|
On July 03 2016 02:15 marvellosity wrote:
I don't really get this 'taking subjectivity out of it' line. Even legal systems (the most procedural of all) are rife with subjective decisions. All no votes and swearing or whatever else simply aren't the same .
Exactly. That's why we should only warn for the first novote and why we will never be able to "standardise" punishments for bad behaviour.
|
RIP VE
I've only known you as scum ;( Maybe we could've had plenty occasions to scumhunt together if I would have posted this sooner.
A couple of thoughts and a suggestion.
Apart from flavor the amusement in forum mafia depends entirely on interaction and there are numerous obstacles to be overcome, some of them not initially apparent.
It requires long-term attention, effort and nonchalance, but good luck realizing you're failing or making others fail at the 3rd requirement before it's too late to let it slide; nevertheless swearing and busting balls can make up a considerable percentage of the fun which tightening regulations on freedom of expression would dampen.
So with all this investment that we know this game is good at luring there's a high risk of the rewards falling short, even if you're victorious.
[Problem]
Once upset there's nothing worse than having to tiptoe on the edges of the rules of conduct in order to circumvent getting penalized while still communicating what is on one's mind with high fidelity to emotions. Some might snap, some might stomach it, some might release demons for all to see. Some might be more talented at this than others but is this the skillset people want to exhibit in a game of mafia? [Why]
Fuck no, I think finding scum and manipulating town into mislynching townies while having a jolly time is, but if someone gets between you and your rewarding experience chances are that holding back will only creep up on you later.
[Solution]
Layers of control.
What if one of the players acted as a trustee by providing a quicktopic for the player base to vent without fear of repercussions (except with race/gender/homophobic/mental disorder stuff and posting after death), while the host keeps the game thread squeaky clean with a rigid policy against personal attacks; including calling someone bad or something they said insufficient, instead enforcing a strict adherence to the finality of alignment indication and to the use of the euphemism scummy(?). Or multiple trustees (as few as possible/convenient) with various degrees of liberty.
This way the kind of behavior in question becomes alignment-irrelevant. One may choose to ignore and never even access the speakeasy QT or revel in it extensively or fugitively, to get something off one's chest and carry on having fun; what happens there stays there only until the game is over and may not be invoked as grounds for voting someone, nor may the link be made available to third parties, hosts included.
Certainly you as a player will recognize a theatrical element even in the most abrasive comments, or not, you choose but #keepTLmafiashinyontheexterior
|
Actually, this is something the INFP site hosts (QT and RB) have kinda done.
They give each player a QT. It works like this.
Each Town member has a QT where only the host and the said townie can see.
Each mafia member has the same, but also the mafia chat.
Anything can be said in said personal Qt's
It works some-what from what I can tell. And can even be used for posting thoughts etc. Not to say it stops it enitraly, though, my experience with it did seemed to help a bit.
|
On July 09 2016 07:26 Shapelog wrote:
Actually, this is something the INFP site hosts (QT and RB) have kinda done.
They give each player a QT. It works like this.
Each Town member has a QT where only the host and the said townie can see.
Each mafia member has the same, but also the mafia chat.
Anything can be said in said personal Qt's
It works some-what from what I can tell. And can even be used for posting thoughts etc. Not to say it stops it enitraly, though, my experience with it did seemed to help a bit.
Noted but I don't think so.
What I suggested was a kind of Vegas whereas this would be like the rl equivalent of a complaint box.
|
So the Vegas Idea of what happens in vegas, stays in vegas?
This way the kind of behavior in question becomes alignment-irrelevant. One may choose to ignore and never even access the speakeasy QT or revel in it extensively or fugitively, to get something off one's chest and carry on having fun; what happens there stays there only until the game is over and may not be invoked as grounds for voting someone, nor may the link be made available to third parties, hosts included.
Here's the problem with that.
1. Hosts need to have access to it. just to not have a cheating insensitive. Don't have to have say or anything, but still should be able to at least check it.
2. Finding "trustees". It isn't that I do not think the community cannot find trustees (hell I do it.) It is more about, if it A) will be lip tight, and B) what if the rage implies the trustee? Or has something that pisses off the trustee.
We could also have a vent/offsite venting (like gaming) thread. CSGO sub forum has one. The only prob. will be people not talking about it or any games they are in.
|
Hosts have enough on their plate.
If someone wanted to cheat they'd use other means just the same.
Trustees can use it ad libitum as well.
Edited posts would be considered spam as there is no way to distinguish a creator edit from the original poster's one, but it has to be one of the two so.. shared shame.
