|
There's been several games now that have really focused on protected mouthpieces with DT checks. Since I cannot fault those involved for taking the highest probability path to victory given the game setup involved, let's discuss how to set up a game to focus players on reading each other as the main path to victory, rather than relying on DT checks and protections. This thread can also be used for discussion of other aspects of game design for mafia games as well.
Some ideas on how to include DTs without allowing them to dominate the game.
1. Make it a risk to claim publicly. Do not include enough protection in the game so that whenever the DT claims publicly, the mafia has a reasonable chance of killing him/her the next night.
2. Have DTs return "town" or "mafia" without returning specific roles. This makes it harder for other players to trust the DT's results, so the DT needs to work harder to prove to the town that the DT is authentic. Especially when claiming privately.
3. Include more roles that can mess with results. Simple enough. But keep in mind that introducing even a subtle amount of doubt into the DT check affects the power of the role disproportionately. A small chance that a public red-callout could go wrong, or a small chance that the town circle that's been setup has been infiltrated dramatically reduces the power of the role.
4. Disallow private communications between players in the game. Actually, most mafia games elsewhere have this in place, so DTs are abnormally powerful on TL Mafia as a result.
5. Set up the game so that under any circumstances, not more than x% of the players in the game can be DT checked. (perhaps x = 33) If it's impossible for the majority of the players in a game to be DT checked by the end of the game, then the town still needs to read and judge most of the players in the game. This is simply calculating how many nights the game is likely to last, and setting the number of DTs so that it's not possible for them to check too many players over the course of the game.
Some ideas on how to remove DTs altogether yet give the town a reasonable chance to win.
1. In addition to mandatory voting, have it mandatory to have a vote in place X hours before the day's deadline. This earlier forced vote can still be changed before the deadline. This mechanic forces players to have a vote down earlier, so that trends that have formed can still likely be changed later on. As well, players cannot vote just before the deadline and use the current votes in place as an excuse on how they voted. (I did this last game - it probably wasn't helpful to the town.)
2. Include roles that give information, but not in the absolute clear-cut way that DTs do. Trackers (investigate a person, and you get to know if and on who that person did a night action to), and watchers (investigate a person, and you get to know who performed night actions on this person) are useful roles that can supplement a person's reading of others in the game without being overpowering.
Also, I like the bus driver role. A mafia bus driver needs to read and predict town actions to use the power for maximum advantage, and a town bus driver needs to read/predict mafia actions. A mafia bus driver can act as an anti-medic and redirect the vigiliante's hit. If DT checks are returned without the DT knowing if the check was switched, then the driver can also really wreck the DT's results and credibility.
A town bus driver, with a successful prediction, can act as a medic and vigilante at once! But it's not easy to pull off. I don't think the bus driver was the imbalanced part of Mafia XX, for sure. Anyways, the bus driver role relies on prediction for maximum benefit, so it adds to the reading/prediction game of mafia instead of taking away from it, like the DT does.
|
1.) Public claiming isn't really an issue. In fact DTs if they are good shouldn't be scared to claim, it's when they choose to claim that is an issue and keeps the role somewhat in check (Dt is mega good regardless). The problem is with players playing behind the scenes DTs never have to do anything publicly. They don't need to lead suspects, don't need to role claim, don't need to breadcrumb - nothing. They are damn invincible this way ^_^. Needless to say DTs + Medics is always a problem, so Mafia needs Roleblockers, GFs, Millers to shut them out. 3 Roles for 1 role is just kinda telling you how strong it can be. Imo the best way to deal with DTs is to use Trackers and Watchers and/or using Sane/Insane/Paranoid DTs and making the possibility of them ambiguous.
2.) Alignment Check for sure. No more RCs for now.
3.) cool, kinda answered in 1
4.) I am all for banning PMs for those whose roles don't allow it. The games have been downright shitty these last few months because of it. When you go back and read some of the old games you can just see lots of things don't make sense because too much information is missing. Which leads to arguments because one side has information that isn't available in plain sight and the other side can't make the connection.
