EPTNah don't worry take your time.
I just don't want you to forget that's all
A Discourse on the Definition of Normal Games - Page 4
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
Nah don't worry take your time. I just don't want you to forget that's all | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18264 Posts
It might give more leeway to the balancing team, but given foolishness' last post, the problem isn't even so much the definition of normal, but rather drama in the balancing team itself. Not gonna comment on that stuff  @Curu: I'm quite surprised to read your opinion. Would you not consider your GoT game normal? | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
Pretty sure that isn't normal, even if that's what I do in the majority of my games anyway | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Also I strongly disagree with the notion that players do not take themed games seriously and if some don't, they shouldn't be joining at all. A themed game just means to me that more attention has to be directed towards setup speculation, planning and forming strategies unrelated to actual analysis. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On April 24 2012 12:24 gonzaw wrote: Also, that "heavy lore" thing people talk about (Like having each Vanilla Townie have a different role name and PM flavour and shit) shouldn't be allowed in a Normal game and include it in the new category. Because scum need to be given fake-claims for that, maybe some part of the game will revolve around discussing said lore too, etc. Maybe the people that just want to have a relaxing mafia time don't want to deal with all those names and flavour and claims and shit and just want a plain ol' "Vanilla Town" or "Mafia Goon". disagree here. I like the heavy flavor in normal games a lot and it makes the whole thing feel less 0815-setup that was just randomly created by a setup-creating-machine. As long as it's flavor that is not affecting the game I have no problem with that at all. Also if that's the case People HAVE fakeclaimes before the game starts. As an example you probably still remember LI. Mafia was given 2 Role-PM's before the game started for every player. One Role was the real one for your mafia role and the 2nd was a fake claim for a VT that was exactly like all the real VTs. Additionally we had the possiblity to ask for up to 6 (?) more fake-claims if we wanted to blue fakeclaim. I asked for a vet fakeclaim and got this: + Show Spoiler + Welcome to TL Mafia LI, you are Robert Boscawen, Viscount of Falmouth, you had a brief flare of glory in the great battles of Kommar, where you were made an honorary General after a cannon ball took off your left arm. Your family has always been one of the smallest and least influential, as your father bemoaned in his deathbead, and despite your best efforts it looks like they will remain under the boot of the other families forever, as even your generalship wasn't enough to get you a seat in the house of lords. Still, you know enough of war and battle to survive the first hit aimed at you during the game. Now, quash the anti-monarchists, decisively, so that you will finally be noticed, rather than pushed aside as a cripple. (I guess I am allowed to post this, the game is over after all?) And if it's like that I have no issues at all with flavor. In contrary it spices the whole thing up, changed the whole thing and again, it just doesn't feel like one of those out of the box set-ups. I can understand if people are not going that way for newby games or minis because those are getting hosted so quickly but for normal games I don't see a problem at all with that. That being said I have to 100% agree with prplhz. I can understand that people are emotional. I was pretty angry after LI myself and I am sorry for behaving like I did the moment I found out the game ended like that because I really wanted to win that game. So I can understand people who are getting angry about host failures the first moment but that really is an issue for us. I don't think we can have people running around telling hosts how retarded they are after a game because of a mistake or because the game was slightly imbalanced. I still remember the game with Annul (not talkign about the funny parts). Don't know what it was called... I think incog hosted it and wbg co-hosted it? At some point we as mafia basicly all-ined because we thought it's looking really good and we'd win that way. I did a huge case on Erandorr about how he was ignoring the game which was bullshit but it was our counterwagon to safe Annul and it worked. Erandorr was something like 4 votes away from majority while 2 mafias still had their vote pending 3 hours before the deadline and suddenly out of nowhere WBG tells people that erandorr gets replaced 2 hours prior to the deadline. Apparently it was all just a really unlucky situation, because Erandorr already requested to be replaced way earlier but neither incog nore wbg were around so they did a last second decision to replace Erandorr that moment and not with the next day/night-post. I was so mad at that point because it obviously ruined our all-in and people were unvoting erandorr to get Annul lynched instead which was the reason we got pretty desperate and everyone knows how that ended. That's the kind of stories I remember and the moment