[FEEDBACK] Double Round Rolls

[geeves]

A feedback thread for a simple enough PR: https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/12547

 

- Players who have played a role the previous round will now be the last in line for candidates chosen for the same role in the current round. You only count as having played a role if you join it before one hour has elapsed.

 

Discuss below.

[geeves]

If you've posted on feedback on Github, please repost here, by the way.

[Faye <3]

Long overdue IMO. This is a great and I'd almost wager necessary change for people who play few-slot roles that are highly contested like Investigator.

[CoffeeToffee]

Contested roles should be fought for ICly in a duel to the death.

 

Jokes aside I agree with this system. Would it apply to antags as well?

[geeves]

Nope, this only applies to station jobs.

[Zelmana]

Leave it up to chance.

[Yonnimer]

Does this only apply to back-to-back rounds, or can someone play a role, log off for the night, then the next day the first round they ready for they still are put as last in line? 

[DickFreedomJohnson]

So I have been thinking about this for a couple hours now, I saw it passing while at work and I've come to a few thoughts on it. It's a rough choice tbh because of the players that are limited on time. Let me give an example.

I get home from work every day and typically I play two rounds of aurora for about four or five hours which is exactly as much as I am allotted before I need to deal with real life responsibilities. I try to get in a fair amount of on station roleplaying and general bullshitting in those two rounds as my character I play. With this change it will completely throw my game schedule to a singular round of gameplay. (assuming my job is being swamped like it occasionally is.) I enjoy playing on aurora but I am not about to play one round then wait two hours then play a second round when it is already closing in on my time I take to wind down to sleep. As well to this it shuts down any roleplay that can begin one round and then cross into a second round like I've seen and done before.

On the other side of things as Faye said above, it frees up slots from people that keep on continually playing and hording the fun. As well it also acts as a buffer to prevent shitters from in theory ruining every round by doing a terrible job in whatever job they keep rolling. This however is already dealt with based around (from what I believe from my experience) RNG and I believe character age. (correct me if I am wrong on the character age.) 

I had further thoughts that I should have written down but I'm sure they will return to me eventually, but these are the two sides of it that I see, not including my issue of "What if it doesn't apply to back to back and rather it takes a lifeweb approach where you HAVE to play another round as something else before you can play your job again." as Yonnimer had already brought that concern up.

[Faye <3]

1 hour ago, Yonnimer said:

Does this only apply to back-to-back rounds, or can someone play a role, log off for the night, then the next day the first round they ready for they still are put as last in line? 

Back to back. For instance, playing a round as investigator and then readying up for the round directly after as investigator would end up with someone who had not played investigator last round being prioritized. 

[Peppermint]

I have concerns of what this might do to general pop numbers. For example, if I'm hesitant about joining a round on a contested role, this would push it even more firmly into the no. I don't think bleeding more high pop rounds would be worth it for now but might be a very good consideration for the NBT when competition inevitably skyrockets. 

[Lucaken]

I remain adamant that no matter how this applies to the station currently, it should absolutely be implemented for NBT, especially at it's launch. As Peppermint says, I suspect a large amount of people are going to be clamoring for roles then (especially limited, new ones), and it's only fair we give every player equal amount of time.

I also see no reason as to why this shouldn't be implemented later on, too. Yes, people have limited timeslots (I myself struggle to find two hours in my evenings, on a good day) but I raise you this - it is even more infuriating to finally get the chance to log on, see that you have just enough time for a round, and then lose your role to a person that has been playing since the start of the day, every single round.

While I recognize the pop-killing potential of it all, I personally weigh that against the diversification of roles and characters. People need to branch out, simply said, as even if you found your perfect job, it's a disservice not only to yourself but to the wider community if you just spam that one slot until the end of days. This is not to mention the negative affects of only playing one character, but that is a lot more subjective so I won't comment on it. Visitor slots are still unlimited, though, and I think people will be surprised how much you can get out of those IC breaks, and you can still play the same character back-to-back. This also eliminates the cross-round RP issue Johnson mentioned above.

[Triogenix]

8 minutes ago, Lucaken said:

While I recognize the pop-killing potential of it all, I personally weigh that against the diversification of roles and characters. People need to branch out, simply said, as even if you found your perfect job, it's a disservice not only to yourself but to the wider community if you just spam that one slot until the end of days. This is not to mention the negative affects of only playing one character, but that is a lot more subjective so I won't comment on it. 

Lucaken pretty much summed up why I think this is a good change, people need to play more then a single character, I've found that you can get 3-4 really solid characters.

However, I also feel this may open up people job-hopping a lot more, because if you played your officer last round, why not play them as warden the next if you want to keep playing(this is an example)? I know barely a thing about coding and development, so I can't really comment on any possible solutions to this, and it's already an issue.

[CampinKiller]

32 minutes ago, Lucaken said:

People need to branch out, simply said, as even if you found your perfect job, it's a disservice not only to yourself but to the wider community if you just spam that one slot until the end of days.

I agree with most of your argument, but this is a bad take to have. Some people have found their enjoyment, and trying to dictate to people what they should play under some arbitrary reasoning of "they need to branch out" doesn't sit right with me. I've tried other roles, and there are very few that I actually enjoy as much as the two or three I play regularly (one of which I play far more than the others anyway). 

Anyway though, I'm not sure where I sit on this. I've had the displeasure of others where I've watched my single-slot role get taken by the same guy who's had it for 3 straight rounds, but at the same time, this could really be rough at times for pop if you just want to play that one role.

[Roostercat]

There is no one right way to play this game. If people want to player one character, then they are welcome to do that. This change should not be implemented because people need to “branch out” as this caters to only SOME players whilst hurting others, and sets a bad precedent.

