Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Sept 24, 2007 20:47:46 GMT -5
Caveat: No referencing events in the ongoing game! This is for abstract discussion only! Maybe some of these points will have to wait until the game is over, but I'm leaving them here:
*Can Townie PMs be used as a secret handshake between townies safely? Am I right that it helps scum eliminate who the power-roles aren't? (Because if a powerrole plays along and pretends to be townie, what happens when he needs to roleclaim?)
*What are the actual risk/rewards for a Day 1 No-Lynch scenario?
*Can "why was so-and-so killed last Night" be a question that helps town? (I would think it's either scum showing off or trying to rolefish.)
*When does it become beneficial for town to mass nameclaim in a closed (or semi-closed) theme?
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Sept 24, 2007 23:32:40 GMT -5
Caveat: No referencing events in the ongoing game! This is for abstract discussion only! Maybe some of these points will have to wait until the game is over, but I'm leaving them here: *Can Townie PMs be used as a secret handshake 'twixt townies safely? Am I right that it helps scum eliminate who the power-roles aren't? (Because if a powerrole plays along and pretends to be townie, what happens when he needs to roleclaim?) *What are the actual risk/rewards for a Day 1 No-Lynch scenario? *Can "why was so-and-so killed last Night" be a question that helps town? (I would think it's either scum showing off or trying to rolefish.) *When does it become beneficial for town to mass nameclaim in a closed (or semi-closed) theme? My Thoughts (Generic and OUT OF GAME): 1) Can Townie PMs be used as a secret handshake 'twixt townies safely? -Sometimes, but I feel its cheap and unfair, but its easily counterable. I dislike specific quoting of it. Or creating tests such as "What is the 4th letter of the 4th word of your PM" or something like that. I've seen it done in games, and I always felt that's cheap as hell. But its ALSO easily counterable by 2 ways: a) If an open game, reveal the "Townie" pm to everyone as the "generic example of a pm" so both scum and town know what it looks like, and can't use such crap. b) My fav- Create custom PMs for each person, so that no two people have the same PM'ed thing. Like one may be town, one townie, one vanilla, one plain jane, etc.... Just so you can't assume your pm is the same as all others. c) just say you did one of the above methods and tell your town to play fair about it. That should easily enough solve the problem. 2) What are the actual risk/rewards for a Day 1 No-Lynch scenario? Reward: 1.Scum get a free Kill. 2. All information roles get an extra day too. 3. Townie doesn't kill any one bad or good, also then, a paper trail isn't created. It's easy to advocate no-lynch and then have nothing really to root out scum with on day 2. Unless you're hoping that information will be gleaned from the kills so that you can analyze what happened during Day 1 with more clarity. But that's unlikely. 3.b. ALSO: If scum then kill the Cop on Night 2. Well, the town comes out looking like idiots. Big fucking blind idiots. Don't assume that no kills mean "oh well, at least an innocent is spared". It means that the Scum get a 2nd chance to try to kill a power role. 4. This is the biggest reason i hate No lynches: If there is a Recruiting role, he gets to double his numbers for free. Ie: If there is 1 cult member on day 1. Now there is a chance of 2 or 3 (if it starts out w/ a night). So the next day he's already got the equivalent of a Mason group. He can start making power plays because there are members that know one another and can deflect votes and move them around (a 3 person group basically). He also gets a chance to try to recruit a power role. Or if someone is a townie confirmed role, he can then get a chance to easily sneak him over to the Cult side w/o anyone realizing it. Cults want to recruit those LEAST Likely to die at night/day. Thusly, they pick the ones who are most suspicious (because Scum won't kill them), or the ones that are most likely to be protected/Confirmed (because town won't kill them), and then something in between last. That's why I hate giving the cult free days. Because they can basically take their pick of the litter, and I have yet to see a good way to remove cults. 3.Can "why was so-and-so killed last Night" be a question that helps town? (I would think it's either scum showing off or trying to rolefish.) -I don't know about this one. I think early on, not so much. Later in the games, as data accumulates, patterns are created, it then goes from no idea to WIFOM. Unless of course there is a pattern of traceable kills. Some mafia games have it so that the killers (usually when there are 3 or more) each have a unique method. This then allows one to go back an analyze which person killed who. But unless that is known, i don't see it as a helpful Question at the start. Just a way to WIFOM and think about it, but not an option to pursue. *When does it become beneficial for town to mass nameclaim in a closed (or semi-closed) theme?[/quote]: Thinking about this.... I want to say for sure when there are about 10-12 people left, enough data has been given over the course of the game (to know if roles/names are correlated), and if the power roles have been outed/killed off. So if the doctor is dead, and the cop is gone, and there are 10 of you left, and you know that bad guys have "bad names' then yeah, i'd do it. However, this also means that scum has had all game to try to come up with a name. So i'm in favor of a mix. The option of hearing name claims throughout the game to catch "scum" off guard. This usually works i think better in a Night First game rather than a day start (because by then you'll know some killers, but scum will know then what the generic "townie" name IS, but they wont have time yet to devise a quick out) -Unless of course the names aren't correlated. -Or if the Mods gave the scum "Safe" names to use to hide behind. Then the naming thing kinda sucks. But it's always fun in theme games i think more so than in a "normal" open game.
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Sept 25, 2007 21:24:44 GMT -5
Thought of another question:
*Is the "majority+1 lynch or no lynch" rule more beneficial for town or scum?
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Sept 25, 2007 22:33:16 GMT -5
:shrug: That depends on the scum/town i think. In here, i think it hurts us more. us=Town.
Majority +1 is always the standard, but usually the threat is never No lynch. Usually either highest gets it, or a random lynch by the mods (which just sounds evil, but the only people then in favor of it would be scum. It'd remove the "no lynchers' from teh crowd)
|
|
|
Post by JSexton on Sept 26, 2007 16:28:05 GMT -5
Caveat: No referencing events in the ongoing game! This is for abstract discussion only! Maybe some of these points will have to wait until the game is over, but I'm leaving them here: *Can Townie PMs be used as a secret handshake 'twixt townies safely? Am I right that it helps scum eliminate who the power-roles aren't? (Because if a powerrole plays along and pretends to be townie, what happens when he needs to roleclaim?) No, I don't think so. I generally post the generic vanilla town PM in my games. I also don't allow quoting of anything but the bolded parts, which is name, role, and alignment. Philosophicaly, it goes against the spirit of the game, and the mod should carefully design so that isn't possible to gain an advantage by trying to work around it. I dislike saying "Hey, play fair.", without establishing exactly what "fair" is, because it hurts people who try to be creative. I'd rather design a game to encourage a specific behavior. I don't think it's ever right to no-lynch day one. he information gleaned is more than the basic body+plus alignment, it's the votes and conversation. And there's nothing wrong with eliciting multiple claims day 1, either, provided they had a solid foundation. I think it makes a good topic of conversation. Some scum love to show off their knowledge in order to look insightful, and you can catch someone with more info than they ought to have. Just be careful about taking speculation to seriously. Late game, it can be a good tool, especially once the power roles are in the open. A well designed game should never be breakable on the basis of names, however. Never.
|
|
|
Post by JSexton on Sept 26, 2007 16:30:41 GMT -5
Thought of another question: *Is the "majority+1 lynch or no lynch" rule more beneficial for town or scum? Town, no question. It may not seems like it, since it's so harsh. But being strict with the town does a very important thing: it forces participation. If you simply lynch the person with the most votes as deadline, then you give scum (and bored players) the chance to slide along without committing to anything, knowing there's nothing forcing them to do so. When, however, you desperately need people on wagons in order to lynch, scum are forced to join in, or risk the wrath of the town. Punishing bad play hurts the scum more than the town, since scum are the ones who want to get away with bad play.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Sept 26, 2007 16:32:04 GMT -5
Thought of another question: *Is the "majority+1 lynch or no lynch" rule more beneficial for town or scum? If you want the game designers opinion, I find it more potentially beneficial to the town. Potentially being the key. It was included as a protown balance, I ran it by JSexton who made a couple of suggestions to make it even more townie favorable (which I kept) and then I posted it. Of course, like all things, it can be used by the scum against the town...and by the town against the town. But in the long run, I think it heavily benefits the town.
|
|
|
Post by sirsam972 on Sept 27, 2007 4:09:17 GMT -5
*Can Townie PMs be used as a secret handshake 'twixt townies safely? Am I right that it helps scum eliminate who the power-roles aren't? (Because if a powerrole plays along and pretends to be townie, what happens when he needs to roleclaim?) Nah, in my opinion this shouldn't be a factor in the game. Only in-game material should be a factor. The PM's with Identities I send out don't say anything else than "You are a Citizen" for vanilla citizens. *What are the actual risk/rewards for a Day 1 No-Lynch scenario?
I'm not a fan of no-lynching. (I know the question didn't ask for my opinion but bear with me ) Usually the voting process gives enough evidence to be a worth a citizen. And it still could catch a scum. Besides, if you no lynch on day 1 you don't get any evidence on voting patterns or anyone's true motivations (another reason why I'm not a fan of no cardflip games) and you're back where you started on Day 2. Besides, who wants to do all that talking and then not even end up with a result? =) How anti-climactic. *Can "why was so-and-so killed last Night" be a question that helps town? (I would think it's either scum showing off or trying to rolefish.)
Unless I'm mistaken, I was under the impression that this was normally recognized as a huge way of identifying scum. Sure, the first two are often random and soon it gets to a point where confirmed citizens get night killed, but there's still a lot of information to be gleaned. If someone role claims but isn't night killed for awhile, that's good information. If nothing else a night kill tells you that this is a person the scum felt threatened by, so you can read over their posts to see what it was that might have made them feel threatened.
I have some questions of my own I'm interested in hearing y'alls thoughts on: * How do you feel about games that allow people to talk outside the thread? Who does this give an advantage to? * How do you feel about voting systems that force people to cast a vote, with penalties (up to expulsion) for not voting? * Rather than just use a certain % of scum for a group, I prefer to use the % of voting periods as an indicator. For example, I think scum should have to at least survive one Vote for each Vote they don't survive (survive 1 in 2 votes) to win. This assumes a small number of not extremely powerful citizen roles. Actually I think the number is closer to 1 in 3 votes, but probably somewhere in between. Is this a good indicator? What do you think the number should be closer to?
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Sept 27, 2007 8:53:22 GMT -5
Answering one of my own questions...
On mafiascum, they do use the majority+1 or no lynch rule, but they also don't set a hard deadline at the start of any Day unless it drags out too long. Then a deadline (sometimes retractable, even) is set in which the # to lynch drops by some amount, and THEN it becomes "lynch at deadline or no lynch at all".
So I feel like having a deadline from the get go gives the town unnecessary pressure, and you end up with stuff like Ramirogate (tm) happening.
But, on the other hand, mafiascum games do tend to take really freaking long to finish, so...
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Sept 27, 2007 10:24:23 GMT -5
Answering one of my own questions... On mafiascum, they do use the majority+1 or no lynch rule, but they also don't set a hard deadline at the start of any Day unless it drags out too long. Then a deadline (sometimes retractable, even) is set in which the # to lynch drops by some amount, and THEN it becomes "lynch at deadline or no lynch at all". So I feel like having a deadline from the get go gives the town unnecessary pressure, and you end up with stuff like Ramirogate (tm) happening. But, on the other hand, mafiascum games do tend to take really freaking long to finish, so... Originally we were going to have a Day of unspecified length, but I was talked into the idea that we would never end a Day if we did that right now. It just wasn't something we were used to. So instead I more then doubled the length of the normal Day. I really didn't expect any of these Days to go the distance. It is insteresting though.
|
|
|
Post by JSexton on Sept 27, 2007 10:27:38 GMT -5
* How do you feel about games that allow people to talk outside the thread? Who does this give an advantage to? Scum, generally. You can give townies the ability to talk in private (masons, usually), but what are they going to talk about? Anything important or insightful should be laid out in the game thread, most of the time. Masons might be able to coordinate and try to setup a gambit, but most of the time, it doesn't add much value. And messenger roles/information wheels are fun, but rarely contribute in any meaningful way. Scum, on the other hand, gain a huge advantage from their private talks, whether it's sharing tells for power roles, planning fake claims, planning gambits, setting up sacrifices, coordinating abilities, etc. I think I prefer "encourage" over "force". Interesting. I've often heard "if a town mislynches more than three times, they deserve to lose" in normal sized games (18-22 people). This is a similar concept. I usually map out kills from all killing groups and see how long the game might go, or just how short it could be, and use that a gauge. I want games to last between 5-7 Days, ideally, which lines up well with the both theories above.
|
|
|
Post by JSexton on Sept 27, 2007 10:29:50 GMT -5
Answering one of my own questions... On mafiascum, they do use the majority+1 or no lynch rule, but they also don't set a hard deadline at the start of any Day unless it drags out too long. Then a deadline (sometimes retractable, even) is set in which the # to lynch drops by some amount, and THEN it becomes "lynch at deadline or no lynch at all". So I feel like having a deadline from the get go gives the town unnecessary pressure, and you end up with stuff like Ramirogate (tm) happening. But, on the other hand, mafiascum games do tend to take really freaking long to finish, so... Yup. Again, I used to only set a deadline when the game seemed to be stalling. But that seemed to encourage stalling, followed by a frantic rush to lynch when there was suddenly a deadline three days away, and the day still dragged on for weeks. Setting a deadline at the outset leads to clear expectations, and the town can plan for it. They know what they need to do, and if it doesn't happen, it's entirely their own fault.
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Sept 27, 2007 12:28:51 GMT -5
Using the Newbie "C9" setup to muck about with statistics.
(C9 = 7 players, 2 scum, 50% chance of Doc existing, 50% chance of Cop existing, 25% chance of both or neither, remaining players are Vanilla.)
From the viewpoint of a Vanilla player, the town comprises of 6 other people (he knows his own role). So on Day One each of the other players has:
2/6 = 1/3 chance of being scum 1/6 * 0.5 = 1/12 chance of being the Cop 1/6 * 0.5 = 1/12 chance of being the Doc 1 - 1/3 - 1/12 - 1/12 = 1/2 chance of being a Vanilla
For each Power Role, the town also comprises of 6 people (he knows his own role), but the Day One statistics look like this: 2/6 = 1/3 chance of being scum 1/6 * 0.5 = 1/12 chance of being the other Power Role 1 - 1/3 - 1/12 = 7/12 chance of being a Vanilla
From the viewpoint of the scum, however, the town only comprises of 5 other people (because he knows his own role and his partner's). So on Day One those other players has:
1/5 * 0.5 = 1/10 chance of being the Cop 1/5 * 0.5 = 1/10 chance of being the Doc 1 - 1/10 - 1/10 = 4/5 chance of being a Vanilla
For the town as a whole, the Day One statistics look like this for each player: 2/7 chance of being scum 1/7 * 0.5 = 1/14 chance of being the Cop 1/7 * 0.5 = 1/14 chance of being the Doc 1 - 2/7 - 1/14 - 1/14 = 4/7 chance of being a Vanilla
(These are also the chances that those roles are lynched on Day One.)
We also might be able to play with statistics on Day One voting (since it takes 4 to lynch and no additional votes/unvotes can take place once the hammer comes down), but I think that might get into realms of complication that can't be detailed with numbers.
|
|
|
Post by diggitcamara on Sept 27, 2007 12:48:34 GMT -5
*Can "why was so-and-so killed last Night" be a question that helps town? (I would think it's either scum showing off or trying to rolefish.)
