|
We gather here today to ready ourselves for a great endeavor. To create the first ever unique to TL Normal Mini set up. We gather to theory craft our way to brilliance.
Some thing to consider:
1. In the past our normal minis have had between 9 and 16 players with between 2 and 4 scum.
2. Normal minis can but often don't include a third party.
2a. The third party in [N][M] is almost exclusively the SK, with an occasional survivor.
3. The set-up should probably be, in some way, variable to prevent the easy gaming of the set up done in C9++ games or 2of4 set ups.
4. This set up should reflect the way we on TL approach balance and not the way that things are balanced on any other site.
5. The set up should be fun!
|
|
|
|
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
So I'd just like to put my GSL / British Empire setup on the chopping block. As it stands it's probably not ideal for a normal mini setup (instant majority, non-standard named VT role) but I've always had fun with it. Currently it's town-favored.
The setup:
7 town, 2 scum, 4 potential setups. players don't know which one is being used. Docs are non-conseq, Cops are Parity. BoxeRs have no power but receive a unique PM, so can be claimed as a role. Scum RB notifies.
A: 1 Doc, 1 Cop, 5 VT, 1 Goon, 1 Scum RB
B: 1 Doc, 1 BoxeR, 5 VT, 2 Goon
C: 1 Cop, 1 BoxeR, 5 VT, 2 Goon
D: 2 BoxeR, 5 VT, 1 Goon, 1 Scum RB
I used Instant Majority in these games, which probably increased the town advantage. Ways to balance could include removing RB notifications, getting rid of IML, reducing the number of blues, telling scum the exact setup.
|
Though I always loved these games I think my major issue with this set-up which pushed it too far into the town favoured category was the inability of scum to fake claim. Claimants were confirmed town every time.
My goal for a TL[N][M] would be to allow big plays from every side and to never have the easily confirmed town of set ups like BH's minis.
One way I see to counter act that with your particular set up Blaze is to remove the Named VTs and to make them simply VTs so that town is unsure of the total number of blue roles.
Another way for that set up would be to have only alignment flips and not role flips so that if doc/named vt/cop died early scum could fake claim blue. This would reward the scum team for sniping blues early on and could lead to a more balanced game.
I'd like to collect a number of minis we have run in the past which were considered normal and look at whether we believe they were town or scum favoured and where the middle ground is.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
I'd say it should be 12-13 players, not 9, if we're going for a default size
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
12 players, 3 of whom are scum is a nice size. Can also be 13 players, 3 of whom are scum.
I think our default roles included/available should include cop, parity cop, doctor, jailkeeper, veteran, vigilante for sure. Maybe not parity cop?
what do you guys think of trackers/watchers? How about scum delivering KP vs KP being factional?
|
I think nine, three, one is the way to go. Kp = 1. Factional kp.
Town roles
Doctor
Vig
Vet
Cop/parity cop
Tracker/Watcher
Scum roles
Roleblocker
Godfather
Framer
3p
Sk
Assassin (given name of target. Wins if target dies before him. No bullet)
Don't really like survivor/jester as I feel it just encourages lurking/being useless
Need to think about potential groupings of the roles.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
I think kp should always be 1. My definition for "normal mini" (at least in my head) includes scum only ever having 1 kp. They might have a vigi or something but the "1 kp" thing is how I usually frame mini vs non-mini though peopel may disagree.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
Really don't see why 3p would be 'standard', I'd infinitely prefer games without them, personally
edit: yes, 1kp also, not some formula
|
If be fine with one if it's factional. Delivered feels weaker with only one.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
Risen???
Hundreds of thousands of mini normals across the universe have been run with 1kp delivered. It's really not a thing to even worry about
|
I'm just trying to think of a way to make ours unique. I prefer higher powered setups is all
Edit: I'm updating my initial post as we discuss this lol
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
It needs to be good before it needs to be unique
It needs to be a setup that everyone wants to play as well.
Simple is usually better, it just needs to have variety.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
I personally am a fan of the factional KP but I also see why people like the delivered KP. Delivered KP DOES allow for a bit of flexibility though. So like, if town doesn't have a JK, you can have KP be delivered and give town a Tracker rather than a Cop. This will be a weaker role because the Tracker only gets a "red check" if he is tracking the correct member of the scumteam.
We don't have to do it though, we could go with factional. What are our thoughts on RB notifications?
|
Then maybe drop the sk and just leave the assassin as 3p? I like games with third parties but if simple is the way to go I could see dropping the faction entirely and going nine, three with more blues
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
Delivered KP is amazing for flexibility. For the flexibility reason alone I think it's pretty superior as an option to factional
Not sure about RB notifications, it could just be something that's tweakable depending on setup I suppose? Don't see why it has to be set in stone, even in a template
|
Rb should notify for sure.
|
I think if we're going for simple the role should be set in stone, yeah?
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
I could see reasons to NOT have RB notify. One fun thing about RB non-notification is it means town has a little less info about whether or not scum has an RB. If we're going to be running mostly or entirely closed, I'd see a reason for that. RB Notifying gives an extra thing for scum to play with (fakeclaiming RB for example) but gives town also a little more info.
Also, what do we think about open/closed?
Open - everyone knows the setup.
Semi-Open - there are a list of setups, people don't know which one it is.
Semi-Closed - there is a list of roles, people don't know how many (if any) of each role there are
Closed - all anyone knows is the number of scum
|
I think this being a standardized thing means it can't be closed. I'm assuming the whole goal is to come up with a list of setups or a method for determining setups in a way that is balanced, fun, varied, and allows for all types of play. If anything, I always prefer semi-closed, but I feel that no matter what we do, we will end up with something that is semi-open due to the whole open and collaborative nature of this idea (which isn't a bad thing mind you, just something to realize).
|
I like notification because I think it makes choices mute important. Adds an additional layer of intrigue. Could see the normal not wanting that, though.
I would like semi-open
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
Semi-open means we'll decide here on a bunch of setups, maybe make a pool of them and hosts can draw from those setups for their games. Maybe we can just make an OP with all the setup info and hosts can just link to it (like a standardized OP with possible setups and all the normal mini rules) in their OP and make the Normal Mini OPs pretty concise as a result.
|
|
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
If I hosted a mini normal, it'd definitely be semi-closed, regardless of what got decided here :p
|
Eh, I prefer there to be choices whether or not someone is notified of being roleblocked. It should depend on the setup. For example, there should totally be a 9 VT, 2 Mafia RB, 1 Godfather setup with no rb notifications. There should also be a 8 VT, 1 town RB, 1 Mafia RB, 2 Goon setup with rb notifications. I think flexibility is key.
|
On December 31 2013 04:22 marvellosity wrote:
If I hosted a mini normal, it'd definitely be semi-closed, regardless of what got decided here :p
I know what you mean, but I don't think it is possible for whatever we create to be truly semi-closed because unless a few people decide the setups or the way to create the setups behind closed doors and never reveal that info, we will always be semi-open or open because at least a few people will know things and could share that info. And in the interest of fairness we probably should share that info to prevent accidental or purposeful advantages gained from people getting access to that info.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
part of what we need to decide is whether we want to make a standard OP to link to (this would basically force us to be semi-open, I think) or just to make a list of roles and some guidelines + standard rules to make hosting mini normals a bit easier / more standard
|
I think the OP to link to is the way to go.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
Isn't the net of this going to be that those who like how the standard template turns out will use it, and those who don't, won't?
I think one of the inherent problems of trying to create a "standard" setup is that it already gives away more information than it needs to necessarily :/
Like I think semi-open setups are pretty restrictive in terms of the ability to do fun things like fakeclaim, and so I wouldn't run one for that reason
|
Honestly the simplest solution is to agree on "normal mini" roles, and hosts just determine them "however they want to" (as long as it keeps in line with a rough balance I guess)
If you control it in too much detail, it'll be ez to game the setup.
