As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
The Future of CF
Thanatos
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So, anyhow, this forum is moving quite a bit faster thread-wise than it used to. We would like to be able to pack more onto the front page. That being said, we're considering the following changes:
*Reducing the number of threads allowed per play-by-post to one
*Reducing the number of Phallas allowed to one main, and two minis again
*Creating a Phalla subforum
We're strongly leaning towards the first two options. We would give currently-running games a two-week grace period to figure out how they want to combine stuff, and they would be allowed to make a new thread (locking the old ones). Does anyone have any other input/suggestions? And no, a PbP subforum isn't an option.
*Reducing the number of threads allowed per play-by-post to one
*Reducing the number of Phallas allowed to one main, and two minis again
*Creating a Phalla subforum
We're strongly leaning towards the first two options. We would give currently-running games a two-week grace period to figure out how they want to combine stuff, and they would be allowed to make a new thread (locking the old ones). Does anyone have any other input/suggestions? And no, a PbP subforum isn't an option.
Thanatos on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Since there are a lot more PbPs than phalla games at any one time, and no limit on the former, option 1 is the biggest impact on the CF front page. Multiple threads saved, versus only one thread difference with option 2. Option 2 isn't going to have enough impact to even bother doing anything.
That said, I don't think it's that hard to follow the CF forum now, and I don't even abuse subscribed threads which I would recommend to anyone having trouble. I also don't want to split any of CF into any kind of subforum.
This forum was originally about tabletop games and I think stuff like Phallas and the other game variants popping up on here are different then our original intent. Splitting stuff up into tabletop games and forum games (like Phalla, mafia, etc) might work.
This is because you cannot count. One thread is not a bigger change than one thread per PbP on the front page, which right at this moment is a handful of threads and two game threads already following the IC/OOC concept.
Locking phalla threads wouldn't hurt anything I don't think, but I don't see it being that big of a problem that it needs policing, most games have a day or two of reveal/questions.
Everything here is a "forum game."
I was talking about phallas. An OOC thread and an IC thread to me are a handful as you must switch between the two. However, I like them because it keeps the IC thread story only and I rather follow that then go through 10 pages of OOC and 4 pages of IC.
I'm going to continue using a combined thread either way.
Option 2 is the only reasonable choice imo because (a) if we're trying to affect the front page, the phalla change will be a change of exactly one thread, while the PbP change will be on average several threads and (b) option 2 doesn't limit the amount of games we can play here, just how they're presented.
I vote for Option 4, educate the few that have issue with a busy forum on how to use Subscribed Threads, we are still not nearly as fast paced as some of the other forums.
i guess i just dont really see the difference between a Phalla subforum and a pbp subforum.
with that in mind, i would suggest the phalla subforum before re-limiting the number of phallas or limiting the number of threads per pbp game. then again, i dont really have a problem following the threads either.
This is mainly my concern, too. I prefer multiple threads because it really allows for greater discussion and depth - it's a useful tool for mediating and creating game discussion and encouraging camaraderie and group coherence. I don't think something like Catalyst and Seed could work without an OOC thread, as it's almost as much about what it engenders in the players as much as what it creates in actual play.
To be honest, there's just as much front page churn here as there is in D&D, and cutting down on the number of threads wouldn't put new magical things on the first page. All it would mean is older threads would stick around longer. I think you'd actually end up with a similar amount of threads for each pbp game in the end - just that instead of an IC thread and an application thread that turns into an OOC thread, you'd get an IC thread and an application thread.
I'd really be intrigued to see why:
i) the current front-page turnover is an issue
ii) it's possible for phalla with less threads to have a subforum but not pbp.
And one less thread would mean one less thread on the front page driving other threads to the second/third page.
2) Because that's the way it is.
With one main Phalla and two mini Phallas, that's still only 3 threads on the main page. That's half as many.
Lord knows how many other different games there are multiples of, like BSG boardgame and such.
But, putting the IC/OOC threads for different PbPs would be so much cleaner. And, unless I read the OP wrong, that's the goal.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
I think it's because the PBP games are a little bit more in the spirit of the CF subforum than phallas.
