|
On January 24 2014 20:26 kushm4sta wrote:
um why is effort required. why is activity required even? there are rules like you have to post once a day and vote. As long as someone follows those rules in any way they choose, they should not be modkilled.
Lurking is a viable strat for scum and there's no reason to take it away, except spammers rage because their annoying spam strat has been countered.
yall need to think outside the box.
What I value in my games is mafia purity. And by that I mean players can play in any way they choose as long as it doesn't violate a clear cut set of rules layed out before hand.
"Effort" is so subjective it's ridiculous. There is going to be a lot of mod action analysis from that. Because in a way lack of effort may be a scumstrat. So if a host gets pissed at lack of effort, that could be a scumtell for that player.
And I disagree that the game because impossible for town with lurkers. You're all just bad.
There isnt too much that is more frustrating to me than people who say nothing fro 48hrs and then last minute vote.
This rarely does anything to elucidate that players alignment and to me at least, can make the game unbearable.
Unfortunately, town does it plenty, as does scum.
Some ppl just shouldnt be signing up to play, as the above is not an acceptable (IMHO) usage of the 1 post/day clause.
|
We get to choose whether or not to play with those players who only post once per day or whatever by opting out or through WOTC.
We get to choose whether that is even a problem by signing up for games where the "model OP" rules are unchanged or adjusted to our taste (5 posts per day, perhaps, or some other arbitrary number).
If you want to lynch someone who appears to be squandering their 1 post per day on garbage and contributing nothing else, you can use that as a platform to get them lynched.
If that's not acceptable terms for dealing with it, we might just not be hardcore enough here at TL and there are probably other more rigorous communities that will supply that type of environment, or you can make your own!
|
On January 24 2014 20:50 ObviousOne wrote:
We get to choose whether or not to play with those players who only post once per day or whatever by opting out or through WOTC.
We get to choose whether that is even a problem by signing up for games where the "model OP" rules are unchanged or adjusted to our taste (5 posts per day, perhaps, or some other arbitrary number).
If you want to lynch someone who appears to be squandering their 1 post per day on garbage and contributing nothing else, you can use that as a platform to get them lynched.
If that's not acceptable terms for dealing with it, we might just not be hardcore enough here at TL and there are probably other more rigorous communities that will supply that type of environment, or you can make your own! The problem is, I dont want to.
Other than Rayn, I always try lynch scum >>> town.
|
On January 24 2014 21:25 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2014 20:50 ObviousOne wrote:
We get to choose whether or not to play with those players who only post once per day or whatever by opting out or through WOTC.
We get to choose whether that is even a problem by signing up for games where the "model OP" rules are unchanged or adjusted to our taste (5 posts per day, perhaps, or some other arbitrary number).
If you want to lynch someone who appears to be squandering their 1 post per day on garbage and contributing nothing else, you can use that as a platform to get them lynched.
If that's not acceptable terms for dealing with it, we might just not be hardcore enough here at TL and there are probably other more rigorous communities that will supply that type of environment, or you can make your own! The problem is, I dont want to. Other than Rayn, I always try lynch scum >>> town.
I think it's a problem that solves itself if it's done over and over again by deterring that player from signing up through getting lynched. Otherwise we might have something like:
HazingBland signs up for LT Mafia I and posts once and gets lynched day 1 for not participating.
HazingBland signs up for LT Mafia IV and posts once and gets lynched day 1 for not participating.
HazingBland signs up for LT Mafia IX and posts once and gets lynched day 1 for not participating.
You as a player can plead your case to the host showing the evidence that it would be a wasted slot and I'm sure that without any assurances from HazingBland that this current game (LT Mafia XIII) will be different, that the host's discretion can be to not allow that player to play in that game. That's totally an option to you as well, you may find a host who agrees with you in that regard. Has anyone tried this yet?
[Any resemblance of player or game names to actual players is happenstance and totally fictional]
|
haha 
to Mocsta's post. ^^
|
I think inactive people add an interesting element to the game. You have a forced neutral read, and you have to weigh the value of lynching them against any scum reads you have.
Policy lynching - some boring shit you start the game with. But it can be more. Imagine if people actually voted for policy (which they never do), it would add a lot of drama and metagame.
The way it is now "you MUST read the thread", you are modkilled for lack of effort, is actually limiting the breadth of the game.
|
Also you can try encouraging players by being friendly and nice to them. Some people post very.... aggressively, sometimes needlessly so, thinking that it's the best way to get things done but not everyone reacts equally to that kind of social pressure. Try to not alienate people by being perceived as mean or an asshole. We're supposed to be playing on a forum together and having a good time, not routing out people who play differently from our personal expectations.
|
Oo that has nothing to do with anything. Take your hippy shit elsewhere please
|
It's all, like, interconnected, man.
|
I think Rayn needs to be banned for making Suki cry 
|
Ok, before hand, this is not a serious note.
Just a tantrum that I'll keep real short.
Oh... my ... fuxsinating (My sfw filter functions!)
How the dues does Kush/Oats flip town after their performance in SMB??
My mind, it hurts.
Like seriously hurts.
Ugh, I won't go on a spiel.