Hey...
That's pretty much how it is already!
|
kitaman27
United States9244 Posts
We kinda already have a thread for discussing normal game setups and what roles/mechanics should be allowed. Even if we come up with a default setup, I'd think hosts would still be allowed to run any variation of any setup they would want (within reason).
I'd imagine the goal of this thread would be to come up with a well-defined setup like Matrix6 or C9++ that we could call our own and make improvements until we're satisfied with the balance and how it plays out. In my opinion, a setup that is randomized between a list of possible open setups in the way to go.
It's tough to say much about balance in a semi-open setup that leaves it up to the host to determine role distribution. It's a lot easier to examine the balance of setup that is a coinflip between 3 goon, 1 medic, 8 VT and 3 goon, 1 cop, 8 VT than a setup with "an unknown number of vanilla, cops, detectives, and vigilantes".
While it may be difficult to come up with a 12-13 person setup with a set in stone role list and call it balanced, if you can come up with a couple slightly town favored setups and a couple slightly mafia favored setups and randomize the actual setup between these, than you can try to aim for something that averages out closer to 50/50, while promoting setup variety at the same time.
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
I agree with Kita in that a setup that is randomized between a list of possible open setups is the way to go. I think knowing what to expect without knowing the details still allows for plays to be made (e.g. fake claiming) while ensuring some sort of balance.
Personally I'm against any sort of 3rd party in these setups.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
I think dandel got it tbh
|
I have to go with dandel as well
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On December 31 2013 04:59 Dandel Ion wrote:
Honestly the simplest solution is to agree on "normal mini" roles, and hosts just determine them "however they want to" (as long as it keeps in line with a rough balance I guess)
If you control it in too much detail, it'll be ez to game the setup.
Hey...
That's pretty much how it is already!
I agree, but that doesn't mean we can't come up with the exclusive "TL Mafia Normal Mini" setup (with a catchier name of course). I wouldn't force the normal mini queue to just be only this type of game if it existed. This would serve as more of a default setup or go-to setup, with hosts having the power to tweak numbers/roles if they so desire for their own game.
|
Personal preference I like dandel's method, there should always be a possibility of two cops (or any other roles) to help with counterclaims.
I also don't like 3P in minis. SK can mess with the balance too much, and Jester/Survivor is just so disruptive to the metagame in general.
If I were allowed to host a mafia cup, I would use this setup
No PMs, Roleblocks not notified
12 People Total
3 Scum (One Roleblocker, One Godfather, One Goon)
3-4 Blue Roles (Host can fill however he wants)
Possible Roles
Blue Roles: Cop, Doctor, Veteran, 1 Shot Vig, Tracker, Watcher, Jailkeeper
Green Roles: VT, Miller, Nosy Neighbour
No mad hatter as they carry too much KP in a mini. No Bus drivers because it should be a normal game, and night action resolution should be simple
|
If minis are generally 16-ish or less, what happens between 16 and say, 25? Do we have a "moderately sized mafia"?
|
Isn't that just a normal?
We could call large games 30+ ish
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
I always thought of minis as a combination of "less than 16" and "mafia has a single KP" and anything more than that is normal-sized (which is quite a range)
|
Minis are generally 16 or less. Anything else is a "large" game.
|
Hmm. Interesting.
I've always felt that 20 person games and 30 person games had a completely different feel to them.
I guess I'll start putting them in the normal slot from now on (except for Titanics  )
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
20 person games certainly feel different than 30+-- it's the difference between Medium and Large I guess. But neither are independently so common and popular that they deserve their own category imo; the "mini vs non-mini" distinction is more important.
|
Blazinghand? Is there any way you could make a 12 player version of your GSL setup?
|
wasn't gsl instant majority though?
|
On December 31 2013 12:25 kushm4sta wrote:
wasn't gsl instant majority though?
Yeah but it doesn't have to be.
|
On December 31 2013 07:15 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2013 04:59 Dandel Ion wrote:
Honestly the simplest solution is to agree on "normal mini" roles, and hosts just determine them "however they want to" (as long as it keeps in line with a rough balance I guess)
If you control it in too much detail, it'll be ez to game the setup.
Hey...
That's pretty much how it is already! I agree, but that doesn't mean we can't come up with the exclusive "TL Mafia Normal Mini" setup (with a catchier name of course). I wouldn't force the normal mini queue to just be only this type of game if it existed. This would serve as more of a default setup or go-to setup, with hosts having the power to tweak numbers/roles if they so desire for their own game.
I agree. If we want to constantly run minis, we need a default setup that any host can use immediatly. With this, we avoid a situation where a new game is delayed because there is no host who has a setup ready.
If someone wants to use his own setup (eg. Blazinghands GSL setup), then he is free to do so.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
? I'm not saying we shouldn't necessarily have a setup "ready", but it takes a few minutes to balance a normal mini setup...
edit: mostly because unlike larger games and/or themed, you have the 1kp/night standard, which makes it extremely easy to deal with
|
On December 31 2013 19:42 marvellosity wrote:
? I'm not saying we shouldn't necessarily have a setup "ready", but it takes a few minutes to balance a normal mini setup...
edit: mostly because unlike larger games and/or themed, you have the 1kp/night standard, which makes it extremely easy to deal with
Then I misunderstood you, disregard my comment.
|
So my understanding of the agreements reached herein:
12 players
Mafia kp is 1
Mafia kp is deliverable
9 town 3 scum
Mafia roles: GF, RB, mason, tracker, vig, framer and goon
Town roles: RB, cop (sane), parity cop, miller, doc, JK, tracker, watcher, vig, masoner, mason pair, vet, nosy neighbour
Notifications
Roleblock: yes
Doc save: no
Vet hit: yes
Does anyone disagree with the above? Of not we should move to create some form of point system similar to Xatalos' with which to balance the games easily and independently of needing to submit them to the balance team every time. We could then have the TL normal mini as a setup which did not need balance approval making it quick and easy to run. Any variations would need to be approved by a member of the balance team.
Thoughts?
|
mason (and masons), scum tracker (scum vig maybe) I'd consider normal too.
|
I think a mason pair is a role that should be used more.
|
I would posit that Minis, while traditionally run as 15-16 or under, should be capped at 13 if they are to take a constant, recurring slot.
You may have already reached this conclusion, I'm not caught up, just throwing that out there.
Also, Nosy Neighbor should be a role.
|
On January 02 2014 06:19 Promethelax wrote:
So my understanding of the agreements reached herein:
12 players
Mafia kp is 1
Mafia kp is deliverable
9 town 3 scum
Mafia roles: GF, RB, mason, tracker, vig, framer and goon
Town roles: RB, cop (sane), parity cop, miller, doc, JK, tracker, watcher, vig, masoner, mason pair, vet, nosy neighbour
Notifications
Roleblock: yes
Doc save: no
Vet hit: yes
Does anyone disagree with the above? Of not we should move to create some form of point system similar to Xatalos' with which to balance the games easily and independently of needing to submit them to the balance team every time. We could then have the TL normal mini as a setup which did not need balance approval making it quick and easy to run. Any variations would need to be approved by a member of the balance team.
Thoughts?
Does anyone disagree with this post? If not ill start working on a simple balancing act based around this set-up.