5.) I just don't think that would be too fair. The Mafia should be punished if the detective lives too long and they had the means of disposing or nullifying him/her. If a DT lives to the end they shouldn't be punished ^_^.
Voting: I'm going back to the old mechanics I used where votes were placed in the thread. This is a huge advantage for game play because now when people vote in the context of discussion, more discussion can be generated. The voting threads isolate votes and rarely do we see people called out on the truly suspicious votes. From now on Majority votes + deadlines, instead of only deadlines. Now everyone HAS to pay attention, and not just lazily wait for the last 2 hours and abstain all the way through the day.
6.) nod to Trackers and Watchers. Weaker than DTs but force the player to really start questioning people's motives. Still DTs are good in a balanced setup.
7.) I don't really like the Bus Driver that much. Probably looks better as a serial killer type role where he/she wins by killing everyone else.
|
As for #5, I didn't mean an artificial cap, but just not including enough DTs vs the number of days the game is likely to last. But yeah, if DTs aren't as easily protected and if there's no out of thread communication, then even if DTs could check many players over the course of the game it's still much harder to rely solely on DT checks to win.
Bus driver is amazing! It's a role that relies on prediction and reading other people - an extension of normal mafia play. But I do agree a SK Bus Driver could be pretty interesting.
|
I think more SKs in general would be interesting.
Additionally, I think it would make more sense if we kept the roles as they currently are but added varying win conditions for different players on teams, or conditions for them to acquire their abilities in the first place.
For instance: A vig needs to hit a DT in order to win.
A townie needs get hit prior to day 3.
Etc.
Or
DTs can't check anyone until they correctly guess a blue role via PM to the host (X guesses per day/night cycle)
Medics can't protect anyone until a certain member is killed. Maybe someone that they need to predict will be hit
Vets only gain their extra night life (or night lives) after a certain % of the town dies and they decide to suit up.
Goons can become experienced after mafia kills a certain group of people unique to each goon. They gain XYZ.
While this would obviously be batshit insane hard to balance on the first try, It might be interesting to try out for a few games.
|
What about independent DTs with different victory objectives? I.e. two DTs whose only goals are to survive and eliminate the other DT. Or other independent blues that can be persuaded to join either town/mafia in the same way? There's also a slightly different mechanic that I've been thinking about, where the mafia receives the abilities of the people they've killed. Not sure if any of these have been done
There's also placing limits on Medic protections, though they aren't considered used unless the mafia actually makes their hit.
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
So long as we're talking about different mechanics, I'm thinking it might be fun to run a Quantum Mafia game, where players' roles are only a set of probabilities until the wavefunction is collapsed by DT-check/lynches/kills. It'll be a complicated mess for the moderator, but I'm hoping it can turn out to be good and not too luck-based.
|
On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place.
On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
So long as we're talking about different mechanics, I'm thinking it might be fun to run a Quantum Mafia game, where players' roles are only a set of probabilities until the wavefunction is collapsed by DT-check/lynches/kills. It'll be a complicated mess for the moderator, but I'm hoping it can turn out to be good and not too luck-based. LOL. Are you kidding? I think it'd be a major mess for every player - whose side is one on? But I TOTALLY want play in a setup like this. Maybe the possibility of being on either side will lead players to play better? Plus how much will (probable) mafia know about who else is on their "team"?
|
It looks somewhat complicated. From what I can tell the probabilities list is open, like the following:
Player 1 - 50-20-20-10
Player 2 - 75-25-0-0
Player 3 - 15-15-30-40 etc.
and players only know that they're Player 1 or 3 or whatever. Actually I'm not sure about this, since some games seem to have done it and some haven't.
