I think a ban is justified even without a PM. It's pretty simple: don't post in threads you aren't reading. If you get warned like that, you're responsible for noticing it. And in this case, the warning was an hour and a half before the first of the offending posts and 4 hours before the last one. It isn't like it was given 4 days earlier.

I'll defer to Zona's judgment as to the actual punishment, assuming it's at least a 1 game ban and no more than a 3 game ban.

Curu

Canada2817 Posts

December 02 2011 05:31 GMT

#2242

On December 02 2011 10:54 Qatol wrote:
I think a ban is justified even without a PM. It's pretty simple: don't post in threads you aren't reading. If you get warned like that, you're responsible for noticing it. And in this case, the warning was an hour and a half before the first of the offending posts and 4 hours before the last one. It isn't like it was given 4 days earlier.

I'll defer to Zona's judgment as to the actual punishment, assuming it's at least a 1 game ban and no more than a 3 game ban.

If you get banned every time you post in a thread without reading then I think sinani needs a permanent ban.

I kid, I kid.

wherebugsgo

Japan10647 Posts

December 02 2011 09:47 GMT

#2243

On December 02 2011 14:31 Curu wrote:

Show nested quote +

If you get banned every time you post in a thread without reading then I think sinani needs a permanent ban.

I kid, I kid.

no you don't you liar rofl

syllogism

Finland5948 Posts

December 02 2011 10:00 GMT

#2244

Something really has to be done about the activity requirements. How is it that you can avoid modkill by making 2 one line posts with no game relevant information just because you happen to vote, but you do get modkilled for not voting? Frankly activity is much more important than voting.

iGrok

United States5142 Posts

December 02 2011 10:51 GMT

#2245

On December 02 2011 19:00 syllogism wrote:
Something really has to be done about the activity requirements. How is it that you can avoid modkill by making 2 one line posts with no game relevant information just because you happen to vote, but you do get modkilled for not voting? Frankly activity is much more important than voting.

Its up to the hosts. Minimum requirements are suggested to be one per day + vote. All of my future games will have increased activity requirements. But if you just increase number of posts, it will just result in spam. Personally, I feel that I could actively play the game and post only once every 24 hours. That would be the absolute minimum I'd expect from a player in one of my games, and my OP will reflect that.

tl;dr: If you want more activity, require more yourself/tell the mod

Palmar

Iceland22634 Posts

December 02 2011 10:56 GMT

#2246

But at the same time, lurking should probably not be eliminated as a viable scum strategy, I'm never in favor of just implementing something that breaks a certain strategy (lurker banes, role-claim-killers etc), But I am more than fine with balancing a game normally while accounting for those strategies.

For example, I don't like a lurker bane mechanic, but I do like giving towns compulsive vigilantes, or just multi-shot vigilantes to deal with lurkers. After 2 nights of inactives being shot the message should have gotten through.

Similarly, I don't like direct anti-mass-claim measures, but I am in favor of giving scum roles that can mess with mass-claiming (scum doctors, vigilantes, alignment cops, veterans etc).

I never want to take away from strategic choices, but I do want towns and scum alike to be able to deal with anything thrown at them in an efficient manner, if they play it smart enough.

Qatol

United States3165 Posts

December 02 2011 14:28 GMT

#2247

The problem with multi-shot vigis or compulsive vigis is they are very hard to justify from a balance perspective. They represent a lot of KP for the town. However, if you balance the game assuming they will get 2-3 shots off and they die night 1 without getting to shoot at all, the town suddenly needs to outplay the mafia pretty convincingly to even get a close win.

chaoser

United States5541 Posts

December 02 2011 15:54 GMT

#2248

1 game ban. popcorn should be enjoyed by all, the living as well as the undead

sinani206

United States1959 Posts

December 03 2011 02:28 GMT

#2249

so while this is being decided, im just gonna sitout student (technically open to everyone, right?).

Meapak_Ziphh

United States6789 Posts

December 03 2011 06:12 GMT

#2250

Due to the circumstances of the game there will be no bans requested for XLVII.

wherebugsgo

Japan10647 Posts

December 03 2011 06:26 GMT

#2251

On December 02 2011 23:28 Qatol wrote:
The problem with multi-shot vigis or compulsive vigis is they are very hard to justify from a balance perspective. They represent a lot of KP for the town. However, if you balance the game assuming they will get 2-3 shots off and they die night 1 without getting to shoot at all, the town suddenly needs to outplay the mafia pretty convincingly to even get a close win.

C9++ is a great setup that is very balanced, and at the same time really interesting.

I think it can take care of a lot of the balance issues we have with minis, while keeping the setup fresh enough that it'll always be different every game that's rolled.