Additionally, why would any changes have to come at the expense of the fun that goes on here? I guess what I'm trying to say is, maybe a bit more explanation would help us suggest things that could ameliorate whatever technical/social issues are going on behind the scenes instead of just pruning fun down to size?
so the issue with CF is that people are posting in it? Like I said, that's the same as D&D - it just means people are interested and involved here.
I don't see how that's "less fun."
Would this require all phallas in all subforums to be in the new subforum?
I ask because that was the case last time you asked for our opinion on this.
Both my games have two threads. On one, my OOC is 110 pages and the IC just about going to 70 pages. I've been running it here for like a year now. This week alone my OOC thread had ~50 posts in it, and my IC had ~25 posts. I can see number one having a severely negative impact on my games… I can't say I'm really fond of the the first option at all.
What are you trying to pack onto the front page?
10 discussion threads
25 recruit/game threads
- 14 of those are D&D4E threads (but only one pair belonging to the same game)
- 3 are BSG games
- 3 are Phalla/Miniphalla
- 5 of them are other games
I can see why you don't want to move all PbP into a subforum - it would leave top-level CF practically a ghost town - but I might suggest a subforum for D&D4E PbP, or maybe all RPG PbP so as not to single out a particular game:
- There's more threads for that than anything else, and if most of those are split into two threads it seems like there's enough there to support a subforum
- RPG games tend to run longer and there's less incidence of player substitution
- This is just my personal opinion, but I'm far less likely to randomly click on an RPG thread than a board game thread. Probably the tl;dr effect at work.
Maybe let DMs/GMs make recruit threads in top-level CF so that people can find them more easily, but once the players have been selected, run the games themselves in a subforum. Just throwing ideas out there.
Correct me if I'm way off though.
Do you really think it's a big issue though? I mean, if you look somewhere like G&T or D&D their front page turnover is not very long at all, is it? I couldn't believe that CF would overtake forums like that. But even if 5 hours is ridiculously fast, I don't think we have enough threads to fill 2 pages.
I understand we're trying to get as much good stuff on the front page as possible, but I mean, as far as game threads: Those are generally "destination shopper" locations, aren't they? I mean, take my Twilight Imperium game, for instance. It wasn't on the front page before I went to go update it, so i looked on the second page for it.
I understand we'll get people looking at threads who just like to lurk, I just don't see a huge problem. I have no issue navigating CF and I honestly don't think we have enough threads to fill up an entire page without each thread taking double the space.
What I'm trying to say here is we can keep everything on the page if we want to, but we barely have enough threads to fill it. We might as well utilize the second page, I just don't see it as much of a problem. I don't think we need to transform the thread turnaround back to three or four days like it used to be.
Because you're mitigating the possibilities any given game can have? You're sacrificing the utility for a notional idea of "more front-page threads" without telling us why. I mean, let's look at it this way: the default front page setting is last post. This doesn't tell us anything about the actual thread itself, its quality or the people involved: it's simply a signpost in time. It's trivially easy to change that to alphabetical or work through subscriptions or whatever a person would like. Excepting the mods' control over "stickies", there's no absolute qualifier to "this is a front page thread and that isn't."
Another thing to consider is the issue of form. To some degree, the idea of threads and posts dictates specific things about how we run and play in games. It's an easy chunking for combat rounds and turns in any given RPG, for example. The presence of an OOC thread for a pbp game signifies fuller out-of-character discussion may be necessary than the quick tangents folded into a combined thread. It turns phalla games on the whole into connected testaments instead of disconnected slices. We've developed traditions and ways of working with the system here and, no disrespect intended, I'd ask you to at least consider those because they're functions of how we play everyday: something you're not here for.
One of the issues with this thread is that it's not really explaining or interfacing with any of the communities here well. I mean, it's certainly fractional: the pollish nature allows for Phalla people to push the wall down on pbp people and vice-versa. But it doesn't really go ahead and ask "What does dropping a third mini do for Phalla? What does dropping OOC threads mean for pbp games?" The questions, and the ramifications upon the involved parties, are too complicated for presentation like this. Worse yet, there's a nebulous purpose towards it: all of a sudden, we're asked to curtail our games in the name of "more threads (discussion/games) on the first page." To put it another way, if there are issues with pbp you need to specifically ask them of pbp players. If there are issues with phalla, you need to specifically ask them of phalla players. If there's an issue with the game to discussion ratio, then that's a separate issue (I can think of answers to that, but none of them are 'cut most pbp games in half'.)