I think previous setups have also allowed for mafia to do some kind of IRC thing but it might be terribly hard to enforce here. Given the mechanics it seems like it might be incredibly complicated to have more than just Town/DT/Mafia roles but that's something I'll have to figure out. Also, probably should have to have a small-ish game at first because the number of states can be just plain ridiculous! I'll make a post once I've figured out all the details and after these next games are done.
|
On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
So long as we're talking about different mechanics, I'm thinking it might be fun to run a Quantum Mafia game, where players' roles are only a set of probabilities until the wavefunction is collapsed by DT-check/lynches/kills. It'll be a complicated mess for the moderator, but I'm hoping it can turn out to be good and not too luck-based.
What will be the Townie victory condition? If setup is like this, there would be lot of people with probability of becoming Mafia. If even one people with 1% probability of being Mafia is alive, it cannot be Town's victory because the possibility of Mafia "existing" is still present. It could be made that the overall Mafia probability decreases below certain percentage it becomes Town victory, but there are still many factors that could mess it up.
Will everyone having probability of being Mafia send their night actions in? Will their NK be honoured by using number generator, and if one's NK goes through will the probability of the individual who made NK collapse into being only Mafia? Because it is suicidal for Mafia to organize in this format, there are expected to be team-killings between Mafia. So will there be extra rule to moderate this or so?
I mean, I'm all up for it since it sounds like fun format, but this realistically just sounds like bundle of headaches.
|
Hmm, few month ago I tried making "Zerg Psi Adaptor Mafia" format. I'm not sure how it will work out but I predict role-reading of every player plays critical role in this format. I tossed out my plannings, but I remember some gist of it:
1. Every player is given specific role (unit). Each unit has it's "strength point".
2. Mafia is "experimented drone"(1 strength) with psi adaptor implanted on it. On every night, their night action consists of this:
"Mind control player A to attack B".
If Strength A > B, B is killed.
If A=B, both is killed.
If B > A, Both A and B stays alive and role of A becomes revealed to public.
3. When there are more than one individual at attacking or defending party, their strength points are added together.
Mafia 1 "A attack C"
Mafia 2 "B attack C"
A+B versus C
If A+B=C, all three are killed.
4. Ultralisk has INFINITE strength.
5. There are three methods to kill for Town: lynch, consume (Defiler), cerebrate retaliation.
6. Cerebrate is elected major that has strength of 0 but cannot be attacked until all the bodyguards (Overlord) is removed. Cerebrate is unaware of who the bodyguard is. During the daytime, Cerebrate can retaliate against suspected Mafia by commanding "player A, B, C attack D". If D is experimented Drone, they can mind control one other player by PM. This mind-controlled player will add to defender's strength, but is not killed if overpowered.
The overall strength or identity of the retaliatory force is not revealed (even when they are repelled), and only the result of the retaliatory attack will be revealed at the end of the day thread.
7. The lowest tier unit is (normal) Drone (strength 1), and has the highest # out of all occupations. Because the objective of the Mafia is to nullify the base strength for Terran invasion, death of all the Drone also results in Mafia victory.
|
On March 22 2010 06:41 haster27 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
So long as we're talking about different mechanics, I'm thinking it might be fun to run a Quantum Mafia game, where players' roles are only a set of probabilities until the wavefunction is collapsed by DT-check/lynches/kills. It'll be a complicated mess for the moderator, but I'm hoping it can turn out to be good and not too luck-based. What will be the Townie victory condition? If setup is like this, there would be lot of people with probability of becoming Mafia. If even one people with 1% probability of being Mafia is alive, it cannot be Town's victory because the possibility of Mafia "existing" is still present. It could be made that the overall Mafia probability decreases below certain percentage it becomes Town victory, but there are still many factors that could mess it up. Will everyone having probability of being Mafia send their night actions in? Will their NK be honoured by using number generator, and if one's NK goes through will the probability of the individual who made NK collapse into being only Mafia? Because it is suicidal for Mafia to organize in this format, there are expected to be team-killings between Mafia. So will there be extra rule to moderate this or so? I mean, I'm all up for it since it sounds like fun format, but this realistically just sounds like bundle of headaches.
