Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Ah, thanks! I think I just copied and pasted one of the other posts since I got the gist of what was being stated.

I went back and looked at the listings, and it said "Average Number of Players Online", which is not very clear to me. Our peak times definitely has way more players at any other given time, but we have a good number of people except for the very early hours of the morning. Are we supposed to take our peak times and divide it by our lowest times? How are we supposed to arrive at an "average". Peak can be anywhere from 90 to 110 and stretches for approximately 4-5 hours while low points can be as low as 35 to 50 for about 2 hours of dead time. Figuring out a player per hour ratio while factoring in weekends vs weekday usage would be a pain!

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

I just factor in how many players RIGHT after a reboot. So NW is in the Division by Zero Range. Heh.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

You still need to decide where "10" goes.

I suppose you could use the median, or even the mode, but personally I find the arithmetic mean to be the most accurate as well as the easiest to calculate - simply add up the total number of played seconds and divide it by the uptime. Thus if there are 600 played seconds and the mud has been up for 60 seconds, the average number of players is 10. Calculated over hundreds or thousands of hours uptime, it can provide a pretty reasonable average.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Ugh, okay this should do it and to fix some wording:

[ ] Fewer than 10 Players
[ ] 10..25 Players
[ ] 26..50 Players
[ ] 51..100 Players
[ ] More than 100 Players

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Why make checkboxes to search for a range of numbers? You could simply allow people to determine minimum and maximum themselves and do a greater than or smaller than search.

As for checkboxes, Playerkilling, for example, is too broadly defined. One thing PK system needs is a textbox where admins can describe the PK system of their game. Few checkboxes should also be used to narrow down the option that TMS search would give to you. These questions are some people could find somewhat relevant:

Is there an option to opt out from PK?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

Does the game have safe zones?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

Some other options could also be useful here.

Roleplay category would also benefit from a text box, as admins could then describe there what they expect from a player roleplay-wise or how roleplay is seen in their MUD. There might also be some relevant check boxes in this category also, but I can't think of one right now. Personally, I think that more category-specific text boxes would benefit the info file and would result to the info files having higher quality of information about the MUDs they describe.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Could the TMS MUD Database include whether a MUD allows or does not allow multi-playing? That's a feature I've used when searching at TMC and would like to see that added here as well.

Some Hack'N'Slash muds are very difficult to play unless one is grouped and it's handy to know in advance whether a potential player can make their own group.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Ah! You mean like a

Mud population desired [ ] to [ ]

The player would input "50" to "1000", and the engine would spit out whatever MUDs would fit that category?

I'd be fine with that since anyone lying would just get some seriously disappointed players. :)

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Hmm, how could you group with yourself. Sounds difficult and odd.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

By playing multiple characters at the same time. Thus his question about multi-playing.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

The player would enter "50" to "1000" if he considers 1000 as upper limit. You could also have an additional option that defines how the numbers are interpreted a drop-down menu or such where you can choose between minimum, maximum or range as search method. Of the two parameters, the parameter you don't want to define is left blank.

What comes to MUD admins lying, isn't the treshold to lie smaller when you can excuse yourself with the available options not describing your MUD adequately. A 30-60 player MUD would type in 30 as minimum and 60 as maximum. In the checkbox system that admin would check

[ ] Fewer than 10 Players
[ ] 10..25 Players
[ ] 26..50 Players
[X] 51..100 Players
[ ] More than 100 Players

"Because 26-50 shows my 30-60 MUD in a poor light." So, it will be rounded upwards.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Multi-playing of course also influences the number of players on line. If half of them are duplicates or triplicates it totally skews the real number.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

Right you are, Molly. This thread helped me notice how the Beta Mud Database was missing a Multi-playing option.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

The same with bots and idlers. It starts getting difficult to accurately calculate numbers the more factors you want to take into account, though. I could have the mud only count unique IP addresses, but that would clump together people who share a connection, while ignoring those who can multiplay from different IP addresses. I could estimate the numbers, but I prefer to have the mud do it automatically if possible, as it's harder for people to argue with.

Having an option for multi-playing would at least let the player know that the number of players may well include duplicates. As with many of the other proposals, I'd also like to see a text-box for clarifying details. For example, a mud might allow you to multiplay, but with a maximum of 2 characters - or multiplaying might be banned, except for transferring equipment to storage characters.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

I think we may be getting a little technical/complicated. Remember, the average mud player doesn't hang around these (or other) forums and all they want is to find a mud or a pool of muds to try out. One of the irritating things I found when I was searching for new muds (back when I was just a regular player) was that there were too many options and they required prior knowledge. Like the whole "26 - 50 players" category, for example, requires the person to know what a mud with a 26 - 50 playerbase plays like. Or, for PK selections, they would have had to have experience with a mud that has safe zones or whatever the choices are.

Just to propose a radically different idea: how about phrasing it similar to how people ask for mud suggestions when they post in the forum? For example:

How do you feel about the following statements? (1-highly negative to 9-highly positive):

1. A large playerbase is important to me.
2. I prefer as few PK restrictions as possible.
3. I need an environment that encourages and monitors high quality roleplay.

Or whatever the questions are, I just made those up. My point is that mud searches tend to focus very much on numbers, whereas people (especially non-technical people) want "feelings" - basically all they want to know is "is this a mud I will like"? Of course, that would bring up the mud profiles which would show the numbers. So someone who put 8 for the one about mud size, would end up getting the larger muds. Kind of like a search engine that has a percentage score for all muds and lists the highest ones first, rather than the "you're in or you're out, even if you just missed one category" searches that mud sites tend to have.

I agree that it would be a lot harder to do something like that, but I'd argue it would end up being more useful and mean that fewer games would be overlooked.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

I'm totally confused now. What database are you referring to?
Your own or the one for this site?

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

That would be the one on this site I assume, since the link at the top of the forum says "Mud Database (Beta)".

I think a multi-playing option might also be something to add, as I myself prefer games where it isn't allowed so being able to search for them would be of benefit.

Re: Searching for a Mud
 

It's very easy to group with your own account if the mud allows multi-playing. This is often found in muds with low populations but are designed for grouping in mind. Not all games are solo-friendly, and some games are solo-friendly only to a point.

Multi-playing has become mainstream in a lot of the bigtime games. You simply buy two accounts, run them on two different computers. Viola! You have an instant group (often to the detriment of anyone else playing with you).

Dark Age of Camelot was notorious for this, and it actually seemed to become a part of their business model. You had another account that you leveled up with your main account, and you would use them to buff your original account. They were commonly known as "buff bots". I had the misfortune of partying with someone who was running 3 accounts at the same time. It was horridly painful.

So, in most cases, it IS difficult to do this, but sometimes, in a very underpopulated game, it's really the only way to survive parts of the game depending on how the game is designed.