Your input will improve TL mafia! Think of the glory, the adoring fans, the supermodels!
|
On January 02 2014 06:19 Promethelax wrote:
So my understanding of the agreements reached herein:
12 players
Mafia kp is 1
Mafia kp is deliverable
9 town 3 scum
Mafia roles: GF, RB, mason, tracker, vig, framer and goon
Town roles: RB, cop (sane), parity cop, miller, doc, JK, tracker, watcher, vig, masoner, mason pair, vet, nosy neighbour
Notifications
Roleblock: yes
Doc save: no
Vet hit: yes
Does anyone disagree with the above? Of not we should move to create some form of point system similar to Xatalos' with which to balance the games easily and independently of needing to submit them to the balance team every time. We could then have the TL normal mini as a setup which did not need balance approval making it quick and easy to run. Any variations would need to be approved by a member of the balance team.
Thoughts?
Mason Pair seems pretty OP, especially in a mini. Having two easily conformable townies is pretty risky.
I also feel like masoner is a little to exotic as a role to be considered a mini mafia setup and shouldn't be considered standard.
The point system is all right, however I would like for the host to be able to assign points totals to fit in a range, probably from -2 to +2, in order to make fakeclaiming easier.
|
Mason pair is easily balanceable in minis.
|
On January 03 2014 16:12 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2014 06:19 Promethelax wrote:
So my understanding of the agreements reached herein:
12 players
Mafia kp is 1
Mafia kp is deliverable
9 town 3 scum
Mafia roles: GF, RB, mason, tracker, vig, framer and goon
Town roles: RB, cop (sane), parity cop, miller, doc, JK, tracker, watcher, vig, masoner, mason pair, vet, nosy neighbour
Notifications
Roleblock: yes
Doc save: no
Vet hit: yes
Does anyone disagree with the above? Of not we should move to create some form of point system similar to Xatalos' with which to balance the games easily and independently of needing to submit them to the balance team every time. We could then have the TL normal mini as a setup which did not need balance approval making it quick and easy to run. Any variations would need to be approved by a member of the balance team.
Thoughts?
Does anyone disagree with this post? If not ill start working on a simple balancing act based around this set-up. Your input will improve TL mafia! Think of the glory, the adoring fans, the supermodels!
It's nice that you mention my balance tester, but I wouldn't say it's the optimal way for creating a super balanced / standard setup... It's more like a guideline for creating decently balanced setups very fast and easily. I don't think it's possible to create a point system like that where the resulting setups wouldn't need at least a quick review by a human. There are just too many variables (role interactions etc.) to make any automatic method 100% accurate.
If you want to have a "standard" setup that wouldn't need any further review, I think the best option might be to create a large amount of very balanced setups and to only reveal some basic facts about the setup (such as possible roles) before the game starts. Then the actual setup is randomized from a list of possible setups. That way you could have a very balanced "default" setup while retaining the mystery of not knowing the exact setup.
It's a slight problem, though, that the longer the game goes on, it becomes easier to deduce the setup being used in that particular game (especially for Mafia since they have extra information about the roles in the game). That's why I think it'd be best to have a very large amount of these possible setups with slight variations - so many that it'd become fruitless to even think about basing your reads on setup speculation.
I think your proposed basic facts about a setup for 12 players are good (9 town, 3 scum, 1 KP etc.). Out of curiosity, I checked what was the default suggested setup for 12 players in the balance tester, and it's very similar:
Vanilla Townie
Vanilla Townie
Vanilla Townie
Vanilla Townie
Vanilla Townie
Vanilla Townie
Vanilla Townie
Doctor (no self-save)
Cop
Mafia Goon
Mafia Goon
Mafia Roleblocker
Balance score: -0.5 (very trivially in favor of Mafia)
Town victory odds: 49.12%
Mafia victory odds: 50.88%
|
My concerns are the following:
1. Follow-the-cop needs to be hard or impossible to achieve. Usually the only way this will work in a mini is by removing the doctor role and replacing it with JK, or ensuring that doctor and cop cannot be present simultaneously. One could argue that you could leave it in the game by just having a scum RB but I would say even that is questionable, given that the loss of the RB generally means the loss of the team as a whole. I think if the setup degenerates that easily to follow-the-cop then it inherently is not balanced. Thus I would strongly be against the inclusion of any normal medic/doctor type role in normal minis, even though the role itself is "normal".
2. I would advocate for making 13p minis and 9p minis standard. I can't for the life of me find the article on mafiawiki that explained why mafiascum switched from 12p minis to 13p minis in 2011 (look at this list: http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=List_of_Mini_Normals ) but when I was researching C9++ I came across the rationale for that and agreed with it myself pretty strongly. I think mafia might have been winning too many games or something like that.
It could very well be possible that 12p normals are more balanced than 13p normals. At a glance it would seem that way, given that both sides need the same number of lynches to win. In 13p games mafia need one extra lynch that town does not need (or a no-lynch on a particular day).
If 12p normals are standardized then I would suggest removing the no-lynch option-this (if I calculated it out right) forces the game to end after one side has achieved 3 "correct" lynches. Then ties would work like this:
If #mafia = #town, mafia wins. Otherwise, if two candidates have the same # of votes, then the first to reach the max dies.
(you could make a normal "twist" mini by making double or even triple lynch possible in the case of ties)
With C9++ in particular I think 13 players are necessary because of the possibility of more (and more powerful) blues. By including additional scum/town powers I think you need to dilute the pool with an extra vanilla player, but you also need to include a no-lynch option. The game becomes slower and lasts longer, which should usually favor town a bit more than a 12p mini that will basically end after 3 mislynches or 3 scum lynches.
|
...I can't for the life of me find the article on mafiawiki that explained why mafiascum switched from 12p minis to 13p minis in 2011
I found it... eventually.
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14635&start=0
EDIT: In reference to this:
Thus I would strongly be against the inclusion of any normal medic/doctor type role in normal minis, even though the role itself is "normal".
Do you feel that making a doctor unable to protect the same target twice in a row is sufficient to solve the problems with the role? I have my doubts, but it is at least a step in the right direction.
|
I'll throw an idea out here. Even if it turns out to be fatally flawed, or just not fun-looking, or not your own idea so obviously it's no good  , it'll give us a place to start talking.
Hypothetical Standard Normal Mini
13 players: 10 town, 3 mafia, no 3P.
+ Show Spoiler +Doubtless you could modify the setup to possibly include 3P but I'm against making that possibility the standard.
Basic Idea:
+ Show Spoiler +
Town get 1 or 2 power roles from the following list: EDIT: Whether this is 1 or 2 is randomly determined, probably a coinflip.
Sane Cop
Jailkeeper
X-Shot Vigilante (1 or 2, leaning towards the latter)
Mafia get an equal number of roles from the following list:
Godfather
Roleblocker
Role Cop
The idea behind these choices is that all available roles are of at least comparable power with no especially powerful synergies, so that any combination of them can be used. (For example, scum having both a Framer and a Godfather is probably much different to only having one or the other. Same for Doctor and Cop - or Doctor and anything with a power, really.)
I think most possible combinations will be more-or-less balanced, or at least have similar balance to each other. Balance can be adjusted with the changes suggested below, or other changes entirely.
Possible Changes:
+ Show Spoiler +- Changing the number of shots available to the Vigilante. More shots probably favours town.
- Give town a named townie when they have only one power role à la GSL. Change favours town.
- Give town a 50% or whatever chance of having a miller, in addition to PRs. If un-self-aware, change favours mafia. If self-aware, change is indeterminate.
- Further restrict mafia roles: e.g. they always get a Godfather, and get a Roleblocker in addition if the town has 2 roles. Restricts the setup a lot.
- Add a mason pair to the possible town roles. I'm not sure if I like masons, and in any case leaving masons to non-standard normal games is probably OK. It's a possibility, anyway. Effects will vary.
