[N][M]Noir Mini Mafia - Ch. 5

On July 31 2020 05:03 LightningStrike wrote:
/in

On August 01 2020 03:12 Eywa- wrote:

No worries, I'll catch him if he is mafia.

On August 08 2020 03:56 Trfel wrote:
GlowingBear, I can cohost if you want to play!

On August 23 2020 10:10 Hapahauli wrote:
Setup Thoughts:



+1 to Trfel.

This is the 5th iteration of this setup I have had a chance to host on TL. Looking back at previous games, it tends to amplify both positive and negative aspects of town activity atmosphere. An active town can use the flexible lynch mechanic to bulldoze a scum-team. As in this game, an inactive town can get frozen and gridlocked trying to consolidate on a majority lynch.

Unfortunately, this game was compromised by inactivity. GTacc and Mr. Cheesecake were modkilled for inactivity. HoldenGolden would have been warned (and was likely on the way to a modkill) before he got lynched. No game (especially this setup) is fun when a third of the game isn't active.



Rayn also identified a pretty key flaw in the setup: there is rarely an incentive for mafia to night-kill. In future games, I would RNG a night kill if mafia did not submit an action (i.e. on Night 1).

Moderation Thoughts:

I'd appreciate feedback on the moderation of the game.

For my part, I think I screwed up on two fronts:

Firstly, I should have imposed much stricter activity requirements in a game of this nature. While a host cannot control activity levels, I can modkill and/or replace players more quickly. I had in my mind that 48-hours of thread inactivity would justify a warning. A second 48-hour period of inactivity would justify a mod-kill. A consecutive 72-hour period of inactivity would justify a modkill. I believe these standards were insufficient, especially when I had two replacements lined up for the game.

Secondly, I do not believe it was proper for me to require the confirmation of the night kill by both mafia members. It seemed unnecessary, and allows one inactive mafia member to derail night actions.

Regarding Gameplay:

I quoted a couple of posts from the QT and the thread that I found "thematic" of the game. The inactivity does make it difficult to draw too much from the game. However, the general "theme" of "townies going at each other's throats while mafia sits back and watches" holds.

Damdred's comment during the scramble toward the D2 lynch summarizes this dynamic well.



On D2, this was true: LS was barely active (and Mr. CC afk) while townies argued with each other and ultimately lynched Shockeyy.

Mr. CC, to his credit, was willing to "get involved" in lynch shenanigans on D1. However, I feel that his sabotage of the D1 lynch (by unvoting at the last minute on cycle 3) was a scum-slip.



Vivax had a great post here, albeit he drew the wrong conclusions. In the dynamic of this game, town has to push lynches. Being willing to lynch, and being involved in last-minute attempts to consolidate lynches are strong townie traits.

In this game, it is the mafia that were not bloodthirsty. LS was generally inactive around deadlines. Mr. CC almost highhandedly caused a no-lynch on D1. Onegu sat back and watched townies scream at each other.



These forced "binary choices" have come up in quite a few recent games, so I thought I'd point it out. In full disclosure, I ended up leading a mislynch in my most recent game against BloodyCobbler (oops) doing this same things.

All and all, I feel that these "binary" choices can be good if you are absolutely 100% sure that a player is mafia. The problem with this logic is that townies are rarely 100% sure of things. If they feel that they are, they usually vastly overestimate their accuracy and confidence.

With that said, binary choices limit a town's flexibility, and artificially amplify a player's propensity to tunnel on a target. It is no surprise that it led to a bad result in this game.

When you force a town to choose between one of two stupid options, logic dictates that they have a 100% chance of choosing a stupid option.

On August 23 2020 12:07 Vivax wrote:
The hosting was awesome but the activity glut made it hard to pull enough information in time.

On August 23 2020 13:09 Dadred wrote:
I don't mind being called scum but just want to work with people and actually play and we didn't actually play mafia most of the time.

It was really demoralizing and not fun at a point, and not talking about Ewya scum read on me.

On August 23 2020 13:22 LightningStrike wrote:

Wait she actually told you one of my scum tells that I not even aware of? O.o

On August 23 2020 13:33 Dadred wrote:



You were fine I don't think you were toxic at all.

Tbh I think you will always run into the same problem I do and several others. We like to post we like to talk.

Sometimes it's better to think and not post every thought. Like I got myself in trouble for waffling my read on LS because I have such a soft spot on him, also I did pretend to have a stronger read cause I really thought cheesecake was scum. It led to a weird read change without much progression.

Sometimes you just have to have clear progression, like your LS read was great and you started to have an amazing follow up on it but you also got off track sometimes.

You just waffle around the thread sometimes, lack pointed questions sometimes but you played ok.