It's possible to just pick an arbitrary number of game states that are skewed towards specific outcomes, so it's possible for certain players to actually have much larger probabilities of being Mafia than if we were using all states. Having town win condition be killing all the mafia shouldn't be a very big issue, since if there are no mafia left the probability of any townie being red is zero. The number of possible states will still likely be large, just not absurdly so that convergence takes forever.
Mafia NKs are a bit more complicated and I'm trying to figure that out now. As I understand it NHs are only represented by probabilities until we collapse the number of game states via lynch. A specific example: if all of the scenarios in which person A is lynched also have person B killed the previous night, then once A is lynched B will die. Player B, of course, was still allowed to post/vote until A was lynched, and existed as a quantum ghost up until that point. I suppose that doesn't quite answer your question entirely, but like I said I'm still figuring things out.
Yeah, it's sort of complicated, and completely different than what we've been playing... but I hope it'll be good enough to run here.
|
On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place.
And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least.
Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game.
|
On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game.
Wait. If players break the rules, you change the rules? I'm of the mindset that you deal with the players instead - by removing them.
In any case the game already relies on the honor system for players not to interfere with the game after they have been killed, so it's not as if it can't be done.
|
On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game.
Hey bro, I was afk. Don't be a hater.
|
On March 23 2010 05:14 L wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game. Hey bro, I was afk. Don't be a hater.
Blame Showtime, he squealed
|
On March 23 2010 05:21 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2010 05:14 L wrote:On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game. Hey bro, I was afk. Don't be a hater. Blame Showtime, he squealed
I can't be angry at him. He's such a G.
|
On March 23 2010 05:14 L wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game. Hey bro, I was afk. Don't be a hater.
Not hating, just using it as an example. I honestly don't think that anyone except maybe the mafia from that game really cares any more.
|
On March 23 2010 09:48 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2010 05:14 L wrote:On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game. Hey bro, I was afk. Don't be a hater. Not hating, just using it as an example. I honestly don't think that anyone except maybe the mafia from that game really cares any more.
My use of the letter G as a noun should have alerted you to the playful and potentially Ebonic nature of my statements.
|
On March 23 2010 11:25 L wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2010 09:48 Qatol wrote:On March 23 2010 05:14 L wrote:On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game. Hey bro, I was afk. Don't be a hater. Not hating, just using it as an example. I honestly don't think that anyone except maybe the mafia from that game really cares any more. My use of the letter G as a noun should have alerted you to the playful and potentially Ebonic nature of my statements.
Ah but the G was directed towards Showtime!/BC, not me!
|
On March 23 2010 11:58 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2010 11:25 L wrote:On March 23 2010 09:48 Qatol wrote:On March 23 2010 05:14 L wrote:On March 22 2010 11:02 Qatol wrote:On March 22 2010 05:54 Zona wrote:On March 22 2010 05:46 d3_crescentia wrote:
No PMs make the game better, but I don't really see how that can be enforced.
Honor system. Just like no interference after you have died has been "enforced". Plus if something fishy goes on hosts can investigate to try to find out if out of thread has taken place. And it hasn't worked as well as you think. There is an incident with this every few games at least. Recent examples include Bill Murray giving away his rolecheck results in Incognito's mafia XVI and L giving away his in the smurf game. Hey bro, I was afk. Don't be a hater. Not hating, just using it as an example. I honestly don't think that anyone except maybe the mafia from that game really cares any more. My use of the letter G as a noun should have alerted you to the playful and potentially Ebonic nature of my statements. Ah but the G was directed towards Showtime!/BC, not me!
You're a G too.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
On March 22 2010 04:15 Zona wrote:
As for #5, I didn't mean an artificial cap, but just not including enough DTs vs the number of days the game is likely to last. But yeah, if DTs aren't as easily protected and if there's no out of thread communication, then even if DTs could check many players over the course of the game it's still much harder to rely solely on DT checks to win.