- Add some other role to the list e.g. tracker, masoner. Effects depends on role, but this may make it easier for scum to fakeclaim.
- Change cop to parity cop, of either kind. Probably favours mafia.
- Allow duplicate town roles. Change probably favours mafia and will alter the metagame somewhat.
- Alter roleblock priority rules to adjust balance, e.g. mafia roleblock takes place before jailkeeper block. Depends on alteration made.
- Prevent the JK from jailing the same player twice in a row. Favours mafia.
My Concerns:
+ Show Spoiler +- There's no possibility of a Doctor, or various other simple town roles. This was the simplest way I could think of to eliminate follow-the-doctor shenanigans - see Bugs' post above. The other obvious alternative is Macho Cops, but that's a little artifical for my taste. Enforcing that the same player can't be protected twice in a row might be enough to fix this but I'm not convinced.
- The rigidity of the setup means it might be exploitable, but that's true of basically all setups that aren't decided by the whim of a host. I like this setup because a lot of stuff is independent; if I'm a cop I don't know if town has another role or what it is, or what mafia's roles could be, simply based on what my role is (though it could adjust the probabilities slightly). There are much more rigid, yet quite playable setups out there.
- 1 power role for each team is less than average I think, but it's a normal game - deal with it.
- Mafia Rolecop isn't really normal on TL but I kind of like the role. It could be replaced by a Framer or something I guess.
- Tracker isn't so popular a role that I feel it needs to be included in a standard normal template. YMMV.
- The number of roles scum get will allow them to draw conclusions about the number of town roles. In particular, if they get one role they will know it is safer to fakeclaim than otherwise. I'm not sure this is a bad thing; scum draw conclusions from the strength of the roles they receive anyway, and if the setup is balanced the mafia's conclusions should be somewhat accurate no matter what setup you run. Knowing they can fakeclaim more safely is part of the compensation for having less powers, I guess.
I'll edit this if anything else occurs to me.
|
I honestly am hoping Blazinghand will make a 13 player version of his GSL setup.
|
On January 04 2014 17:13 DarthPunk wrote:
I honestly am hoping Blazinghand will make a 13 player version of his GSL setup.
What exactly are the aspects of the GSL setup which appeal to you, out of curiosity? I don't disagree with you by any means, by the way.
The most obvious unique feature IMO is that scum get very little information from the roles they get; if they get a Roleblocker town could have two power roles, or none at all. I'm not entirely sure if that's practical to replicate in a 13p game. Even in the 9p game I think there's a fair bit of difference in balance between a pcop+doctor and 2 namedVT setups (though I wouldn't venture to guess which is more balanced)
|
I think people tend to drastically undervalue vigilantes, probably because of the chance that they hit fellow townies. Even so, a vigilante is essentially guaranteed to give you a confirmed townie in a mini game. The worst case scenario is when a vigilante kills a townie the same night he is also shot, which in and of itself is really rare.
Let's look a bit at the 3 roles you provided. I briefly had a convo with Foolishness the other day about something similar, in which I asked him what he would rather have:
1 shot cop
1 shot vigi
We both agreed that in almost all situations we'd rather have the vigi.
Now, what about a full fledged cop and a 1 shot vigi? Now it's closer, and one could potentially make arguments for a vigi (particularly in the hands of a better player) but I think we both agreed again that we'd prefer a cop.
One thing I didn't consider, is the following: which would you rather prefer?
Parity cop
1 shot vigi
I think this one comes down more to personal preference. I think each player would have his or her own preference here, but it's much more even I think than the previous two situations. Similarly there are things like 2 shot cops, but that brings in a host of other issues. When I was tweaking C9++ I thought about this a lot so that the letter rolls would give balanced outcomes, but it's quite a hard thing to think about in the end.
Let's look at the 3 town roles you offered.
Sane Cop
Jailkeeper
1/2 shot vigi
Out of these, I'd say that I'd prefer:
Cop > vigi > jailkeeper.
I think all vigilantes should probably be 1 or 2 shot variants, but I think that role's balance is very weird and sometimes quite hard to quantify.
I think I even lean toward vigilantes being solely 1 shot variants in minis, for the simple reason that upping the power of a vigilante doesn't necessarily make the role "better". To elucidate: It instead swings the role more toward the extremes. A good player already with the role of vigilante will be much better with a second shot, whereas a shitty player with the role of vigilante will be much worse. The swing is too volatile and I think that's a big problem with the role. A 1 shot vigilante, on the other hand, is still more volatile than other roles but is probably at a level that can be relatively easily balanced, since you can measure fairly precisely the impact it will have upon the game (a correct vigi shot has the effect of removing a scum and confirming a town, and an incorrect shot has the effect of removing a townie and still confirming a town-confirming two, actually-sometimes the loss of a townie can almost completely be offset by the confirmations, particularly in low count situations like 6v3, 5v2, 4v1 etc). On the other hand, if you go from parity cop to regular cop, or jailkeeper to doctor, or limited shot to full for any other role, the player's skill does not factor in with respect to the increase in power. All players stand to benefit from the additional functionality of the role.
What I'm trying to get at here is that from a balance perspective you want to limit volatility. It's probably one of the biggest concerns, in my opinion, probably second only to preventing breaking strategies like follow-the-cop (which I suppose you could peg as volatile, in a sense).
To this end you need to balance around vigilantes or remove them completely. In the setups I run, I always look for "worst cases" and "what does it take to win?" by both sides. In 12/13p minis, in the absence of vigilantes, this should almost always be a worst-case of 3/4 cycles to lose for both sides. With vigilantes it's probably acceptable if it's 2 cycle worst-case for mafia to lose. Thus, something like two vigilantes should be avoided. Including an SK is a different story, as with a 3P the pressure is higher on mafia and SK to figure each other out, and so there is a mutual benefit to lynching the opposite party in this scenario. It also changes the claim dynamic for vigis and SKs, as I'll get into later.
The problem with there being a small number of roles is that individual players can make breaking strategies based upon the knowledge they glean from the setup. I experimented with no-knowledge RBs and other things to minimize player knowledge of the setup in my games, and I think I like it better. Why do I think this?
Imagine in your case, Aquanim, that we decide to pick two roles for town. There are 3 combinations possible.
Suppose now that I roll 1-shot vigi in your game.
I would argue that in almost every instance, that my best play should be to claim immediately after shooting. Why, and why wouldn't I ordinarily claim immediately after shooting in, let's say, a C9++ variant that I run? The answer is simple.
I as the vigi know that there has to exist another blue. 50% of the time, that blue is a JK, and now I've given him an optimal strategy. Jail me every night, and I am a confirmed, unkillable townie. If I shot a scum, this means we will almost certainly win if the mafia cannot find the JK within two cycles, and we are still very likely to win if the JK lives for one cycle, even ignoring almost everything else. The other 50% of the time, I will die, but that's okay, since I've told the cop he should not be investigating me.
What if roleblocks are known? Then, I will almost certainly know what the other blue is, and I can choose not to claim if it's not a JK and I think it'll be better for me to claim when there are less townies.
I would say that this is borderline gamebreaking. In the variants of normal minis that I run, the vigi after shooting would ordinarily only claim if he is going to get lynched or if he thinks that claiming will consolidate the lynch for the day onto scum, or if he thinks he is a likely target for mafia. He would not ordinarily have such a high chance of being protected and he has no way to predict what the setup will look like-thus, in most situations he'll only be confirmed for one cycle. In the above situation, there is always at least a 50% chance that there is a jailkeeper, and if roleblock information is given by the host then the setup will essentially be public knowledge.