I didn't know of a better place to voice my dis-satisfaction.
Didn't want to clutter other the ban thread (since they met the minimum at least so it's not like anything will come from it regardless.)
But holy crap.
It's things like this that make me really hesitant to join mafia games now.
Or at least I can say, I am going to be wotc'ing so many players from games I intend to join.
/end rant.
|
On January 27 2014 09:14 OdinOfPergo wrote:
Ok, before hand, this is not a serious note.
Just a tantrum that I'll keep real short.
Oh... my ... fuxsinating (My sfw filter functions!)
How the dues does Kush/Oats flip town after their performance in SMB??
My mind, it hurts.
Like seriously hurts.
Ugh, I won't go on a spiel.
I didn't know of a better place to voice my dis-satisfaction.
Didn't want to clutter other the ban thread (since they met the minimum at least so it's not like anything will come from it regardless.)
But holy crap.
It's things like this that make me really hesitant to join mafia games now.
Or at least I can say, I am going to be wotc'ing so many players from games I intend to join.
/end rant.
I.....what?
|
On January 27 2014 09:14 OdinOfPergo wrote:
Ok, before hand, this is not a serious note.
Just a tantrum that I'll keep real short.
Oh... my ... fuxsinating (My sfw filter functions!)
How the dues does Kush/Oats flip town after their performance in SMB??
My mind, it hurts.
Like seriously hurts.
Ugh, I won't go on a spiel.
I didn't know of a better place to voice my dis-satisfaction.
Didn't want to clutter other the ban thread (since they met the minimum at least so it's not like anything will come from it regardless.)
But holy crap.
It's things like this that make me really hesitant to join mafia games now.
Or at least I can say, I am going to be wotc'ing so many players from games I intend to join.
/end rant.
What? Is reading someones alignment incorrectly their fault or yours?
|
On January 27 2014 11:26 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2014 09:14 OdinOfPergo wrote:
Ok, before hand, this is not a serious note.
Just a tantrum that I'll keep real short.
Oh... my ... fuxsinating (My sfw filter functions!)
How the dues does Kush/Oats flip town after their performance in SMB??
My mind, it hurts.
Like seriously hurts.
Ugh, I won't go on a spiel.
I didn't know of a better place to voice my dis-satisfaction.
Didn't want to clutter other the ban thread (since they met the minimum at least so it's not like anything will come from it regardless.)
But holy crap.
It's things like this that make me really hesitant to join mafia games now.
Or at least I can say, I am going to be wotc'ing so many players from games I intend to join.
/end rant.
What? Is reading someones alignment incorrectly their fault or yours?
Well, your unspoken answer is "your own fault for reading them incorrectly". My own opinion is more nuanced.
If I were to walk into a game and begin trolling my heart out, people would quite properly believe I was mafia (since I'd be playing against town wincon and against my own town meta) and lynch me. In my opinion, other people's scumreads on me in that case would in fact be my own damn fault.
I'm not going to say out loud that I think other people deliberately troll in games as town and don't give a damn about their own wincon.
On the other hand, sometimes people play a perfectly good towngame and get lynched for truly derpy reasons (say, having a scumread on player X because player X treated one of their scumreads like a human being and remained interested in their opinion rather than screaming OMG YOURE SCUM LOLOL). In that case, people's scumreads on them are the fault of the people making the reads.
There's a continuum of blame between the two.
|
@Darth
Ye, pretty much along the lines of the above.
I don't expect anything to change and I don't really want to have a discussion on it.
More of a emotional response at the end of a game I thought I had some sort of idea of.
I was completely wrong but meh.
I'm always going to be completely wrong when town players come into games with w/e, dun care attitudes.
The answer to this in my own head falls on "Yep, I'd rather lynch 100 townies doing something scummy than miss 1 scum doing it."
Maby that's worded bad but hopefully it gets my point across.
|
Why would you want to be wrong 100 times? Then clearly your 'something scummy' tell is wrong then if people doing it are town. Thats the fun in mafia though, scum are tricky and town are stupid. There is a reason why the better players lynch scum more often than the worst players, it isnt all random.
|
On January 27 2014 22:57 OdinOfPergo wrote:
@Darth
Ye, pretty much along the lines of the above.
I don't expect anything to change and I don't really want to have a discussion on it.
More of a emotional response at the end of a game I thought I had some sort of idea of.
I was completely wrong but meh.
I'm always going to be completely wrong when town players come into games with w/e, dun care attitudes.
The answer to this in my own head falls on "Yep, I'd rather lynch 100 townies doing something scummy than miss 1 scum doing it."
Maby that's worded bad but hopefully it gets my point across.
That is ridiculous. If 100 townies are doing something 'scummy' then that thing is not scummy.
|
|
|
Hmm well maby I'm just wrong and this is the wrong game for me..
Trending styles seems to be afk and do not a whole heck of a lot for lots of people right now.
I don't see how you can treat these as town tells.
Null at best maby.
|
If someone who does it flips town, its a towntell right?
So you just dont like the way people play. I guess you shouldnt play then.
Although, who afked and was obviously scum and flipped town in SMB? Nobody.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