Bus driver is amazing! It's a role that relies on prediction and reading other people - an extension of normal mafia play. But I do agree a SK Bus Driver could be pretty interesting.
Bus Driver is fucking awesome.
Yeah.
Darn.
|
I'm thinking of slowly expanding the list of possible roles in Micro-MAFIA 3 and beyond, and I want input and discussion on the proposed roles to ensure that they don't upset the game balance that exists in the current format.
Mafia scrambler:
Each night, you may choose one person to scramble. If a detective investigates this person, the result will be inverted. If you target someone who performs a night action (other than scramble), the target's action will then be performed on a randomly chosen player, and the target will know who his/her night action actually targeted.
(substantially stronger than the roleblocker against detectives, slightly weaker than the roleblocker against medics)
Purpose of this role: In the current format, the detective is always sure of her results. With a scrambler in play, this is no longer the case (which is a major damper on the role, even if the random chance of the result being wrong is a mere 1/7). The detective can no longer solely rely on her results, but must combine them with her reading of others. As well, one detective strategy is to simply check the most experienced player in the game to start, and move on from there. With a scrambler in play, the scrambler could predict this check and counteract it, so the detective needs to think a level deeper when deciding who to check.
Of course, just the possibility that there is a scrambler in the game strengthens the mafia by quite a bit, so the distribution of roles will likely need to be adjusted.
Town Jailer:
Each night, you may choose one person to jail. Any night action (including killing) that target this player is blocked. Any night action that this player performs (including killing) fails. This action's priority is lower than the scrambler or roleblocker.
(substantially stronger than the medic AND detective combined when targeting mafia, slightly weaker than the medic when targeting town)
Purpose of this role:
A medic replacement with a twist. Can potentially be used as a quasi-detective to find mafia by jailing them to see if the nightkill is blocked. (The mafia will need to select someone to perform the nightkill in the game setup, in addition to selecting who to kill, with this role included.)
Town Vigilante
Self-explanatory, with one bullet.
Purpose:
Gives one town member the opportunity to kill without consensus. Could be strong in the hands of a player who reads well, or a disaster in the hands of an impulsive townie. Could also act as a double lynch if used along with town consensus.
Town Veteran
Absorbs one kill. This ability can be temporarily nullified or reassigned by the roleblocker or scrambler, respectively.
Purpose:
Mafia now have to consider if the player they're targeting is veteran when they decide who to kill. And the town member who receives this role may want to play differently to draw the mafia hit. But this ability potentially give the town another day, so it could be pretty powerful.
|
I really like the scrambler, serves a similar purpose of miller but is an actual ability so greater strategy to it.
|
Scamble your mafia allies. in a 9/2 setup, unless DT hits a 1/8 shot the first night, his role becomes useless.
|
Ambiguous Cop >Scrambler ^_^
|
I don't like Vigis. They are too uncontrollable from a balance perspective. Basically, if the player is good/lucky, they give a HUGE boost to the town. Otherwise, they hurt the town a decent amount. Also, they're pretty easy to confirm as innocent. Hatters take more maneuvering/strategy and aren't as easy to confirm. Much better role. Even Hatters with suicide (they can kill someone but they have to die to do it) are better than vigis from my point of view because you have to be really sure and you can't be confirmed as innocent.
|
Vigis are awesome. Imo the role doesn't give as much variance as say...a DT or even Watcher/Trackers. The fact that they can screw up but depend on player skill is a huge reason to keep them around. Vigis are one of the more difficult roles to use well.
Confirming roles as innocent is part of the game and should eventually happen. The problem is in how easy or fast this can happen. Invincible DTs and Masons are the two most prominent examples of this.
|
On March 30 2010 15:46 L wrote:
Scamble your mafia allies. in a 9/2 setup, unless DT hits a 1/8 shot the first night, his role becomes useless.