Adding roles and changing the chance that they appear, or forcing certain role combinations, will generally prevent this. The former obviously makes it harder to balance.
e: also something I failed to make clear that I just noticed:
my point with respect to the "what role would you prefer?" bit was to express the idea that each different combination of possible roles should ideally be as balanced as possible.
If town get cop + vigi and this is universally considered better than, I dunno, jailkeeper + vigi or something like that, but mafia get the same roles regardless, then we have an imbalance that we have introduced.
|
I... may not have made something clear. Whether there's one or two power roles would be randomly determined each game. Whoops.
|
That means that if you're a vigilante there's a 50% chance of there being no other town PRs at all.
|
On January 04 2014 17:43 Aquanim wrote:
I... may not have made something clear. Whether there's one or two power roles would be randomly determined each game. Whoops.
Even in this case, I think you just halve the probabilities.
It's still optimal to claim, I think.
50% of the time, there will be no other blue.
50% of the time, there will be one other blue.
Of the 50% of the time where there is a blue, 50% of the time there will be a JK, which puts the chance for there to be a JK at 25%.
Someone correct me if I did that wrong, I'm not the greatest with probabilities, sadly.
|
I think your probabilities are right. EDIT: Changed my mind, see below. That being said, I don't think there's any way around a vigilante being able to claim once they've made their shot - and I'd argue that across all the setups run on the forum, guessing that there'll be some kind of protective role is often going to be a safe bet. Far better than 25%, certainly.
The only way to fix that problem, if it isn't already fixed, is to eliminate vigilante as a role entirely - which I feel isn't a great solution either.
|
my point with respect to the "what role would you prefer?" bit was to express the idea that each different combination of possible roles should ideally be as balanced as possible.
If town get cop + vigi and this is universally considered better than, I dunno, jailkeeper + vigi or something like that, but mafia get the same roles regardless, then we have an imbalance that we have introduced.
I do agree with you here, and those three roles were the closest to being both
a) similar in power to each other
and
b) having no exceptional synergy in any particular combination
that I've come up with so far. I'd love to hear better suggestions.
EDIT: I think I rate jailkeeper higher than you do, and if a 50% chance of miller is added (which is probably necessary really) that nerfs the cop some. If further nerfs to cop are necessary, it could be changed into a parity cop or something.
The point about swinginess re. 1 and 2-shot vigilantes seems quite reasonable.
|
On January 04 2014 17:50 Aquanim wrote:
I think your probabilities are right. That being said, I don't think there's any way around a vigilante being able to claim once they've made their shot - and I'd argue that across all the setups run on the forum, guessing that there'll be some kind of protective role is often going to be a safe bet. Far better than 25%, certainly.
The only way to fix that problem, if it isn't already fixed, is to eliminate vigilante as a role entirely - which I feel isn't a great solution either.
In the C9++ variant I run, it's probably about half of that. It is true that you should probably claim as a vigi immediately after shooting in most cases, but if there is a high likelihood of that causing there to be a confirmed, unkillable town, there's a problem with the setup.
It's also true that in the C9++ variant I run, if you claim vigi you're not confirmed, because of the possibility of SK. In fact, SKs claiming vigi is pretty common. So no, you don't have to eliminate the vigi role.
|
On January 04 2014 17:37 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 17:13 DarthPunk wrote:
I honestly am hoping Blazinghand will make a 13 player version of his GSL setup. What exactly are the aspects of the GSL setup which appeal to you, out of curiosity? I don't disagree with you by any means, by the way. The most obvious unique feature IMO is that scum get very little information from the roles they get; if they get a Roleblocker town could have two power roles, or none at all. I'm not entirely sure if that's practical to replicate in a 13p game. Even in the 9p game I think there's a fair bit of difference in balance between a pcop+doctor and 2 namedVT setups (though I wouldn't venture to guess which is more balanced)
I liked named VT alot as a power role because it forces you to learn how to claim properly. I like that you can sort of derive the setup after flips and claims etc. I like that you just role from several options.
It is a really elegant setup and is my favourite mini setup of all time. Followed by c9++.
I also like that it was created as far as I know by someone on this forum and is unique to TL.
|
On January 04 2014 17:57 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 17:50 Aquanim wrote:
I think your probabilities are right. That being said, I don't think there's any way around a vigilante being able to claim once they've made their shot - and I'd argue that across all the setups run on the forum, guessing that there'll be some kind of protective role is often going to be a safe bet. Far better than 25%, certainly.
The only way to fix that problem, if it isn't already fixed, is to eliminate vigilante as a role entirely - which I feel isn't a great solution either. In the C9++ variant I run, it's probably less than half of that, if not lower. It is true that you should probably claim as a vigi immediately after shooting in most cases, but if there is a high likelihood of that causing there to be a confirmed, unkillable town, there's a problem with the setup. It's also true that in the C9++ variant I run, if you claim vigi you're not confirmed, because of the possibility of SK. In fact, SKs claiming vigi is pretty common. So no, you don't have to eliminate the vigi role.
The confirmed unkillable townie is a problem with any protective role in combination with pretty much anything claimable. Sure, a cop-claim could be a fake scum claim, but I've not seen that done successfully very often.
(As an aside, I think the combination of vigi+JK in that hypothetical setup is 17% or so, which isn't all that high.)
I'm trying to avoid including an SK so that solution to the vigilante isn't available, unfortunately. Perhaps the fear of an SK is necessary to balance a vigilante, though.
|
On January 04 2014 17:46 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 17:43 Aquanim wrote:
I... may not have made something clear. Whether there's one or two power roles would be randomly determined each game. Whoops. Even in this case, I think you just halve the probabilities. It's still optimal to claim, I think. 50% of the time, there will be no other blue. 50% of the time, there will be one other blue. Of the 50% of the time where there is a blue, 50% of the time there will be a JK, which puts the chance for there to be a JK at 25%. Someone correct me if I did that wrong, I'm not the greatest with probabilities, sadly.
Oh bugger, I think we both failed at probability 101.
tl;dr: If I'm a vigilante, that makes it more likely there's two PRs as opposed to one.
There are six equally likely setups:
Cop
JK
Vig
Cop+JK
Cop+Vig
JK+Vig
If I'm a vigilante, there are three equally likely setups:
Cop
JK
Vig
Cop+JK
Cop+Vig
JK+Vig
So if I'm a Vigilante the probability of there being a JK as well is 33%, not 25%.
|
On January 04 2014 18:10 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 17:46 wherebugsgo wrote:On January 04 2014 17:43 Aquanim wrote:
I... may not have made something clear. Whether there's one or two power roles would be randomly determined each game. Whoops. Even in this case, I think you just halve the probabilities. It's still optimal to claim, I think. 50% of the time, there will be no other blue. 50% of the time, there will be one other blue. Of the 50% of the time where there is a blue, 50% of the time there will be a JK, which puts the chance for there to be a JK at 25%. Someone correct me if I did that wrong, I'm not the greatest with probabilities, sadly. Oh bugger, I think we both failed at probability 101.tl;dr: If I'm a vigilante, that makes it more likely there's two PRs as opposed to one. There are six equally likely setups: Cop JK Vig Cop+JK Cop+Vig JK+Vig If I'm a vigilante, there are three equally likely setups: Cop JKVig Cop+JK Cop+Vig
JK+VigSo if I'm a Vigilante the probability of there being a JK as well is 33%, not 25%.
Yeah lol, you're right. I knew I was forgetting something :p
|
Does changing the doctor/jailkeeper/protective role such that it can't protect the same person twice in a row alleviate your concerns at all WBG? I think that would mean that scum should at least get the opportunity to kill the confirmed townie at some point. It does something to solve follow-the-cop (a very related problem) as well.