they happen I get mad but the next day or a week later it's all fine again. Noone cares about stuff like that anymore and if they do it's more like a funny story nowadays. That's the kind of thing that comes to my mind everytime something weird happens and I try to think about and stop me from posting like a total retard because we can't have people running around insulting hosts, telling them how retarded they are just because of a mistake or whatever else happend. I know people get angry but everyone knows that the hosts are at least frustrated as well when something like that happens. They put some effort into the game themselves after all. Big fancy conclusion: I really don't think we can afford people running arround telling hosts how retarded they are, pretty much no matter what. DocH comes to mind (although I never read that game, but I heard postgame was brutal oO), the co-host mistake in LI comes to mind and people still refer to those things all the time. I still feel bad for screwing up wbg's first C9++ when I spelled the VT "Vannila TownY" makeing someone confrim himself because he quoted that from the pm. Everyone's mad at everyone else for screwing up the game in some way and that's not helping us at all and I think that's the reason why everyone's yelling at each other telling them how we need to change everything because they are mad about what happened the last couple games or whatever else. Just my opinion on what's going on right now because I think what we have right now is fine, we just need people to chill. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On April 23 2012 23:36 iGrok wrote: You and I both think DMs are normal, but you'd be surprised just how much backroom arguing there was. Re: Low PR #s: Ive got 3/16 (not giving anything away here). The solution is clearly have me host all the games because my setups are best :p. I had to completely ignore two seasoned vets on the balance team to run my game. Thats not a decision I made lightly. Ultimately though, I decided what was best, cleared it with Foolishness, and ran it. As long as behavior doesn't ruin and at least 4-5 players play competently, it should be a very good game by current standards (but thats a topic for another thread). That being said, I don't really care. I think its bad to have strict rules. I also think its bad that a host can just overrule the balance team. I don't have a solution to the issue or a way to unify the problems. What I do know (and this may sound a little egotistical but whatever) is that my games consistently are very highly regarded (aside from one bastard game) and its ridiculous that I had to fight to run a normal game. Eh, fuck it. Its spilling out, may as well post the whole thing. This os my last game for the forseeable future, hence my not caring. There's a lot of reasons why, but basically i'm sick of the godawful play on TL. Its so bad I asked foolishness to let me run a 25 man all townie game, where I kill off whoever was the most BM at night. Modern TL towns have changed strategies from hunting scum to provoking everyone and looking for any slips. I don't mind if 1-2 players play protagonist, they get the game going. But its a community-wide mindset now. 90% of players act this way. New players pick up the bad habits. Games essentially turn into who can shit on the other guy the loudest, and actual scumhunting gets ignored. Now, there are a couple players who don't follow this trend. But from a hosting perspective, its not worth the time and effort (and I put more time and effort into hosting than most players playing the game) to host a terrible game. So this is my last one. To LIII players: consider this your last warning. I'm going to start enforcing no warning instant modkill for bad behavior. You've already had several warnings. My patience is GONE. Shape up. I agree, the games of late have become shitslinging contests. Your latest games are stacked with players who take every opportunity to insult someone. I, myself also tend to become an arrogant BM bastard when annoyed and thats why I have decided to change up my game, and toning it down. I think we need more hosts that modkill for BM, and I think you should stick around and be one of those who do. | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On April 24 2012 21:32 Tunkeg wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 23 2012 23:36 iGrok wrote: You and I both think DMs are normal, but you'd be surprised just how much backroom arguing there was. Re: Low PR #s: Ive got 3/16 (not giving anything away here). The solution is clearly have me host all the games because my setups are best :p. I had to completely ignore two seasoned vets on the balance team to run my game. Thats not a decision I made lightly. Ultimately though, I decided what was best, cleared it with Foolishness, and ran it. As long as behavior doesn't ruin and at least 4-5 players play competently, it should be a very good game by current standards (but thats a topic for another thread). That being said, I don't really care. I think its bad to have strict rules. I also think its bad that a host can just overrule the balance team. I don't have a solution to the issue or a way to unify the problems. What I do know (and this may sound a little egotistical but whatever) is that my games consistently are very highly regarded (aside from one bastard game) and its ridiculous that I had to fight to run a normal game. Eh, fuck it. Its spilling out, may as well post the whole thing. This os my last game for the forseeable future, hence my not caring. There's a lot of reasons why, but basically i'm sick of the godawful play on TL. Its so bad I asked foolishness to let me run a 25 man all townie game, where I kill off whoever was the most BM at night. Modern TL towns have changed strategies from hunting scum to provoking everyone and looking for any slips. I don't mind if 1-2 players play protagonist, they get the game going. But its a community-wide mindset now. 90% of players act this way. New players pick up the bad habits. Games essentially turn into who can shit on the other guy the loudest, and actual scumhunting gets ignored. Now, there are a couple players who don't follow this trend. But from a hosting perspective, its not worth the time and effort (and I put more time and effort into hosting than most players playing the game) to host a terrible game. So this is my last one. To LIII players: consider this your last warning. I'm going to start enforcing no warning instant modkill for bad behavior. You've already had several warnings. My patience is GONE. Shape up. I agree, the games of late have become shitslinging contests. Your latest games are stacked with players who take every opportunity to insult someone. I, myself also tend to become an arrogant BM bastard when annoyed and thats why I have decided ...to hit preview instead of post  + Show Spoiler + Will edit this after you finish lol EDIT: Glad to hear you're shaping up! I did talk to foolishness about staying, but the only condition would be that I get to host the 25 player all-townie game I mentioned before. iGrok's Good Clean Old Fashioned Mafia. He said no (as he should have). | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
Kurumi
Poland6130 Posts
On April 24 2012 21:32 Tunkeg wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 23 2012 23:36 iGrok wrote: You and I both think DMs are normal, but you'd be surprised just how much backroom arguing there was. Re: Low PR #s: Ive got 3/16 (not giving anything away here). The solution is clearly have me host all the games because my setups are best :p. I had to completely ignore two seasoned vets on the balance team to run my game. Thats not a decision I made lightly. Ultimately though, I decided what was best, cleared it with Foolishness, and ran it. As long as behavior doesn't ruin and at least 4-5 players play competently, it should be a very good game by current standards (but thats a topic for another thread). That being said, I don't really care. I think its bad to have strict rules. I also think its bad that a host can just overrule the balance team. I don't have a solution to the issue or a way to unify the problems. What I do know (and this may sound a little egotistical but whatever) is that my games consistently are very highly regarded (aside from one bastard game) and its ridiculous that I had to fight to run a normal game. Eh, fuck it. Its spilling out, may as well post the whole thing. This os my last game for the forseeable future, hence my not caring. There's a lot of reasons why, but basically i'm sick of the godawful play on TL. Its so bad I asked foolishness to let me run a 25 man all townie game, where I kill off whoever was the most BM at night. Modern TL towns have changed strategies from hunting scum to provoking everyone and looking for any slips. I don't mind if 1-2 players play protagonist, they get the game going. But its a community-wide mindset now. 90% of players act this way. New players pick up the bad habits. Games essentially turn into who can shit on the other guy the loudest, and actual scumhunting gets ignored. Now, there are a couple players who don't follow this trend. But from a hosting perspective, its not worth the time and effort (and I put more time and effort into hosting than most players playing the game) to host a terrible game. So this is my last one. To LIII players: consider this your last warning. I'm going to start enforcing no warning instant modkill for bad behavior. You've already had several warnings. My patience is GONE. Shape up. I agree, the games of late have become shitslinging contests. Your latest games are stacked with players who take every opportunity to insult someone. I, myself also tend to become an arrogant BM bastard when annoyed and thats why I have decided I must play in different games then, because the only bad memories I have are with layabout, but its my fault. Since there was no thread/problem about behaviour I really can't see what the deal is. Besides couple of players of course, because this happens from time to time. On January 01 2012 21:06 Palmar wrote: What's with the doomsaying? Sure, things get heated and a little out of hand that game, but people cool down. It's like in sports or whatever, if you really care about what you're doing, you're going to get angry. The main thing is that people can then let it go and play again, which most of us have no problem with. I dislike people throwing demeaning comments against a community like that. Confirmed town. Listen to him. | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On April 24 2012 21:35 syllogism wrote: I would still rather play with these people than with people who barely provide any content at all I feel like Sleeper Cell I had a very good mix of characters. That was a good game. There's also a difference between playing with aggressive players and playing with shit-slingers. | ||