Well the idea is precisely to allow that sort of strategy. But if you feel the power of the DT is only realized when they check scum, and the scrambler power in its current form is too strong, then the scramble power can be altered so that a detective checking the same target as a scramble always gets MAFIA-aligned as a result.
@Ace: What do you mean by ambiguous cop? None of the wikis I checked have the specific term defined. Unless you just mean unknown sanity?
I agree, vigilante is a hard role to use well, especially without PMs and "town circles". Having the self-discipline not to shoot until there's a good amount of evidence is just a starting point...
|
yep. Cop can be Sane/Insane/Paranoid(kills targets)
|
Dunno, I just don't like that the vigi can establish himself innocent really early by calling his shot.
|
On March 31 2010 10:38 Qatol wrote:
Dunno, I just don't like that the vigi can establish himself innocent really early by calling his shot.
If mafia doesn't react, sure.
But that's kinda on them.
|
The vig can breadcrumb the shot before taking it. How can the mafia react to the claim then without risking one of their own with a counterclaim?
|
The vig can call the shot before taking it. What are the mafia going to do? Hit the same person? Especially if it happens to be a mafia? If there are mafia KP + 1 night kills and 1 kill is the vig's target, it isn't hard to tell if they're legit.
|
Mafia Roleblockers prevent that. Even so losing 1 Mafia for 1 Vigi isn't always a big deal. Vigis also don't tend to breadcrumb anything because of the fact most of the time a lot of them don't know how to and they tend to end up shooting innocents (which isn't always their fault. Killing dumb townies vs Scum is essentially the same benefit imo).
|
On March 31 2010 11:43 Qatol wrote:
The vig can call the shot before taking it. What are the mafia going to do? Hit the same person? Especially if it happens to be a mafia? If there are mafia KP + 1 night kills and 1 kill is the vig's target, it isn't hard to tell if they're legit.
Easy method? Skip a hit that night and then when no medic/vet steps up, you're g2g.
|
Did everyone just ignore my superior vig claiming strategy?
Breadcrumb your shot, don't call it in an obvious manner. Then if mafia didn't see through your breadcrumb before you reveal it, the only chance of there not being 2 kills the next day is the 1/8 chance that you and the mafia chose the same target.
But I wouldn't claim unless I was in danger of being lynched. Furthermore, I wouldn't shoot early just to be able to claim. A bad shot could reduce the number of available mislynches to the town, and lynches provide a lot more information than a random shot in the dark.
|
What I was saying is most won't even breadcrumb anything because of the idea they might be wrong and fear the backlash that could ensue.
|
I've definitely decided to include two new roles once I change things up in Micro-MAFIA:
Town Backup: gets the ability of the first dead non-vanilla pro-town player. (perhaps only functions before a certain day)
Mafia Naive Roleblocker: player is told he's a roleblocker, but the roleblock doesn't function.
I still want to throw in the Scrambler idea somehow, but I'll stew on that for awhile. I want a vigilante too, but players here suck with vigilante powers, and it'll help mafia more than town, methinks.
I'm also crunching the numbers to find a balanced setup with 3 mafia members. With 2, the game swings very wildly in either the town or mafia's favor early on. And with 3 perhaps the mafia will drop more team-working clues that can be spotted.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
On April 11 2010 03:15 Zona wrote:
I've definitely decided to include two new roles once I change things up in Micro-MAFIA:
Town Backup: gets the ability of the first dead non-vanilla pro-town player. (perhaps only functions before a certain day)
Mafia Naive Roleblocker: player is told he's a roleblocker, but the roleblock doesn't function.
I still want to throw in the Scrambler idea somehow, but I'll stew on that for awhile. I want a vigilante too, but players here suck with vigilante powers, and it'll help mafia more than town, methinks.
I'm also crunching the numbers to find a balanced setup with 3 mafia members. With 2, the game swings very wildly in either the town or mafia's favor early on. And with 3 perhaps the mafia will drop more team-working clues that can be spotted.
