[FM Queue] Queues and Submit thread

Forum Matches Discussion
#1620

And no one else review my game I want Suilt too!
Their Nice to me.

#1621

semi-open isnā€™t a setup type (even though it should be but grumble grumble)
would you describe this setup as a vanilla game?
iā€™m asking so I can edit the queue appropriately (not guarenteeing that iā€™m your reviewer here, by the way, just tidying up the queue before things get nightmarishly messy.)

#1622

ā€¦we really ought to have another discussion about what types of games this site accepts. Nowadays, I donā€™t hear any ā€œCompetitive FMsā€ being played at all, and I am using ā€œStandardā€ type that @eevee recommended me for my Bastard++ FM, which wouldā€™ve been considered an SFM in the ā€œoutdated typesā€.

Good griefā€¦ should we make a new thread about this matter?

#1623

ā€¦okay, why does it say ā€œVanillaā€ here?

#1624

i donā€™t know, Iā€™m not in charge of the queue
probably because Bastard++ may be dumb as shit but it is a vanilla setup, just one containing the dumbest possible roles that still fall under vanilla

#1625

if u want lots of competitive go to MU 4Head

#1626

Last competitive we had was Hell in a Cell, tbh.

#1627

And well
Hell in a Cell had dybu

#1628

dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu dybu dabu

9 Likes
#1629

I feel like most people here prefer chill games

#1630

Having a few games that are implicitly stated are intended to be competitive every so often might not be a bad thing

2 Likes
#1631

Okay, so. Hereā€™s three suggested changes for the OP of the thread that are drastic enough to warrant discussion and approval before I, yā€™know, just fuckin put them in:

  1. Somewhere in the OP of the thread, we should list game types. This is crucial because of the weirdass way Discourse handles pinned threads- they still sometimes drift down from the top of the category, where they are supposed to be, for some godforsaken reason. We should also update the actual game types, but thatā€™s not exactly a formatting issue.
  2. Secondly, look at the second column of the tables. This is more of a minor thing, but either it should be ā€œMain Hostā€ and cohosts should not be listed in that collumn (not my ideal solution) or it should be kept as is and read ā€œHostsā€. Obviously, the Main Hosts vs. Co-Hosts distinction exists because of the well-respected tradition of VC bots, and they donā€™t need to be contacted for review, but we should nonetheless be consistent with our language.
  3. We should also have all people who are official reviewers listed in this thread, for the same reason that it is ideal that all information relevant to anybody queueing a game should be in this thread.
  4. Lastly, the Starting segment should probably read ā€œIn Signups/In Progressā€, because the language is vaguely unclear as is.

Some of these are more important than others, but I still think these are reasonableā„¢ changes to make.

8 Likes
#1632

ā€¦do you seriously want me to find an outdated setup with actually bastard mechanics so it isnā€™t called vanilla anymore? IMO Vanilla only means VT, Goons and maybe Doc & Cop.

#1633

ā€¦wait, for real? I didnā€™t even take that game seriously.

#1634

i do not make the decisions here, and I think our categorisation system has somehow gotten worse than back in the olden days when there was only one category that actually got reviewed

#1635

Bruh vanilla is probs like 100+ roles

#1636

Well then, time to nuke you all with ā€œvanillaā€ roles.

#1637

Eevee has a giant lIST of roles classified as vanilla IIRC

#1638

Iā€™d define Vanilla as everything that Modbot on MU can process excluding ITAs and Treestump

1 Like
#1639

Aye. ā€¦so, which higher-ups do you think will see this, and when do you think they will have time to discuss about this matter?