EDIT: In that case, the jailkeeper in the setup could probably be replaced with a doctor, if desired.
The setup I proposed on the previous page probably isn't ideally what we want here (for starters, Mafia Rolecop is not really TL standard) but at the very least I think it's brought into focus some constraints which the ideal setup we're looking for has to satsify - particularly, that there has to be some solution to follow-the-cop and follow-the-confirmed-townie.
I think if anyone else has any ideas for a standard normal mini setup, whether you think it's a particularly good idea or not, I'd like to see them. At the least, we'll work out more things which need to be avoided, mitigated or desired. At best, one of the setups could be chosen or modified by consensus as the standard.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
GSL setup for 13 players (10 town 3 mafia) is tougher.
some notes on 10-3
A worst case for town would be like
D1 10-3
D2 8-3
D3 6-3
D4 4-3 LYLO
Giving town 3 mislynches before a loss. Contrasting the 7-2 setup, this is one extra mislynch. On the other hand, scum has more freedom with their shots (ie not only having to shoot blues) since there's a lower number of blue roles in the setup.
Haven't given a HUGE amount of thought to this but this is probably how I'd do it. I'd consider scaling it up to 3 blue roles, or having the option for a 3rd blue role half the time or something, and maybe giving scum a certain chance to have an additional role. Ideally though the scumteam can only look at themselves to narrow down what the town's blue roles are a little bit.
So an example of what i'm talking about might be like this:
GSL Mini Mafia 13p
10 town, 3 scum. Roll 1d8 and select setup from below. Doctors are non-conseq, RBs inform the target even if it has no power, Pcops can't target themselves.
A: 8x VT, 1x Pcop, 1x Doc, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
B: 8x VT, 1x Pcop, 1x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
C: 8x VT, 1x Doc, 1x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
D: 8x VT, 2x BoxeR, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
E: 7x VT, 1x Pcop, 1x Doc, 1x BoxeR, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
F: 7x VT, 1x Pcop, 2x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
G: 7x VT, 1x Doc, 2x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
H: 7x VT, 3x BoxeR, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
So what does this mean? Well, it means if you're a BoxeR as usual all you know is it's not Setup A. Unlike our normal GSL games though, there's still the possibility you have both a Pcop and a Doc on your side. You're basically in the dark and have to rely on your claim. A Doc knows he either has 2 boxers, a boxer and a cop, a boxer, or a cop as teammates, but not which. A Cop knows he either has 2 boxers, a boxer and a doc, a boxer, or a doc as teammates. What this does is give us additional scum some risky fakeclaim options. 50% of the time, there is a third blue role, and 50% of the time there isn't. Town doesn't know which setup it is, and even if scum fakeclaim blue at LYLO and get counterclaimed, there's a chance to win since it's not clear WHICH blue is lying (as was the case in GSL).
Another important piece of info here is that scum know how many power-having blue roles they're up against. If they have goon goon RB, they know they're up against a single empowered blue and 1-2 boxers. If they have goon GF RB, they know they're up against all boxers or cop doc + 0-1 boxers. Info, but not PERFECT info-- enough for scum to play strategically. It's a slight buff to scum giving them always a roleblocker, and pretty importantly, if you're a cop there's a 50% chance you're up against a godfather.
In this setup, there are more options. This means that scum has a slight advantage over town, since that limited information prevents things like massclaiming being quite as strong. This is probably a good thing since the 9-player GSL setup was a bit town-favored. In the case of setup H, 3 of 13 players being confirmed town on D1 is not nearly as bad as 2 of 9 players in terms of thread presence.
I'll probably run this setup for my next Normal Mini and see how it works out.
|
On January 04 2014 18:24 Aquanim wrote:
Does changing the doctor/jailkeeper/protective role such that it can't protect the same person twice in a row alleviate your concerns at all WBG? I think that would mean that scum should at least get the opportunity to kill the confirmed townie at some point. It does something to solve follow-the-cop (a very related problem) as well.
EDIT: In that case, the jailkeeper in the setup could probably be replaced with a doctor, if desired.
The setup I proposed on the previous page probably isn't ideally what we want here (for starters, Mafia Rolecop is not really TL standard) but at the very least I think it's brought into focus some constraints which the ideal setup we're looking for has to satsify - particularly, that there has to be some solution to follow-the-cop and follow-the-confirmed-townie.
I think if anyone else has any ideas for a standard normal mini setup, whether you think it's a particularly good idea or not, I'd like to see them. At the least, we'll work out more things which need to be avoided, mitigated or desired. At best, one of the setups could be chosen or modified by consensus as the standard.
Yeah, it would, but I'm personally not a fan of including restrictions on how people can use their roles in balancing.
For the same reason I don't like telling vigilantes they can't shoot on n1, though I think I experimented with things like that in the past.
e: wtf is a boxer
|
On January 04 2014 18:39 Blazinghand wrote:
GSL setup for 13 players (10 town 3 mafia) is tougher.
some notes on 10-3
A worst case for town would be like
D1 10-3
D2 8-3
D3 6-3
D4 4-3 LYLO
Giving town 3 mislynches before a loss. Contrasting the 7-2 setup, this is one extra mislynch. On the other hand, scum has more freedom with their shots (ie not only having to shoot blues) since there's a lower number of blue roles in the setup.
Haven't given a HUGE amount of thought to this but this is probably how I'd do it. I'd consider scaling it up to 3 blue roles, or having the option for a 3rd blue role half the time or something, and maybe giving scum a certain chance to have an additional role. Ideally though the scumteam can only look at themselves to narrow down what the town's blue roles are a little bit.
So an example of what i'm talking about might be like this:
GSL Mini Mafia 13p
10 town, 3 scum. Roll 1d8 and select setup from below. Doctors are non-conseq, RBs inform the target even if it has no power, Pcops can't target themselves.
A: 8x VT, 1x Pcop, 1x Doc, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
B: 8x VT, 1x Pcop, 1x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
C: 8x VT, 1x Doc, 1x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
D: 8x VT, 2x BoxeR, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
E: 7x VT, 1x Pcop, 1x Doc, 1x BoxeR, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
F: 7x VT, 1x Pcop, 2x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
G: 7x VT, 1x Doc, 2x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
H: 7x VT, 3x BoxeR, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
So what does this mean? Well, it means if you're a BoxeR as usual all you know is it's not Setup A. Unlike our normal GSL games though, there's still the possibility you have both a Pcop and a Doc on your side. You're basically in the dark and have to rely on your claim. A Doc knows he either has 2 boxers, a boxer and a cop, a boxer, or a cop as teammates, but not which. A Cop knows he either has 2 boxers, a boxer and a doc, a boxer, or a doc as teammates. What this does is give us additional scum some risky fakeclaim options. 50% of the time, there is a third blue role, and 50% of the time there isn't. Town doesn't know which setup it is, and even if scum fakeclaim blue at LYLO and get counterclaimed, there's a chance to win since it's not clear WHICH blue is lying (as was the case in GSL).
Another important piece of info here is that scum know how many power-having blue roles they're up against. If they have goon goon RB, they know they're up against a single empowered blue and 1-2 boxers. If they have goon GF RB, they know they're up against all boxers or cop doc + 0-1 boxers. Info, but not PERFECT info-- enough for scum to play strategically. It's a slight buff to scum giving them always a roleblocker, and pretty importantly, if you're a cop there's a 50% chance you're up against a godfather.
In this setup, there are more options. This means that scum has a slight advantage over town, since that limited information prevents things like massclaiming being quite as strong. This is probably a good thing since the 9-player GSL setup was a bit town-favored. In the case of setup H, 3 of 13 players being confirmed town on D1 is not nearly as bad as 2 of 9 players in terms of thread presence.