[Rushodan]

22 minutes ago, Roostercat said:

There is no one right way to play this game. If people want to player one character, then they are welcome to do that. This change should not be implemented because people need to “branch out” as this caters to only SOME players whilst hurting others, and sets a bad precedent.

Pretty much this. Don't punish players that only really enjoy one aspect of the game. RNG does as RNG wants.

That being said I don't personally care too much. If people overwhelmingly want this then go for it I guess

[Peppermint]

I do think this should be used during NBT's launch, especially in the early days so people can actually play - especially those with work and school and other commitments. Currently I'm 50/50, but may lean toward yes.

[Faye <3]

People who sit in the same role for three, four rounds in a row and play all afternoon need to learn to share, especially when that role is a very limited one. That's my take on this, and why I am in favor of this PR.

[WickedCybs]

I think it's a fine enough idea. Sometimes, I would like to do multiple rounds, but two or more hours for a single round is already a good chunk of time for me anyway. For very popular roles it was not really that uncommon to see the same people occupying it for nearly six or eight hours, depending. So, I'm fine with giving people a chance. If this ends up working out badly, reverting it would be fine.

I'm interested in hearing about is whether cryoing before the hour mark will still put you last in the line for the next round. Since it says late joining past the hour mark doesn't affect your chances for the next, wondering if that works both ways.

2 hours ago, Triogenix said:

Lucaken pretty much summed up why I think this is a good change, people need to play more then a single character, I've found that you can get 3-4 really solid characters.

However, I also feel this may open up people job-hopping a lot more, because if you played your officer last round, why not play them as warden the next if you want to keep playing(this is an example)? I know barely a thing about coding and development, so I can't really comment on any possible solutions to this, and it's already an issue.

It is just security at this point that has the unique problem of that being acceptable. The solution is already in effect for practically every other role. The person job hopping gets spoken to about not doing it. If I saw service being used as a dumping ground or something, I'd speak to people about it. That said, in the NBT it will thankfully be a lot harder to justify some of the usual excuses people use when it comes to job hopping, at least to a whole other department.

Edited November 11, 2021 by WickedCybs
stuff

[Carver]

3 hours ago, Roostercat said:

There is no one right way to play this game. If people want to player one character, then they are welcome to do that. This change should not be implemented because people need to “branch out” as this caters to only SOME players whilst hurting others, and sets a bad precedent.

Sums up my thoughts. If I want to play a round, it's with a specific character and role in mind, and if I don't roll that I'll just not play for that round. This isn't going to do anything but potentially hurt pop numbers.

I didn't think of it until now, but this is going to be actively harmful for events by generally discouraging people playing the round before the event.

Edited November 11, 2021 by Carver

[Colfer]

I think allowing people to play one job that they like with equal chances compared to everybody else should always be left up to chance. This seems like a terrible change imo because for one reason:
You play a CMO at 49 minutes into the round, raiders are already in medbay and being contested by security, you walk in and get taken hostage and executed, next round you are kicked to the curb because of this. Then your slot goes to somebody else who sits in one spot and does nothing the entire round. Then next round your slot isn't even guaranteed because now your back in the 50/50 chances

[NG+7 Gael]

After a bit of consideration, I thiiink it's worth trying out? Worst case scenario it doesn't work out well and gets reverted, so... I think it's worth giving it a try for a little bit at least. See how it goes and all.

That being said, I think Carver brought up a good point...

21 minutes ago, Carver said:

I didn't think of it until now, but this is going to be actively harmful for events by generally discouraging people playing the round before the event.

...with it potentially being harmful to pre-event rounds, since it may discourage people from playing during the round before the event... but, even then, I think that is a fairly niche concern imo and may be outweighed by the positives of having it for every other round.

[Roostercat]

The affect on events is a valid concern, as events only happen once. So if you miss it with your character, you miss it. This already causes quite a lot of anger from people who get their slots outrolled during events as is, but adding this into the mix might make things a little more chaotic when they roll around. Though that's more hypothetical than anything.

[Caelphon]

While I have not seen it in action (the roles I play are not exactly contested, so I normally secure them quite easily - so I suppose I do have bias here) I like what it entails! Perhaps there could be some modifications here and there, regarding the feedback received above, but overall I think the system is quite neat, and I'd love for it to stay. 

[Lucaken]

After reading some of the responses above, I admit that I may have been a bit too harsh on the topic of playing only one character, That was still a subjective point though, as I pointed out, and I stand by everything else that was said. You can call it a bad take or precedent, it doesn't change the fact that this suggestion is needed in other ways. For events, I am fairly sure an exception could be made where the slate is wiped clean beforehand.

To put it into perspective, there is absolutely nothing you can do if someone decides to play the same limited job for eight hours straight, nearly every single day. I have reached out to admins, there is nothing in the rules that they can act on in this scenario. They are not even likely to talk to the player about it. You may think reaching out to these players on your own solves it, but most of the time the response from them is 'sucks to suck'. That means this suggestion here is the only way to actually do something about this, and it's a bit off-putting to see the responses for someone that is lucky to get in a round every now and again.

Keeping it random is not a solution, because the other person has eight hours to play, and I have two.

[Sycmos]

It is not fair under any scenario that a player who has more time to play has the possibility to monopolize a slot for a significant duration of a day when those who have less time to play are shut out repeatedly and thus denied the opportunity altogether. Besides leveling the playing field for people with less time to play during the day, it will also work to break up in-game cliques by forcing people to interact with new characters in their departments on a more regular basis.

I can't see a downside to this that isn't strictly from a personal point of view.