Dude what's that version that has like...
A power role game that actually is really just townies versus mafia.
Like there are two naive mafia role blockers, one deputy and no cop, one nurse and no medic, etc...
|
I know this thread is a couple months old, but I don't see a better place to put this. If I was wrong to bump this, just let me know. Also, I'm a new player to these forums, so I don't expect my opinion to hold too much weight, but here goes.
I think it should be considered a town power to be able to send a message. Allowing all players to PM all players is a townie advantaged state of game. While this can be balanced into the calculations, I think that allowing all players to PM takes a lot away from the game as well. There will be less activity in thread because of how much conversation happens behind closed doors. In the end this stifles interaction and discussion between the players - the very essence, to me, of the game of mafia.
In short, I believe it is better for the health of the game to make no-PM the norm and assign PM powers in roles.
|
On June 14 2010 14:53 YellowInk wrote:
I know this thread is a couple months old, but I don't see a better place to put this. If I was wrong to bump this, just let me know. Also, I'm a new player to these forums, so I don't expect my opinion to hold too much weight, but here goes.
I think it should be considered a town power to be able to send a message. Allowing all players to PM all players is a townie advantaged state of game. While this can be balanced into the calculations, I think that allowing all players to PM takes a lot away from the game as well. There will be less activity in thread because of how much conversation happens behind closed doors. In the end this stifles interaction and discussion between the players - the very essence, to me, of the game of mafia.
In short, I believe it is better for the health of the game to make no-PM the norm and assign PM powers in roles.
I had PM in a mini game, and the mafia won
I don't believe it really matters. Mafia can influence townies to do what they want. If Chezinu is in the game, and town, perhaps you're right 
|
On June 14 2010 14:53 YellowInk wrote:
I know this thread is a couple months old, but I don't see a better place to put this. If I was wrong to bump this, just let me know. Also, I'm a new player to these forums, so I don't expect my opinion to hold too much weight, but here goes.
I think it should be considered a town power to be able to send a message. Allowing all players to PM all players is a townie advantaged state of game. While this can be balanced into the calculations, I think that allowing all players to PM takes a lot away from the game as well. There will be less activity in thread because of how much conversation happens behind closed doors. In the end this stifles interaction and discussion between the players - the very essence, to me, of the game of mafia.
In short, I believe it is better for the health of the game to make no-PM the norm and assign PM powers in roles.
This is the reason I don't play PM games. PMs are a HUGE bonus for the town and just screw Mafia over, not to mention ruining the game. Players also tend to do terrible when PMs are involved because when trying to read the thread multiple chains of information and logic are missing. When playing standard games Masons are usually killed off asap because of their ability to PM.
|
On June 14 2010 15:01 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 14:53 YellowInk wrote:
I know this thread is a couple months old, but I don't see a better place to put this. If I was wrong to bump this, just let me know. Also, I'm a new player to these forums, so I don't expect my opinion to hold too much weight, but here goes.
I think it should be considered a town power to be able to send a message. Allowing all players to PM all players is a townie advantaged state of game. While this can be balanced into the calculations, I think that allowing all players to PM takes a lot away from the game as well. There will be less activity in thread because of how much conversation happens behind closed doors. In the end this stifles interaction and discussion between the players - the very essence, to me, of the game of mafia.
In short, I believe it is better for the health of the game to make no-PM the norm and assign PM powers in roles. I had PM in a mini game, and the mafia won I don't believe it really matters. Mafia can influence townies to do what they want. If Chezinu is in the game, and town, perhaps you're right
It's true, it can work both ways. However it still ruins the game and it takes some really skilled Mafia and stupid townies for the scum to get away with stuff in all out PM game. Still I'd never play in any game like that because it's no longer a Mafia game.
|
I was considering having Masons in my next game (no PM) with the condition that they can't publicly claim or be mod-killed.
edt: of course mafia could pm each other
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
