EPTOn February 20 2013 23:08 risk.nuke wrote:
Yes the setup was townfavored, I'd say more then slightly but we can disagree on that, it's not even my issue since it was an experimental setup. As you both say the bigger crook was RNG, evidently town didn't even need some of their power roles. But that balance perspective should had been obvious to the host from the start and the fair thing to do would be to redo the RNG+ Show Spoiler +and there is a reason for that.
When a game is over, for a player there is nothing as frustrating as to look at a setup and see that it was heavily favored one way or another. More so if you were on the loosing side and put in a lot of effort. And favor doesn't just come from the setup, the players are also a factor. A hosts job is to make sure these frustrating scenarios doesn't happen. Knowing it was imbalanced and writing it of as bad luck because of the RNG isn't acceptable imo. You have a responsibility to your players to try to balance this game, and that should be prioritized before your code of never re-RNG.
Yes the setup was townfavored, I'd say more then slightly but we can disagree on that, it's not even my issue since it was an experimental setup. As you both say the bigger crook was RNG, evidently town didn't even need some of their power roles. But that balance perspective should had been obvious to the host from the start and the fair thing to do would be to redo the RNG+ Show Spoiler +
I know some hosts do this more then others to ensure the teams are as fair as possible. I also know some hosts as yourself dislike doing it.
When a game is over, for a player there is nothing as frustrating as to look at a setup and see that it was heavily favored one way or another. More so if you were on the loosing side and put in a lot of effort. And favor doesn't just come from the setup, the players are also a factor. A hosts job is to make sure these frustrating scenarios doesn't happen. Knowing it was imbalanced and writing it of as bad luck because of the RNG isn't acceptable imo. You have a responsibility to your players to try to balance this game, and that should be prioritized before your code of never re-RNG.
How do you figure it was an experimental setup?
The only thing unusual about this setup was the way the town vig role worked. Everything else was a weaker version of normal.
What syllogism said is 100% true and was the basis of my balancing. Foolishness would agree with me on that, as we both talked it over for about an hour or so.
It's funny that you bring up player balance, since that reinforces my point that your team played with the idea that you were behind to begin with. That's a mental issue. You can't qualify the balance of teams simply by who shows up on them. What if there were two vets? Do I split them up? Or do I put them both on the same team? By your logic only splitting them up would keep the game balanced. If there were 3?
The reason I RNG setups is to stay impartial. Anything else, including rerolling, is subject to bias. If you feel you are incapable of winning against certain players, maybe you should improve or change your outlook on the game.