|
Mementoss
Canada2595 Posts
On April 24 2012 21:37 iGrok wrote: I feel like Sleeper Cell I had a very good mix of characters. That was a good game. There's also a difference between playing with aggressive players and playing with shit-slingers. I agree that I would rather play with players that have personality to them. It helps distinguish well known players, as well as lightens up the game from super serious mode. Cause in the end, we are not actually finding killer mafias, were having fun. I'm not sure about other people but, when people "insult" me or other players with maybe a pictoral representation or a shot at my logic, it seems in good fun/ part of the game. It doesn't feel like to me they are personally attacking that person because they dislike them, unless that said person feels that they are being personally attacked and hurt and PM's the host. Obviously there are exceptions to this, as really vulgar insults are not needed in the game. (EG different ways of saying the same thigns - "Fucking asshole do you have no brain to think", or "It seems as though your logic is not fully functioning today") Anyways when I see a little bit of "shit-slinging" going on. It reminds me of those pictures that show the difference between people you hang out with and friends. The friends all give each other shit and make fun of each other in good fun. I know most people don't personally know each other IRL here, but its still a community where certain names and faces come up with each other often. Its fun as long as its sort of in the moment, and not a game long 2 players hate each other, or this player slings shit on everything he talks to. One last thing on this topic: when action is taken, to me it seems like its always going to be bias towards taking action against a player playing for the town over the mafia. Why is this? Outting a mafia can hurt there team much more as they are smaller and/or it can give away other players motivations, even though similar offenses or people throwing gasoline on the flame maybe be thought about over more time in the latter situation. TLDR; I agree I don't want to overall outlook to be bad on the mafia subforum and that people getting hurt and certain precautions should be taken so this is avoided, however I don't want the game to turn into "super serious mode", where the rules are so strict that the personality is sucked out of the game. This goes for both player actions, as well as set-up rules. imo | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
| ||
|
Mementoss
Canada2595 Posts
On April 24 2012 22:17 iGrok wrote: We're getting off topic O.o Yeah thats true, it slowly started getting off topic, then I completely threw it off topic. My bad, back to discussing the TL standard of normal games. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On April 24 2012 17:24 syllogism wrote: iGrok I hope you just take a break from hosting as you frequently have interesting setups that I particularly enjoy spectating or participating in. If you have a problem with how certain people behave (it's certainly not 90%), you should make it clearer that kind of behavior will not be acceptable to you. If they persist, you are free to ban them from your future games or just make it an invitational. Also I strongly disagree with the notion that players do not take themed games seriously and if some don't, they shouldn't be joining at all. A themed game just means to me that more attention has to be directed towards setup speculation, planning and forming strategies unrelated to actual analysis. Absolutely agree with this, this is how I distinguish between normal and themed games in my head. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On April 24 2012 19:16 Toadesstern wrote: disagree here. I like the heavy flavor in normal games a lot and it makes the whole thing feel less 0815-setup that was just randomly created by a setup-creating-machine. As long as it's flavor that is not affecting the game I have no problem with that at all. Also if that's the case People HAVE fakeclaimes before the game starts. As an example you probably still remember LI. Mafia was given 2 Role-PM's before the game started for every player. One Role was the real one for your mafia role and the 2nd was a fake claim for a VT that was exactly like all the real VTs. Additionally we had the possiblity to ask for up to 6 (?) more fake-claims if we wanted to blue fakeclaim. I asked for a vet fakeclaim and got this: + Show Spoiler + Welcome to TL Mafia LI, you are Robert Boscawen, Viscount of Falmouth, you had a brief flare of glory in the great battles of Kommar, where you were made an honorary General after a cannon ball took off your left arm. Your family has always been one of the smallest and least influential, as your father bemoaned in his deathbead, and despite your best efforts it looks like they will remain under the boot of the other families forever, as even your generalship wasn't enough to get you a seat in the house of lords. Still, you know enough of war and battle to survive the first hit aimed at you during the game. Now, quash the