A venting topic for general use would be persistent whereas a speakeasy QT gets deleted when the game has concluded, dissolved like the conflicts it bears. The former would send the wrong message imo.
Nevertheless I am all for it if the venting thread has an expiration date like say a week, and a queue or randomized shuffle to supply new creators.
I feel like there is need for one right now, and me being upset about what happened notwithstanding I'm not mad at VisceraEyes. I think it's the conclusion to something that has been brewing below the surface and it's not Koshi-specific.
Therefore I will provide the first of hopefully more venting threads; it's the QT I meant to use for Bavaria. Acces should be restricted to mafia players so PM me linking a gamethread and stating your Quicktopic username if interested and I will provide the link.
The next creator will be provided a list of insiders, so they can PM them the new link, in roughly a week from now.
On July 09 2016 07:56 Koshi wrote:
So your sacrifice was not in vain.
|
I kinda like the idea of this.
During some games I basically made a rant QT for myself, where I could yell at a wall and stuff. xD
Overdid it on purpose in there, but it was nice.
In my first scum game, I was also ranting to myself a lot in the scum qt after my two teammates got lunched. Some of the hosts did drop some words of encouragement, also was very nice.
So I think that idea would be nice. Like not everyone will want/need something like this. Still not sure about finding enough Trustees though. Worth a shot though.
|
[Problem]
Failure to vote.
[Solution]
Rank town players post-game with regard to the timeframes they managed to vote for scum as opposed to town. Convert it to bragging rights currency.
For example in a 13p game with 3 scum if you vote scum for 4 hours on day1 you get 9/3 x 4 = 12BR (town - 1 to scum ratio x timeframe in hours). If you vote for a fellow townie instead you get substracted 1 BR per hour from your balance, and you leak 0.2 if you're not voting.
This should make things more interesting and give incentive to scumhunt asap.
However there are times when one votes for reactions / pressure and doesn't want to compromise bank in which case a simultaneous PM to the host would suffice to void liquidity.
Sanctions for breach of conduct should also include a bragging rights cash fine.
Maybe we can also set up some sort of service exchange market for those who are not solely into accumulating bragging rights for the general scoreboard, and those who wish to make bank without playing. Like hosts who may want to lease their flavor space.
|
On July 14 2016 03:09 Race Bannon wrote:
[Problem]
Failure to vote.
[Solution]
Rank town players post-game with regards to the timeframes they managed to vote for scum as opposed to town. Convert it to bragging rights currency.
For example in a 13p game with 3 scum if you vote scum for 4 hours on day1 you get 9/3 x 4 = 12BR (town - 1 to scum ratio x timeframe in hours). If you vote for a fellow townie instead you get substracted 1 BR per hour from your balance, and you leak 0.2 if you're not voting.
This should make things more interesting and give incentive to scumhunt asap.
However there are times when one votes for reactions / pressure and doesn't want to compromise bank in which case a simultaneous PM to the host would suffice to void liquidity.
Sanctions for breach of conduct should also include a bragging rights cash fine.
Maybe we can also set up some sort of service exchange market for those who are not solely into accumulating bragging rights for the general scoreboard, and those who wish to make bank without playing. Like hosts who may want to lease their flavor space.
Get rid of the penalties, I think people would have a lot of fun / be motivated enough with scum voting bragging rights alone.
Awesome idea though
|
rb that might be the worst idea I ever heard. And that transcends forum mafia. It might be the worst idea I've ever heard about anything ever.
|
What about it would make things worse, and what would not make them better than the way they are now, except for someone having to do some math after the game is over.
To clarify the last bit, I think it would be fun if one could do something productive with or for the hard earned ß.
If it mimicks money, harbors value instead of simply remaining a finality its energy doesn't dissipate, but gets reintroduced as a procurer, evaluator and regulator of activity, effort, content and service into the enveloping community body.
Flavor, obsing, coaching, shadowing, guides, archives, community threads, banlist administration and hosting regulation already transcend the game per se. They are adapted augmentations, proof of room to grow.
|
[Shortcoming]
All other games native to TL are of a competitive nature and have people arguing about quality of play too, with people judging and fighting for the relevance of their assessment, but mafia lacks a straightforward way to objectively measure skill, as reflected in recent subjective judgements which have an undeniable tendency to offend and may lead to disruption of games and/or killing the joy of playing.
[Solution]
Ranked match.
Face off two randomly selected players by having them compete for victory in 3 simultaneous games with the same setup and players list.
