New Alamaze Game Utility?

[HeadHoncho]

We also have a new Alamaze Utility program to create games, drop players, substitute players, ...etc. but there's a learning curve to use this as well as to learn where everything is within the XML/database system (in order to track down any problems).

Just wondering, is this the new utility that allows for the possibility of processing games on different days?  Thanks!

[Frost Lord]

We also have a new Alamaze Utility program to create games, drop players, substitute players, ...etc. but there's a learning curve to use this as well as to learn where everything is within the XML/database system (in order to track down any problems).

Just wondering, is this the new utility that allows for the possibility of processing games on different days?  Thanks!

That is a good point.  Now that it is more automated, I would like to see new games forming on a 2-per-week schedule (for example, games that might run on [Mon & Thurs] or [Tues & Fri] or [Wed & Sat]). 

My games are on the same schedule right now and because of this and the current schedule model, I spend almost 2 complete weeks each month with no turn(s).  I just got my turns today and I have nothing to look forward to until next week.

Is there any chance that we can look into changing the schedule for future games?

...just checking.

Thanks FL

[HeadHoncho]

I myself would love the option of moving Warlords and Titan games to a 3 turns/2 weeks schedule and would be happy to pay an extra slot for it, if that's at all possible!

[unclemike]

Currently, the new utility is programmed to start games either on a 4-4-6 schedule or on a weekly basis. I can add more if Ry Vor wishes but those are the only two that are possible right now.

[HeadHoncho]

Just curious, would that functionality be a major pain for you to add?

EDIT: See, the reason I ask is because you made what is known as a "carefully worded response."

Currently, the new utility is programmed to start games either on a 4-4-6 schedule or on a weekly basis. I can add more if Ry Vor wishes but those are the only two that are possible right now.

The player base obviously wants this option, it is probably the most commonly requested meta feature that recurs on a regular basis. And given the technical wizardry UM has displayed in getting the Java platform up-to-speed, I can't imagine this would be a very difficult thing for him to implement.

Ry Vor has indicated in the past that he believes 4-4-6 is plenty fast, and has opined that faster games would chase casual players away. And my response to that is that we should absolutely keep the regular games at 4-4-6, but there are always going to be avid players -- the most dedicated and highest-revenue players -- willing to pay for faster games, perhaps for private games or other limited consumption situations.

If there is a deliberate decision being made not to add this functionality, then that is totally Ry Vor's call, but as an avowed "openness and disclosure" type of consumer, I for one would really like to know that. Many thanks.

[Ry Vor]

Pretty much all but a couple players like the schedule as it is.  If anything, we have lost more players because the turn around is too fast.  Players are getting 7 turns per game a month when in the elder days, it was two turns a month.  When I look at the other PBEM games, they seem to still be on two turns a month at about $10+ a turn.  The Gray Mouser (for example) still hasn't dipped a toe into the Warlords format because even at one turn a week, its a bit daunting.

Doing the coding is one part of what such a change would be.  The website, the forum, the accounting, any marketing, revising what we have in articles about how we operate  would also all have to change to accommodate changes in service levels.  I'm not really looking for a new project to divert from the Choosing and the marketing we have to do in addition to the day-to-day stuff.  So its not a question of what is possible, more about what keeps us on target.  I suggest players that want more Alamaze sign up for more games, rather than have the schedule changed for everyone.  In starting new games, we have been looking at which cycle (for example, Monday or Tuesday processing) is busier, and start the game on the day with the lighter schedule.  But obviously we can't look at an individual player's schedule and alter the start date player by player.  I also like having TH be a day with no processing, as it allows normally an uninterrupted day to do development, whereas when games are processed, something unexpected always seems to come up.  Or a game is being created, which is far more simple now in the java platform as to the game itself, but hasn't changed in any of the accounting, where slots are used, service levels change, and yes, invoices are sent.  I also like the idea that players know a new game will form on Thursdays or Saturdays, so sometimes a decision to join is made on a Wednesday with a bit of sense of urgency so the game can form on Thursday.  And all that allows Mike and I to have a better understanding of what is expected on a given day. 

[Lord Diamond]

I dislike the weeks that my turns run on Tuesday. By the time Monday comes around, I am not nearly as engaged. I would like to have the option of signing up for a twice weekly game. That makes three.

[HeadHoncho]

So in summary, yes UM could do it without much problem, but no, you are making a deliberate decision not to offer other pacing.

Pretty much all but a couple players like the schedule as it is.

There are occasions when you make a comment like this, and I wonder if we are playing the same game or reading the same message board. I could go into specific examples, but I think that would belabor the point. Suffice it to say that my perception differs, and since I'm on a never-ending quest for data, I will post up a poll shortly to gauge which of our perceptions may be closer to the mark.

It isn't even just about faster games, although that is the more common request, it's giving yourself and the players more options, even slower ones. Customization and increasing choices are becoming more and more the norm in gaming, and you yourself seem to recognize this fact in The Choosing. This is just one more area.

It shouldn't even require additional marketing of game variants, the default could remain 4/4/6 and you could save other options for private games. Plus we also have a forum-based game formation process here, and people solicit for new game starts and types all the time.

Your solution of just adding more games doesn't work in two cases, first where a player is on any kind of budget, and second when a player is on mental overload trying to keep different games straight, as you and I have discussed.

In contrast, one single game played more frequently does not take as much mental energy as two different games played half as often.

Finally, again, you could charge more for the faster games if you want, so it wouldn't even need to result in a material change in revenue. In fact, I bet you would even make more money by having more options like this.

[Ry Vor]

Sometimes I'm just stunned.

We are in the PBEM world. Players whose alternate lives are in technology seem to ignore that its basically two guys, a thing I have never shy'd from saying.  We offer many multiple times the varieties of any other competitor here in the last two years.  We charge a fraction of what they do.  We have the ability for players wanting more action to go to a higher service level and have significantly lower per turn cost when they do.  We have made more substantive improvements in two years than any competitor has in more than 10 years.  We have invested more money and have had more optimism than any competitor or anyone related to the industry.  We have a forum with 20,000 posts, a website, support through email answered even on weekends or late night most times.  And yes, all that is actually relevant.  Yeah, someome can play Game of War for free, at least initially.  See how long that keeps your interest.

So we have five service levels, who knows how many game variants - it really can be in the 20's - we run about 4x times the turns per cycle than anyone else (competitor) already on per game, and we start probably 20 times more games than anyone, we provide turns two minutes after the deadline instead of a week later, we are trying to work on a major advance in developing 3rd Cycle and we should do a lot more?  I really would like to see the requests into Middle Earth or Duelmasters or Hyborian War from their players paying 5 times as much.  On one hand, its nice we can have expectations that by far surmount those of competitors, but on the other, I would like to pursue the advancement of this franchise as I choose. 

[Kronin]

I have played several PBEM games. I have never experienced a better run operation than here. I too am really stunned sometimes by some of the comments that get posted. The fact that it is only TWO people doing everything is amazing to me.