anti-monarchists, decisively, so that you will finally be noticed, rather than pushed aside as a cripple. (I guess I am allowed to post this, the game is over after all?) And if it's like that I have no issues at all with flavor. In contrary it spices the whole thing up, changed the whole thing and again, it just doesn't feel like one of those out of the box set-ups. I can understand if people are not going that way for newby games or minis because those are getting hosted so quickly but for normal games I don't see a problem at all with that. Well yeah, personally I don't mind the flavour in any game and would prefer it. But well, it adds something completely unrelated to the core of the game into the mix and may seem a little "too much" if we are setting "Normal Games" as these "Oh this should be a completely normal generic game just to analyze and shit". But meh, if scum are given fakeclaims at the start, and there is no hidden information in the flavour, then it's fine. The thing is that maybe some people may detour from playing the game and try to analyse the flavour and role names to see connections (Like the "Lord/Baron prefix/suffix" thing from LI);...well I know I would | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
I never play in bigger games (my biggest was 20 people I think?) so i can't really comment there. But here is something from my own experience: The "I'm a cop you idiot" game was pretty standard - yes? It was small but very standard. A cop, a medic, 3 vts and 2 mafia goons. That setup was great. But would I play that kind of setup all the time (even with small tweaks to the roles)? Maybe the first 2 or 3 times but after that it would get kinda boring. My point being if we run games that are almost alike all the time it would get boring. I know there are some wiggleroom within the guidelines in this thread but smaller twists in setup might make them more interesting going forward. Besides that I'm against anything that put things in boxes. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On April 25 2012 04:44 Dirkzor wrote: Question: Do people really want normal games? Or do they just think they want normal games? I never play in bigger games (my biggest was 20 people I think?) so i can't really comment there. But here is something from my own experience: The "I'm a cop you idiot" game was pretty standard - yes? It was small but very standard. A cop, a medic, 3 vts and 2 mafia goons. That setup was great. But would I play that kind of setup all the time (even with small tweaks to the roles)? Maybe the first 2 or 3 times but after that it would get kinda boring. My point being if we run games that are almost alike all the time it would get boring. I know there are some wiggleroom within the guidelines in this thread but smaller twists in setup might make them more interesting going forward. Besides that I'm against anything that put things in boxes. nothing is forcing people into only these games, themed games will be co-existing as well | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On April 25 2012 04:44 Dirkzor wrote: Question: Do people really want normal games? Or do they just think they want normal games? I never play in bigger games (my biggest was 20 people I think?) so i can't really comment there. But here is something from my own experience: The "I'm a cop you idiot" game was pretty standard - yes? It was small but very standard. A cop, a medic, 3 vts and 2 mafia goons. That setup was great. But would I play that kind of setup all the time (even with small tweaks to the roles)? Maybe the first 2 or 3 times but after that it would get kinda boring. My point being if we run games that are almost alike all the time it would get boring. I know there are some wiggleroom within the guidelines in this thread but smaller twists in setup might make them more interesting going forward. Besides that I'm against anything that put things in boxes. I would mainly because there are only a few blue roles. Any game where there are lots of VTs, a few blue roles and Scum that may or may not have roles that need to deal with Town blue role is fine by me. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
I think a game should not be considered normal if it has elements that significantly change how you should play. For instance in storm mafia there was a vig role that could only shoot if town had mislynched and they could only shoot into the players that voted for the mislynch. At the time we, the mafia team discovered it we were annoyed because we had all been on a wagon to mislynch redFF day1. I do not want to complain about the role, it's quite inventive in fact. What is significant about that role is that it punishes specific plays that a mafia team might make that are not necessarily good bad plays. The mafia were completely unaware of this role and by doing what we felt was a reasonable move, we actually took a massive risk that the game mechanics were designed to punish. I do not think roles that function like this belong in normal games. I feel like a player should be able to sign up for a normal game, and be able to scumhunt without reading the OP. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
But anyway I digress; I think more hosts should be looking toward minis and normals because the demand exists but isn't being met IMO. | ||
| ||