To be honest, until we have more information on what's being asked of CF here as a community (and with the fact that "front-page thread" really doesn't mean anything), it will be cutting fun for the sake of something.
No.
Stop this.
There is no such thing as "Phalla people" and "pbp people". Yes, there are different groups of people who frequent different types of threads, but we're all just people who play games on the subforum. The only change is in what games we play, and nobody should be pushing walls down on anyone else.
All anyone here wants to do is play games.
Sorry to be kurt, but this sort of "CF Faction War" crap gets me something fierce. It's stupid.
Furthermore, stripping the stuff on the front page won't mean more stuff comes up to replace it - there's tons of applications to any pbp game in something mildly popular, and most every DM here is doing something. We can only keep so many threads going here because they're products of collaboration - G&T and D&D thrive on pure turnover, something like AC works because each new poster is a new thread. That doesn't work for gaming.
Additionally, the proportion of posters here really should be taken into account. CF works because it's Phalla AND RPG stuff AND boardgames as renaissance AND manwarfigs. Individually (and amongst PA's audience as a whole, DEFINITELY) these groups are tiny - we may all have our own internecine issues, but by and large, we all need each other to be just large enough to be a forum. RPGs alone aren't enough to hold up a roof here. Phalla probably not. CF takes as many people as it can and does as good a job as it can to keep them here. Unless we start handing out part-time jobs or something, that won't change.
My first stop on PA is the CF main page, and I mainly F5 that and hit the User CP to watch threads I may be interested in other forums. CF is the only forum I follow the listing of regularly.
Definitely concerned about CF as a whole, here.
this was my idea to the letter. well, missing the fact that you could throw the actual phalla games into the 'games' subforum too and kill every bird in the universe with one stone.
Thats why I think there should be something like the Arcadia Battle Academy in CF. Make a phalla one, and a 4e one, ect. That way, there is no war. I do like the idea for there to be recruitment threads for PBP games.
Moving Phalla to a subforum, however, I'm against. Phalla is working well right now because it's part of the general CF forum and has the general audience; limitations on concurrent games are also keeping the game well-regulated and a sub-forum would definitely change that dynamic in ways that I think would be detrimental. What Rend says above also holds here - this subforum is for all forum game players, and I'd like to keep the mix we have right now.
But as Infidel also said, I'm also of the opinion that the 'speed' of things in CF is such that we don't really need to do dramatic changes. I'll favor the first two options over the third, if any are to be made at all.
I like how you use a dead subforum as a model.
That's a fantastic way to make sure nobody ever stumbles upon anything in CF, and then the whole forum stagnates without new blood.
I don't quite agree with the further limiting on phallas right after the mini size was limited. especially considering that games fill up rather quickly.
as far as the PbP thing, I have no clue.... there are options such as public proboards for OOC but I don't know enough about them to know if that would actually work.
As a general rule, if it gets taken off-board it will lose playerbase. If people can't get to it from the forums they will be less likely to participate, much less keep up at a normal pace.
Sorry, I was trying to hint at the fact that this would be a perfect thread for people to try and shit on each other, if they wanted to, not that I was going for that. To follow on that, CF's communities are often linked - we've recently had phalla players give RPGs or BSG a go for the first time, and vice-versa. The web of relationships here through games is incredibly complex, and splitting it would only sever the community.
What will replace them though? Like I explained above, "front page" is a terrible metric for "active."
The problem is, the main + three minis is a rather appropriate amount right now, given the activity level is still working but just barely.
If you made a subforum, you can't just increase the threads. Who would play in them? Where would new players come from? Most "notice" phalla, lurk, and then decide to signup one day. They're tied to the subforums they are played in, community wise.
If they were their own subforum, they would have very limited potential for growth. More likely, it would even wither.
And the traffic wouldn't justify a subforum on PA at the current rate.
no, rend is correct. there are people who play in pbp 4e games, phallas, read WH40K threads occasionally, check out new games people made up on their own.
to paraphrase: