|
On January 22 2009 04:40 malongo wrote:
BC i think the first lynch is just like that, its a random event in the game since theres nothing to work with. Im fine with that, its just a setup for the rest of the game (im thinking something like chess or even starcraft) theres no way to keep always a balance. And im against unrevealed death roles and covered number of roles, that hurt the town mostly since the basic idea under mafia has always been (imo) how to coordinate a big number of people uninformed vs a small number informed. Think abut callers mafia, if the town doesnt know that theres 1 or 2 less dts then they are not only fucked because of the lack of dt but because they dont know it. The town needs all the public info the game can provide about the death roles. And please let the mess of first day going, as i said its just part of the game, if someone roleclaims first day and call to lynch x then let it be, dont restrict the power to the 2 days.
You dont have to hide how many roles there are, just don't reveal who has which. You could easily say
2 of 2 dts
6 of 6 mafia
etc..
If say night 2 goes by, vig hits mafia, mafia kills some townies and a dt.
next day just update the counters. The town knows a mafia is dead(but not who) and the mafia knows a dt is dead(but again not who)
This kinda gets rid of the idea of no role reveal, but like, If i was mafia and i kill bob and ralph. I know bob is friends with frank and joe. I also killed ralph, who i know is friends with blane and jane. If i i know one of those 2 people is a dt, i still have to figure out if a) which one was it and b) eliminate his small group cause of it.
In most cases however, the mafia will be killing 2-4 people at least in a mafia game, so the open endedness of it can easily have a blue hide inside a group of greens and feed them info. or the like.
As it stands now, people are way to obvious with their role, greens don't like playing as they have nothing to do(elite blue circle jerk). If they are the dominant group, they should have more power than blues, and blues be the people trying to help them succeed. Mafia by knowing the roles of people on death have a way to easy time picking off blues as they tend to cluster towards one and other.
Also, main reason i like no role reveal on death. In a town you have mafia, townie, and townies with a job. The mafia has hidden itself in the town and no one knows who they are, cept other mafia. the townies with abilities have done the same thing(cept they only know themselves).
if you lynch someone, how does anyone know their role? We always have them turn colour, but its not like we would normally know, so it adds a sense of realism to it.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
While smaller games tend to promote activity, larger games promote balance. Larger games reduce the significance of a life ie losing one mafia is not as bad under a large game as it is in a small game or losing 1 DT isn't as bad if you still have 3 left. On top of that it reduces the impact of random lynches on the first day (as already alluded to). Larger games are better for the mafia though, as they add confusion/chaos and make mafia less visible and clue checking significantly harder.
Inactive management then becomes a problem, and how you want to deal with that. However, I found that mass PMs (ez if you know what you're doing) and activity from the Mafia host (ie little delays) can really make a huge difference in combating the inactives and generating activity.
So yea, if you guys are going to run a new game i suggest you make it a large game
|
On January 22 2009 04:58 Plexa wrote:
While smaller games tend to promote activity, larger games promote balance. Larger games reduce the significance of a life ie losing one mafia is not as bad under a large game as it is in a small game or losing 1 DT isn't as bad if you still have 3 left. On top of that it reduces the impact of random lynches on the first day (as already alluded to). Larger games are better for the mafia though, as they add confusion/chaos and make mafia less visible and clue checking significantly harder.
Inactive management then becomes a problem, and how you want to deal with that. However, I found that mass PMs (ez if you know what you're doing) and activity from the Mafia host (ie little delays) can really make a huge difference in combating the inactives and generating activity.
So yea, if you guys are going to run a new game i suggest you make it a large game
can we convince you to play in the next one?
|
On January 22 2009 04:58 Plexa wrote:
While smaller games tend to promote activity, larger games promote balance. Larger games reduce the significance of a life ie losing one mafia is not as bad under a large game as it is in a small game or losing 1 DT isn't as bad if you still have 3 left. On top of that it reduces the impact of random lynches on the first day (as already alluded to). Larger games are better for the mafia though, as they add confusion/chaos and make mafia less visible and clue checking significantly harder.
Inactive management then becomes a problem, and how you want to deal with that. However, I found that mass PMs (ez if you know what you're doing) and activity from the Mafia host (ie little delays) can really make a huge difference in combating the inactives and generating activity.
So yea, if you guys are going to run a new game i suggest you make it a large game
Larger games also favor mafia in another way. Since there is only one lynch a day, it takes the town considerably longer than a smaller game to eliminate the mafia BEFORE they kill off a bunch of townies. There are simply more people who need to be lynched. So regardless of the mafia kill power, they stay around longer than they would in a small game. Thus the game is balanced by adding more KP for the town (vigi/mad hatter) or more double lynches. Hence larger games require more blue roles depending on the mafia:town ratio. Pretty much this whole discussion does go back to activity. However, I'm not sure if keeping the game the way it is now can enforce activity even with short delays and mass PMs. Like Ace + others said, blues shouldn't be crucial to the game. By increasing the size of the game, you inadvertently make blues increasingly necessary for the game balance. When they go, you have a bigger problem than you do if you have a smaller game. This of course affects the killing/double lynch roles the most, but the general concept still applies. DT role checking power is diluted, which also favors the mafia. (Or smaller games favor the DTs, whichever way you want to look at it).
Of course in an ideal situation where everyone is active, then yes, large games probably are better for the balance. But then if we did have an ideal game situation, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
|
On January 22 2009 06:36 Incognito wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2009 04:58 Plexa wrote:
While smaller games tend to promote activity, larger games promote balance. Larger games reduce the significance of a life ie losing one mafia is not as bad under a large game as it is in a small game or losing 1 DT isn't as bad if you still have 3 left. On top of that it reduces the impact of random lynches on the first day (as already alluded to). Larger games are better for the mafia though, as they add confusion/chaos and make mafia less visible and clue checking significantly harder.
Inactive management then becomes a problem, and how you want to deal with that. However, I found that mass PMs (ez if you know what you're doing) and activity from the Mafia host (ie little delays) can really make a huge difference in combating the inactives and generating activity.
So yea, if you guys are going to run a new game i suggest you make it a large game Larger games also favor mafia in another way. Since there is only one lynch a day, it takes the town considerably longer than a smaller game to eliminate the mafia BEFORE they kill off a bunch of townies. There are simply more people who need to be lynched. So regardless of the mafia kill power, they stay around longer than they would in a small game. Thus the game is balanced by adding more KP for the town (vigi/mad hatter) or more double lynches. Hence larger games require more blue roles depending on the mafia:town ratio. Pretty much this whole discussion does go back to activity. However, I'm not sure if keeping the game the way it is now can enforce activity even with short delays and mass PMs. Like Ace + others said, blues shouldn't be crucial to the game. By increasing the size of the game, you inadvertently make blues increasingly necessary for the game balance. When they go, you have a bigger problem than you do if you have a smaller game. This of course affects the killing/double lynch roles the most, but the general concept still applies. DT role checking power is diluted, which also favors the mafia. (Or smaller games favor the DTs, whichever way you want to look at it). Of course in an ideal situation where everyone is active, then yes, large games probably are better for the balance. But then if we did have an ideal game situation, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
In a larger game you do need more blue roles, but just make sure there are significantly more greens. Say you have 50 players, 8-10 mafia, 8-10 blues. thats 16-20 people with a role, and then 30 without.
so out of your town you have 10 roles, 30 greens. or very similar ideas. Just make sure the amount of blues doesnt become to overpowering.
|
right @ BC. Basically while the town should always have the way to kill mafia at night it should never be too much AND there have to be a large number of greens. Large greens = mafia have to think about hits instead of knowing there's a good chance they'll hit a blue.
Right now I think the general consensus is almost reached on how many blues/mafia need to be in a given game. iirc the rule was 1 mafia for every 2-4 townies. Now the thing to do is tweak DTs which heavily depend on what other roles are being used (Gf with role claim I've never played before) and also how many mafia are playing. Vote checks make sense when their are very large games because time wise the game will get boring trying to 1 by 1 find mafia. For small-medium games it isn't needed.
Vet lives are easy to balance also, usually don't want them to take up ridiculous mafia KP and you want their lives to at least match minimum mafia KP.
Vigis are fine with 2 shots. It's when you have too many of them that it becomes a problem.
Double Lynch is needed and I agree with it. I'd prefer the Mayor/Pardoner way where you add in Agents of Chaos but of course this may be going off on "too many roles to get used to" playing style.
Either way I like where this discussion is going and I think we'll be ready for a new game in a couple of weeks. I won't be hosting anymore though because I'd rather play 
|
Assume a very small game. 20 people. 1 DT, 1 medic, 1 vigi, 1 vet. 4 mafia. Now for argument's sake, lets assume a 1:1 kill ratio.
Day 1: 15 town - Oh no! A vigi was lynched!
Day 2: 11 town - but a mafia is lynched.
Day 3: 8 town - another mafia is lynched.
Day 4: 6 town - another mafia is lynched.
Day 5: 5 town, town wins.
So town wins even if their vigi is lost. Lets amplify the situation by 3x.
60 people, 3 DTs, 3 medics, 3 vigis, 3 vets, 12 mafia.
Day 1: 47 town - vigi mislynch
Day 2: 35 town - all the medics and two vigis die, mafia is lynched. 11 mafia remaining.
Day 3: 24 town - mafia is lyched...but see how the town can't win even with a mafia lynch every day.
If we change the mafia KP to 2:1, we still have problems if vigis are killed in the beginning. Of course there is a lesser chance of all the vigis dying in one night, but it happens. But you get the point. Bigger game you have lesser chances of lucky hits, but when it does hit, it gets nasty very quickly. I'd post more here but I have to go. I'l be back later.
|
|
|
For the next host, is the general consensus this:
Have Chuiu Host
In the case he doesn't
Have me Host?
|
I'd be willing to host, but apparently other people do.
Do we have a consensus on whether we will have a small game (30) or large game (50)?
I would be ok with the mayor/pardonner plan in a big game, although I am concerned that it might encourage secret circles, which we are trying to avoid. In small games it could be ok as long as we weaken the roles obviously.
About no role reveal. I like BC's idea with naming what roles died but not who was what role. But I think for simplicity's sake we should wait for no role reveal until maybe next game. We should probably get activity and other problems sorted out first.
|
Sydney2287 Posts
I would be interested to see Chuiu's input in this, does anyone know if he's around?
|
ahahaha at this rate theres going to be more people interested in hosting a mafia rather than playing. I really think Plexa missed the kind of inactivity we are talking about: its not that people dont post much, its that greens simply dissapear after night 1, so i think a smaller game is consensus. And im still against "no role reveal". It kills the small amount of info the town can get from the players behavior.
|
One thing good about no role reveal is that it has the potential to cause people NOT to form secret circles, because if you were in any way attempting to say that you know something because you are in a circle and know stuff, then people will never know that you actually are blue/have a secret circle. For all they know it could be the mafia pretending to have a secret circle. That is one thing going for no role reveal. However, I think we should stick with regular role reveal for now.
What happened to Ver?
|
So what I gathered from reading so far is that we are not modding the DT powers? I have been kind of out of it for the most part and not been reading. But it looks like we left DT rolecheck intact, instead of replacing it with role finder or anything. I think we should try that out in a small game and see how we like it. I am okay with experimenting with a 30 person game just to see how it plays out. I really wanted to see how a capo/dt game with role finder would pan out. DT = Role finder Capo = Role Check.
I am kind of indifferent towards who hosts the game, Chuiu and BC seemed to do the best at it, so if one of them would like to, I am okay with it.
|
On January 22 2009 09:46 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
So what I gathered from reading so far is that we are not modding the DT powers? I have been kind of out of it for the most part and not been reading. But it looks like we left DT rolecheck intact, instead of replacing it with role finder or anything. I think we should try that out in a small game and see how we like it. I am okay with experimenting with a 30 person game just to see how it plays out. I really wanted to see how a capo/dt game with role finder would pan out. DT = Role finder Capo = Role Check.
I am kind of indifferent towards who hosts the game, Chuiu and BC seemed to do the best at it, so if one of them would like to, I am okay with it.
Here is the problem I have with role finder. Lets say we are going to go with like 2 DT 1 vigi 2 medics 2 vets - basically, suggested numbers from earlier posts in the thread. Day 1 both DT rolefind vigi. You now have both DT and the vigi in contact. Day 2 one DT rolefinds medic seed 1 one DT rolefinds medic seed 2. You have all DT vigi and medics in a circle right now. Day 3 you do the same with the vets.
Basically, by day 3, you have the ultimate blue "secret circle" thanks entirely to rolefinder. (Note this is not entirely reliant upon 1 vigi, you could just have the thread agree on a role and seed number for both DTs to search using and get similar results). I think we are trying to avoid having secret circles if at all possible at least for the moment so we can try and have an active game instead of just having instructions come down from on high (in this case, probably through vets or people protected by medics). Therefore, at least for the current game, I am against rolefinder.
|
Yeah this is the same reason why I have a problem with rolefinder...
Are we going to have a role that can only call double lynches or have another system?
|
So I don't know if I want to run a game anytime soon, I'm pretty busy with work during this time of the year. If BC wants to team up we could probably run a game between the two of us.
The setup I was thinking for my next game would be around 50 players again but this time everyone would have a watered down role. For this reason vigilante would be removed because there really is no way to water down that role and effectively keep it interesting. I would love feedback on them:
Detective: Each day can ask if a clue points to a specific player.
Paramedic: Can keep a target player alive but cannot act two consecutive nights in a row.
Veteran: Can gain one extra life per night OR can gain one extra vote per day. Each day the player chooses one.
Private Eye: Can reveal the role of one player OR do a vote count once a game.
Mad Hatter: Can place a bomb on a target player. Anytime the Mad Hatter dies the target player dies with him. Additionally the Mad Hatter may choose to 'suicide' bomb into the target player the night after he chooses his target. Must wait till the next night to move the bomb.
Town: The following are abilities the town can vote on. Actions happen if the majority of players voting that day also vote for a single option. (ie: If there are 40 total votes to lynch people you would need 21 votes on one of these options to use them) Options cannot be used two consecutive days in a row and only three are allowed per game. (ie: two double lynches and an overtime or overtime, sanctuary, and one double lynch or any combination thereof)
Double Lynch: Lynch an additional player the following day, can only be used twice.
Overtime: Give players double actions the following day/night. This does not work for Private Eye or Mad Hatter. Can only be used once.
Sanctuary: Prevents the deaths of a specific type of blue that following night. Can only be used once. ie: Everyone votes on Sanctuary for Veteran then that night anytime mafia or mad hatters target a Veteran it does nothing.
Mafia: Nothing changes here.
Don: Can order only one of the following once a game:
Overkill: Mafia can double their hits one night.
Snakeskin: Cannot be the target of Private Eye role checks, Detective clue checks, or Mad Hatter attacks for the next two days. If a blue attempts one of these they will simply be denied, it does not matter if they are targeting mafia.
Backlash: On the following day whenever a player uses a special ability it works as if the mafia used the ability on the player instead. Quick summary: clue checks do nothing, medic covers random mafia players, veterans vote for their targets but random mafia will gain extra lives, private eyes are revealed to mafia or their vote check goes to show how many private eyes voted for the player, and mad hatters place a bomb on themselves. These happen if and only if the players in question use their abilities and no player will be notified of the change until the day after.
|
Chuiu, my thoughts on your roles:
Detective: too weak. We have been discussing the cluecheck ability a little earlier in the thread and made it slightly stronger (though not much). My problem with the current cluecheck ability is that the town often winds up deciding fluff is a clue, making the cluecheck ability totally worthless. This was why I suggested we change this to connecting a player to a mafioso code name (still weak and based on clue analysis, but you don't have to worry about "Is this a clue?" quite so much)
Paramedic: This one seems fine to me
Veteran: Could be used to give confirmed townies which can then be given multiple night lives. Strong role (maybe too strong?) if played correctly with medics
Private Eye: I don't see why they would ever do a role reveal when there is the chance to get a votecheck instead. We have proven that votechecks can be MUCH stronger.
Mad Hatter: Seems like a nice change to me
Double Lynch/Overtime/Sanctuary: Good ideas, I think these will need more discussion
Don's abilities: at first glance, Overkill seems REALLY strong, but the others might be about as strong. They are definitely stronger than the town abilities (though this might be intentional?)
|
On January 25 2009 15:22 Chuiu wrote:
The setup I was thinking for my next game would be around 50 players again but this time everyone would have a watered down role.
I don't know if this is a good idea. What will the role distribution be? I feel that although I like the Town options and the mafia options, giving too many people roles might not have the effect we want.
DT sounds useless, like Qatol says.
Overtime...does this affect mafia kill count too?
Sanctuary might be OP depending on how many of each role you plan on giving. Because if everyone has a watered down blue role, you might make a large portion of the town invincible for a night.
I don't know if leaving out Vigis is a good idea, but depending on how many mad hatters you have it could be ok.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