I'll probably run this setup for my next Normal Mini and see how it works out.
 Blazinghand
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On January 04 2014 18:39 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 18:24 Aquanim wrote:
Does changing the doctor/jailkeeper/protective role such that it can't protect the same person twice in a row alleviate your concerns at all WBG? I think that would mean that scum should at least get the opportunity to kill the confirmed townie at some point. It does something to solve follow-the-cop (a very related problem) as well.
EDIT: In that case, the jailkeeper in the setup could probably be replaced with a doctor, if desired.
The setup I proposed on the previous page probably isn't ideally what we want here (for starters, Mafia Rolecop is not really TL standard) but at the very least I think it's brought into focus some constraints which the ideal setup we're looking for has to satsify - particularly, that there has to be some solution to follow-the-cop and follow-the-confirmed-townie.
I think if anyone else has any ideas for a standard normal mini setup, whether you think it's a particularly good idea or not, I'd like to see them. At the least, we'll work out more things which need to be avoided, mitigated or desired. At best, one of the setups could be chosen or modified by consensus as the standard. Yeah, it would, but I'm personally not a fan of including restrictions on how people can use their roles in balancing. For the same reason I don't like telling vigilantes they can't shoot on n1, though I think I experimented with things like that in the past. e: wtf is a boxer
BoxeR is a blue with no powers. His only power is he receives a PM that looks different than the PMs the VTs get. Because the setup is semi-open, he can claim and has some setup info.
btw anyone who wants can use that setup of suggest changes. not sure how it would work yet.
|
Basically an Innocent child that is confirmed through a semi open setup rather than mod confirmed.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
It's not QUITE as strong as Innocent Child in the sense that it can be counter claimed. It's more vulnerable to "shitty play" than an Innocent Child is which is good imo
also since they're not aware of each other you can have 3 boxers in a setup without breaking it lol
|
On January 04 2014 18:48 Blazinghand wrote:
It's not QUITE as strong as Innocent Child in the sense that it can be counter claimed. It's more vulnerable to "shitty play" than an Innocent Child is which is good imo
also since they're not aware of each other you can have 3 boxers in a setup without breaking it lol
I agree. I really like the role.
|
Without Named VT's there would never have been a Tommy the Fireman.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
The original role description:
BoxeR (Named VT): You are a blue with no powers. Still, you are the legendary BoxeR, so you can of course roleclaim. However, this is GSL Open Season 1, and so you don't know if you're Lim Yo Hwan or Lee Jung Hoon. There might both be in this game, or it might be just you and HopeTorture, or you and NesTea. Find and destroy the cheesers.
the joke of course being the fact that mkp played under the handle BoxeR between october 2010 and january 2011
|
One idea which occurs to me is that it might be worth thinking about "secondary" standard setups designed around the possibility for an uncommon role like Tracker, Watcher, Masons, etc. similar to how the GSL setup is based around the Named VT.
It's probably impossible to fit every possible "normal" role into a single setup, and even if it were I don't think it would be a good idea. Too many combinations to think about them all.
Even if just as a mental exercise to consider how, for example, a Tracker combined with role X can impact balance, I think this would be worthwhile. It would at least be a guideline for people wanting to use these roles in future.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
That sounds like an interesting idea.
tracker and watcher are pretty different, even if they use the visiting mechanic.
tracker: it's in many ways a weaker version of cop in a game with delivered kp. pretty much detects scum or blue and based on where the action went you can reason what they were.
watcher: kind of like a doctor. Causes scum to shoot sub-optimal targets (ie not go straight for the towniest guy) if they know it exists, except the penalty is information rather than lack of an NK.
i'm not as familiar with masons
|
Watcher is kind of an OP role, especially in games with games with delivered KP as it confirms killing/non-killing role if seen someone being visited. Cops are already kinda OP in mini games (or like in any games, i think that's why parity cops are used more often) and watcher is in a way like a cop.
Trackers in games imo go well with vigilantes, veterans, masons and nosy neighbours etc. I think the problem with watchers is you would need to give mafia some chances of fakeclaiming or add mafia vigilante(s) as well, but especially in smaller games it becomes too roled and complicated.
Therefore i don't really think using watchers in small games is a smart idea. Trackers however would be interesting in games balanced with vigis, vets, and masons - over usual games with cops, docs, JK's etc.
EDIT: Actually with trackers you could add blacksmith(?), a person who gives out a bulletproof vest for someone for the next night (pick a person on N1 -> the person gets a BP-vest for N2), it would be like a nerfed doc as you should pick a target the night before.
|
I don't think named VT is a normal role on TL, but supposing we include it (or self-aware miller) I'd be wary of including more than one or two max of those roles in a game at any rate. It's one of those roles that exists solely to be claimed, and I think it's much more powerful than you'd think.
http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Named_Townie
Mafia claiming a named VT (or self-aware miller) is way too risky.
Also, in all of the setups you provided, certain townies know enough about the setup such that they can punish scum fakeclaims. It's true that any given blue will not know what the other blues are, but the counts matter.
Town gains a huge advantage if a GF flips too, since they then know exactly how many claims to expect, and they know that any PC results are guaranteed to be correct.
Since there can't be two cops, scum should never claim cop, because it makes a 1 for 1 trade incredibly likely. I as scum would never do that. You can only claim named VT as GF, and if you make it policy for named VTs to claim at the beginning of the game (which it should be) then no scum can claim that either. Since it is almost never in the interest of town to claim doctor, scum can't claim that either.
I don't think fake claim opportunities really exist in that setup except as really huge gambits in already shitty situations.
e: watcher is OP as fuck and doesn't even deserve a mention in roles to include.
|
Do fake claim opportunities really need to exist? It's kind of hard to fake claim in c9++ also.
|
On January 04 2014 20:02 DarthPunk wrote:
Do fake claim opportunities really need to exist? It's kind of hard to fake claim in c9++ also.
I personally do not like games without fake claim opportunities. Roles like named VT are okay but you have to give mafia some leeway to handle situations in multiple ways, i don't find it really fun if you have only one correct way to do some things as mafia (f.ex. to fakeclaim/counter-claim or try to snipe something? etc.)
Imo it's better if people have multiple approaches they are able to take and weigh the probabilities of success and use their judgement to determine the best course of action instead of making the game go some certain way where there is like "only one right way to play" for mafia in certain situations.
|
At the same time, though, I don't think fakeclaims should be too easy or safe.
EDIT: I think that fakeclaims tend to be more viable, useful and appropriate in larger games where balance is less razor-sharp and an extra role here or there is not as noticeable.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On January 04 2014 19:52 wherebugsgo wrote:
Town gains a huge advantage if a GF flips too, since they then know exactly how many claims to expect, and they know that any PC results are guaranteed to be correct.
GF flip is bad, but it can always be bad for scum anyways. The pcop issue is more of a problem in the 13 player setup because he'll have more checks, but it's the "check one person per night" pcop not the "check two people per night" pcop.
Also a GF flip tells town nothing about how many claims to expect, only about what kinds. A, D, E, and H all have a GF. All a GF flip tells town is that there is either both a cop AND a doctor, or only BoxeRs. In theory there could be 0, 1, 2, or 3 BoxeRs if the only flip so far is a GF.
|
A few thoughts regarding trackers:
If a single mafia player can deliver KP and use their power, which is tracked? Being tracked to two places at once practically confirms them as mafia, and there's arguments against tracking only one. The most elegant solution is to enforce that a mafia cannot use their power and deliver KP, which may have ramifications for balance.