The player who is being ®anked will be scum once, while the other is town, and town two times. Once while the other is scum and in an eventual tiebreaker were they're both townies, relying on bragon income to determine the better performance and thus the victor.
Every player will have to deposit a fee to participate but the amount of bragons they receive for voting scum doubles by default and quadruples for games won by their faction. However only the result of the face-off counts for the ®leage, the power ranking of which bears a purely relativist signifcance, gaining relevance exponentially with every new result.
With ranked matches and the introduction of bragons (ß) and maybe an equivalent for scumgames (§) the evaluation of player caliber can become a legitimate extension to the service spectrum the community provides.
Remember, Day[9]'s daily wouldn't have become a viewer magnet without an iccup A rank and neither should much consideration be given to the opinions of someone who doesn't have the cred. Furthermore the quality of post-game analysis, coaching and guide concocting has only to gain if it's primarily the A list players who engage in such activities.
|
Blazinghand
United States25563 Posts
The real solution here is 1v1 games of mafia
|
|
|
On July 16 2016 01:46 Blazinghand wrote:
The real solution here is 1v1 games of mafia
N0 start, town bus driver and mafia goon
|
Ranked match.
Face off two randomly selected players by having them compete for victory in 3 simultaneous games with the same setup and players list.
The player who is being ®anked will be scum once, while the other is town, and town two times. Once while the other is scum and in an eventual tiebreaker were they're both townies, relying on bragon income to determine the better performance and thus the victor.
The underline is a big issue. 1 game of fourm mafia already draws a lot of attention, but three? Not only that, but if I know that X is either 66% town or 33% mafia in those 3 games, and X flips mafia via lynch in game 1. He is confirmed town in game 2 and 3.
If you really want rank, I can create a Ranking system, following the lines of:
-Either, Game join is a rank game over all ([R] tag) or PM telling me that they want that game they are about to start to count to ranking. This wouldn't be allowed in any newbie or coaching games, due to obv details.
-Must play at least 3-5 games to be ranked (Kinda like placement matches, however, instead of placing you, it teaches you the game.)
-Separate MMR for both town, 3rd party, and scum .
-Monthly Reports about the Top 25 (or what ever) MMR players for the 3 alignment.
-To be placed, you must send me or whoever at least X games where you Y alignment. Y being the Alignment you want to be ranked.
-MMR will be added/removed depending on players actions during the game. (If you are the last remaining scum, and you carry your team, you should get extra MMR IMO)
It is kinda of a headache, But I could maybe make it work if People show interest. I think it is better if you have it to where any games can count towards your rank (minus expectations) and the thread doesn't need to necessarily know.
|
On July 15 2016 12:27 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:
rb that might be the worst idea I ever heard. And that transcends forum mafia. It might be the worst idea I've ever heard about anything ever.
|
Nobody except the 1 host out of three who randomized the roles of the 3 games, until he found a suitable pair, knows who is being ranked right up until the games are finished.
3 simultaneous games with the same setup and players is unlike 3 random games with nothing in common. It is demanding to perform well and players may have to compromise intelligently on their effort investment because the scumteams will exploit inefficiency, but it also eliminates many variables which obstruct meaningful ranking; which is why I'm skeptical of your approach.
Lengthening days might be a fair tweak, probably would result in roughly the same workload overall though.
|
No offense but I just don't think the idea will work because to put it frankly playing two games at once is taxing but three at once is hellish.
Its just really draining to people and honestly it waters down the mafia product in that situation
|
None taken. I appreciate your feedback, I just need to explain it better for you to stop thinking of it as one of your average games multiplied by 3, before I consider compromising for 2 games.
+ Show Spoiler [Instead see it for what it is:] +
..one game spanning across 3 game threads; more like a 3d game as opposed to 3 2d games played side-by-side is really just 1.5 × the investment and triple the richness if the same players, all of them reluctant to loose too much sleep over something as trivial as mafia, balance out their workload among each other and the games.
Furthermore they reap all of the benefits of 3 games, all with unique flavor inclusive for easier delineation.
Plus they get to experience something unprecedented one could call live meta, which can mean the [Solution] to the [Problem] of lackluster newblood influx and stay, and is the result of the whole being more than the sum of its parts.
As time progresses both town and scum gauge the capabilities of their fellow players faster and more easily, without the need for prior encounters and meta-dive masochism, supplying sufficient raw materials in the form of impressions for analysis / manipulations. This might not mean much to veterans but it's a huge interactivity boost for newer players but generally a convenient shortcut for those unfamiliar with each other, facilitating the cognitive flow and tying the game together like the dude's rug, man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