Unless I'm mistaken, I was under the impression that this was normally recognized as a huge way of identifying scum. Sure, the first two are often random and soon it gets to a point where confirmed citizens get night killed, but there's still a lot of information to be gleaned. If someone role claims but isn't night killed for awhile, that's good information. If nothing else a night kill tells you that this is a person the scum felt threatened by, so you can read over their posts to see what it was that might have made them feel threatened. Well, the way it has played out (so far) in the SDMB games, scum seem far more preoccupied to vote against people who haven't interacted significantly with them. And they're usually trying to ferret out power roles, with varying success. What that has meant to town is that an actual discussion of the reasons why someone was killed was to guess that they were after this-'n-that power role, which, in turn, doesn't actually help town (this doesn't apply to this game, of course, since it was a closed setup). Counterintuitively, by now I usually look at those players that appear to be good but have been "overlooked" by scum. More often than not they actually have spotted one or two scum.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Blaster Master on Oct 1, 2007 14:31:10 GMT -5
Caveat: No referencing events in the ongoing game! This is for abstract discussion only! Maybe some of these points will have to wait until the game is over, but I'm leaving them here: *Can Townie PMs be used as a secret handshake 'twixt townies safely? Am I right that it helps scum eliminate who the power-roles aren't? (Because if a powerrole plays along and pretends to be townie, what happens when he needs to roleclaim?) As others have said, and as I've expressed previously, I think using PMs in any way is poor-form and against the spirit of the game at best or potentially game breaking at worst. That is, the whole point of a vanilla townie is that they don't have any special information. If they can use their PM verify a claim, you're playing in the meta-game realm. As far as MV went, I specifically quoted the role descriptions when sending out PMs so I'd be sure that no one, specifically the vanilla townies and non-believers, could identify eachother, each by accident. The only PMs that had special information were ones that would never be quoted or didn't matter if they were (eg, the monks, the cult, and the martyr). OTOH, I really didn't like the idea of banning quoting of PMs either. While I am generally against meta-gaming, which is what quoting PMs is in my mind, meta-gaming is sometimes unavoidable (as with impressions of playstyles from previous games). Urm... I think I went over this extensively in game, so I'll be brief... potentially massive reward (ie, large amounts of information and potential of getting scum) versus minimal risk (ie, reasonable to minimal information and potentially taking out vanilla townies). Sometimes, but I think the differentiation is made when people just posit the question, versus provide useful analysis with regard to it. However, I think most of the time, the answer is plainly obvious (eg, they gave power role tells), it's designed to put the town into circular reasoning (eg, was it to make so-and-so more or less suspicious), or it was done for reasons the town has little chance of figuring out (eg, setting up a particular claim, like "monkgate" in MV). IOW, I think it's a question everyone asks, but it's pointless to voice it unless you have an opinion and evidence to back it up. IMO, this occurs when a high degree of correlation between names and alignments is well known by the town. That is, an advantage occurs because EVERYONE has a name (or specifically lacks a name) and power roles may or may not correlate with the importance of a name. Hence, if there's a high correlation, then names give a high degree of certainty of towniness, with little exposure of the power roles. To state more plainly, ROLEclaiming necessarily correlates to alignment and powerrole, but NAMEclaiming only necessarily correlates to alignment (assuming high correlation). Thus, NAMEclaiming achieves all of the benefits of ROLEclaiming without so many of the drawbacks. PLUS, it achieves this not through the typical game mechanics, but through meta-game mechanics. AFAICT, since earlier examples, most mafia games that have themes have been specifically designed to prevent this, so I would say, with exception for special cases (eg, all but one of the masons is dead, with the last unclaimed, and all the masons have something in common), it is probably useless at best, and potentially harmful at worst
|
|