "the solution" is, in my own opinion, not the best solution to the problem. So far I've agreed with most of the things that have been brought forward as problems with this "solution", namely that it would cause players to be able to earn gold more easily than usual and that it would have too big an impact on the leaderboard, as it's much much easier to defeat 2 other players compared to 7. These are 2 extremes, I know, but I personally feel like defeating 3 other players should be the bare minimum of actually winning a minigame such as flying, melting floor or spell wars.

Besides which, if you're waiting 30 minutes to play flying, what are you doing it for? The gold? The daily activity? The fun? Because it seems to me like 30 minutes is plenty of time to more gold than you'd get from winning a game of flying and claiming a flying daily combined. If it's for the fun, do you really need the minigame to be practising a flying course? Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising you here but I'm just trying to get to the bottom of why you think that the problem I've agreed with is a problem, is so important that it needs fixing. Because personally, I simply think that it is a problem that can just continue existing until the end of time. I think there will always be times when almost nobody is queueing up for a game, even after lowering the minimum.

I've played Potterworld during quiet times, but those are simply times when I accept that I am unable to play minigames and decide to do something different. Because at the end of the day, PW has a lot to offer in terms of gameplay, and will have a lot more to offer in only 3 more weeks...

 

[Joe_Magus]

The reason why I offered only one point is that I agree with you on most of your arguments. I would love it if we could lower the queue size on melting floor and spell wars, however taking into account that map size cannot be adjusted based on the number of players in the queue it doesn’t seem possible. The only thing I have concerns on is flying, so that’s what offered my opinion on in the above post.

Thanks for your reply, and I'm starting to understand more what you mean now - It's less about the 2 Gold and more about how it affects the All-Time Leaderboard - and honestly that makes so much sense. It's something I had overlooked and completely understand that this would negatively effect it!

Besides which, if you're waiting 30 minutes to play flying, what are you doing it for? The gold? The daily activity? The fun? Because it seems to me like 30 minutes is plenty of time to more gold than you'd get from winning a game of flying and claiming a flying daily combined. If it's for the fun, do you really need the minigame to be practising a flying course? Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising you here but I'm just trying to get to the bottom of why you think that the problem I've agreed with is a problem, is so important that it needs fixing. Because personally, I simply think that it is a problem that can just continue existing until the end of time. I think there will always be times when almost nobody is queueing up for a game, even after lowering the minimum.

I'm really not really that bothered for the Gold, myself - or the Leaderboard in most games, The reason I had tried to create a solution was from trying to complete my Daily Activities and found that the difficulty of "Games Master" is more of a time constraint to try and get the games, and then beat the people you are against (Which can be difficult against a lot of people on the server) and demotivating when matching for a game can take so long.

Thanks again for your replies, I'm sorry that the conversation started off as it did, I think on my own part, It was an emotion based off of seeing that it was a problem, and struggling myself with it and not having anyone address it as such. Sorry it turned the way it did from my end!

 

[Aurora]

Heya! Thanks for making a suggestion for the server.
I will now mention this idea to the other Poltergeists, so that we can discuss it and come back to you with a response.
Have a great day!

 

[Aurora]

Hello again @Joe_Magus
thanks once again for bringing this suggestion up to us. We really appreciate all the suggestions you make for the server because it helps us see what the playerbase thinks and how we could improve the server!
Unfortunately, we will be declining this suggestion because we think that by making the queues smaller, the games would be less fun to play. The minimum player requirement for a game is set as such to ensure that the game can function properly as well as be fun and competitive. If we were to reduce the queue, this would change. For example, only having 3 players in flying would automatically have all the players who participate, if they finish, be in the top 3 which would affect rewards as well as the flying leaderboard. In melting floor, there are certain maps that already take a long time to finish with only 4 players playing. This would only get worse with only 3 players. You suggested reducing the map size depending on players playing but unfortunately this is not possible due to our tech.
I hope this makes sense and you can understand why we have decided to decline your suggestion!
Best Regards,
Aurora

 

[nathan1e]

Hello again @luckiestblock ,

Auroralock, why do you tag luckiestblock when @Joe_Magus created this suggestion?

 

[luckiestblock]

Lol I didn't even comment on this thread and I was mentioned. 11/10

 

[Aurora]

Apologies D:

 

[luckiestblock]

Its fine it made me laugh more the anything