Do mafia require some kind of tracker-obfuscating ability? The three I can think of are:
- Godfather-analogue; cannot be tracked, or is tracked to wherever he chooses. Mafia would always choose to deliver KP through this guy, making the tracker power kind of pointless.
- Framer-analogue; makes a player look like they visited a specific other player. Seems pretty powerful, just keep framing people so that they visit your KP target.
- Weaker framer-analogue; makes a player look like they visited some other player, but the framer doesn't get to choose who. This has the most appeal to me though I haven't thought it through balance-wise.
Obviously Nosy Neighbour functions as the Miller-analogue.
And agreed, watcher is pretty OP.
|
Watchers and trackers only really work well in big games IMO.
|
If a single mafia player can deliver KP and use their power, which is tracked?
Usually all the actions are tracked. That's where it comes tricky for mafia. Use their power role to get basically outed if tracked versus risk multiple mafia members to be seen visiting people.
I don't see any problem with this. It adds another element to the game
|
On January 04 2014 20:37 DarthPunk wrote:
Watchers and trackers only really work well in big games IMO.
Hmm... I'm inclined to agree with you, actually.
|
I would be interested in playing in a game (in case someone wants to experiment) with the following roles (0+ of every role):
Town:
- tracker
- 1-shot vigilante
- blacksmith
- nosy neighbour
- vanilla town
Mafia:
- roleblocker (rb's not notified)
- 1-shot framer (chooses 2 players -> the first player shows up visiting the second one)
- goon
All flips flip alignment only.
|
Im interested in these minis. Would host, would play.
|
I think we should play test blazinghand's setup in the next normal mini.
|
What's Blazinghand's setup?
EDIT: The GSL / British Empire setup ?
|
On January 04 2014 22:17 raynpelikoneet wrote:
What's Blazinghand's setup?
EDIT: The GSL / British Empire setup ?
The one he just posted.
|
I don't think he has posted any setups since the GSL/British mini example.
Or do you mean the tracker shenanigans?
|
On January 04 2014 22:16 DarthPunk wrote:
I think we should play test blazinghand's setup in the next normal mini.
Well, there's a spot on the queue right now. Blazinghand's currently running a game so he can't put one up (though being instant majority who knows how long it'll take). I'd offer to, but my game's in signups and there's no way it should end before Blazinghand's anyway.
|
On January 04 2014 23:08 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 22:16 DarthPunk wrote:
I think we should play test blazinghand's setup in the next normal mini. Well, there's a spot on the queue right now. Blazinghand's currently running a game so he can't put one up (though being instant majority who knows how long it'll take). I'd offer to, but my game's in signups and there's no way it should end before Blazinghand's anyway.
I'll do it if BH allows me to use his setup.
|
On January 04 2014 20:20 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 19:52 wherebugsgo wrote:
Town gains a huge advantage if a GF flips too, since they then know exactly how many claims to expect, and they know that any PC results are guaranteed to be correct. GF flip is bad, but it can always be bad for scum anyways. The pcop issue is more of a problem in the 13 player setup because he'll have more checks, but it's the "check one person per night" pcop not the "check two people per night" pcop. Also a GF flip tells town nothing about how many claims to expect, only about what kinds. A, D, E, and H all have a GF. All a GF flip tells town is that there is either both a cop AND a doctor, or only BoxeRs. In theory there could be 0, 1, 2, or 3 BoxeRs if the only flip so far is a GF.
Oh my bad, I think I must've mistaken the goon for a blue. I read the roles incorrectly.
I guess my only real point left here is that I'm not a fan of named VTs being that common and setups like this where fake claiming is basically impossible/really dumb. Fake claims by no means should be easy-they never are. However, I think it's a disadvantage to scum to be completely unable to introduce misdirection with a fake claim such as with the setup you suggested.
I can't think of a situation in which I would ever fake claim with roles like that.
It sounds like you've used the named townie role before; is it not policy for named VTs to claim immediately upon entering the game? If not, why not?
|
On January 04 2014 23:55 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 20:20 Blazinghand wrote:On January 04 2014 19:52 wherebugsgo wrote:
Town gains a huge advantage if a GF flips too, since they then know exactly how many claims to expect, and they know that any PC results are guaranteed to be correct. GF flip is bad, but it can always be bad for scum anyways. The pcop issue is more of a problem in the 13 player setup because he'll have more checks, but it's the "check one person per night" pcop not the "check two people per night" pcop. Also a GF flip tells town nothing about how many claims to expect, only about what kinds. A, D, E, and H all have a GF. All a GF flip tells town is that there is either both a cop AND a doctor, or only BoxeRs. In theory there could be 0, 1, 2, or 3 BoxeRs if the only flip so far is a GF. Oh my bad, I think I must've mistaken the goon for a blue. I read the roles incorrectly. I guess my only real point left here is that I'm not a fan of named VTs being that common and setups like this where fake claiming is basically impossible/really dumb. Fake claims by no means should be easy-they never are. However, I think it's a disadvantage to scum to be completely unable to introduce misdirection with a fake claim such as with the setup you suggested. I can't think of a situation in which I would ever fake claim with roles like that. It sounds like you've used the named townie role before; is it not policy for named VTs to claim immediately upon entering the game? If not, why not?
Basically you can fake claim at lylo still.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
Anyone's welcome to run my GSL setup, including the experimental 13p setup.
On January 04 2014 23:55 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 20:20 Blazinghand wrote:On January 04 2014 19:52 wherebugsgo wrote:
Town gains a huge advantage if a GF flips too, since they then know exactly how many claims to expect, and they know that any PC results are guaranteed to be correct. GF flip is bad, but it can always be bad for scum anyways. The pcop issue is more of a problem in the 13 player setup because he'll have more checks, but it's the "check one person per night" pcop not the "check two people per night" pcop. Also a GF flip tells town nothing about how many claims to expect, only about what kinds. A, D, E, and H all have a GF. All a GF flip tells town is that there is either both a cop AND a doctor, or only BoxeRs. In theory there could be 0, 1, 2, or 3 BoxeRs if the only flip so far is a GF. Oh my bad, I think I must've mistaken the goon for a blue. I read the roles incorrectly. I guess my only real point left here is that I'm not a fan of named VTs being that common and setups like this where fake claiming is basically impossible/really dumb. Fake claims by no means should be easy-they never are. However, I think it's a disadvantage to scum to be completely unable to introduce misdirection with a fake claim such as with the setup you suggested. I can't think of a situation in which I would ever fake claim with roles like that. It sounds like you've used the named townie role before; is it not policy for named VTs to claim immediately upon entering the game? If not, why not?
It's kinda policy for them to claim at the start of the game (and it should be, imo) but people don't mostly because people are bad. The possibility of there being like 2 named VTs claiming D1 and a cop hiding in the VTs does make this setup look too town favored.
That being said, I wonder if what really needs to be done is for the number of roles to be more variable (ie a possibility for only 1 blue, or even 0 blues total) so that town trusts the claims less?
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
13p GSL v0.2
GSL Mini Mafia 13p
10 town, 3 scum. Randomly select setup from below. Doctors are non-conseq, RBs inform the target even if it has no power, Pcops can't target themselves.
A: 8x VT, 1x Pcop, 1x Doc, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
B: 8x VT, 1xPcop, 1x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
C: 8x VT, 1xDoc, 1x BoxeR, 2x Goon, 1x RB
D: 8x VT, 2xBoxeR, 1x Goon, 1x RB, 1x GF
Next, Roll 1d2
1: Remove one VT, add one BoxeR.
2: Use setup as-is.
In this setup, there are more options. This means that scum has a slight advantage over town, since that limited information prevents things like massclaiming being quite as strong. This is probably a good thing since the 9-player GSL setup was a bit town-favored.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
