Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Keep it as is

3 (12%)

Change it to a full Jester, with game-end on win

1 (4%)

Change it to a full Jester, but without game-end on win

5 (20%)

Change it to a full Jester, with game-end on win AFTER day 3

3 (12%)

Change it to a Jester with the loss of the Next Day phase

4 (16%)

Remove it entirely

9 (36%)

Other (explain)

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 25

[JoshuaFH]

I wasn't talking about your "Everyone votes for themselves" strategy WA, I was talking about how I cornered the two reporters in Paranormal 6!

[Leafsnail]

Well, as far as I can see, the DL was added to prevent a total deadlock.  If people really, really, really could not agree on who to lynch, there would be a compromise, and both would die.  However, it is currently being deliberately and cynically used to squeeze an extra lynch out of the day phase.  Whether or not this benefits the town, it still goes against the original intentions of the game.

[webadict]

I wasn't talking about your "Everyone votes for themselves" strategy WA, I was talking about how I cornered the two reporters in Paranormal 6!

Yes, but if you think about it, that was lame. If you had chosen to lynch one, it's based on cunning and intellect. If you lynch both, it's not really a game. It's just taking a gun and shooting both.

Think of it as the evil twin situation: You and your evil twin are in one place, and the evil twin plans to destroy the world. The only way to stop him is to kill him. Now, the gun is in someone else's hands. You have to convince him that you're the good twin.

The way you spin it isn't about trying to decipher which is which, it's just putting an extra bullet in the gun. Why take the chance?

Because that's the game. It's not about killing both. It's about being logical and cunning.

[Alexhans]

Wrong Janus! The rules as they are allow for a trick of EPIC proportions. Suppose there is a dopp enchanter, then that dopp can proceed with the crowd to "tie" between two people, and then at the end, only ONE person will be lynched! And because it requires that half of everyone to be involved, that allows him to weed out a town, protect a fellow dopp, and perform a 6+ way WIFOM.

dude... and you would look at the waggon an narrow down and enchanter... 

You need to stop thinking about UNIQUE game scenarios and think about the OVERALL game.

Yes, but if you think about it, that was lame. If you had chosen to lynch one, it's based on cunning and intellect. If you lynch both, it's not really a game. It's just taking a gun and shooting both.

QFT.  Deciding who to lynch between 2 suspicious people is a great moment in mafia.  Just lynching both is lazy and really sucks.
--------------------------
Anyway... proposition for next game...

Let's balance this thing with 1 mafia before attempting to make it a multiple mafia game...

As josh said in the game... Scum actually needs to scumhunt the other team so lack of scumhunting is not necesarilly a scumtell...

Let's PLEASE go back to dopps vs town with the additional aliens...

Anything else is just a bloody and swingy mess...

[webadict]

Wrong Janus! The rules as they are allow for a trick of EPIC proportions. Suppose there is a dopp enchanter, then that dopp can proceed with the crowd to "tie" between two people, and then at the end, only ONE person will be lynched! And because it requires that half of everyone to be involved, that allows him to weed out a town, protect a fellow dopp, and perform a 6+ way WIFOM.

dude... and you would look at the waggon an narrow down and enchanter... 

You need to stop thinking about UNIQUE game scenarios and think about the OVERALL game.

Yes, but if you think about it, that was lame. If you had chosen to lynch one, it's based on cunning and intellect. If you lynch both, it's not really a game. It's just taking a gun and shooting both.

QFT.  Deciding who to lynch between 2 suspicious people is a great moment in mafia.  Just lynching both is lazy and really sucks.
--------------------------
Anyway... proposition for next game...

Let's balance this thing with 1 mafia before attempting to make it a multiple mafia game...

As josh said in the game... Scum actually needs to scumhunt the other team so lack of scumhunting is not necesarilly a scumtell...

Let's PLEASE go back to dopps vs town with the additional aliens...

Anything else is just a bloody and swingy mess...

I agree.

[Mephansteras]

Hehe. Ok, that'll be the next poll. I'd like to get some more people's thoughts on the issue of Contingency voting and double-lynches first.

[Pandarsenic]

I don't see what anyone can have against conditional voting that they don't have don't have against double-lynching. Double-lynching is so much worse than conditional votes.

I think conditional votes should be allowed at least for when people aren't going to be able to log in and check on things by the end of the phase.

[Rysith]

I think conditional votes should be allowed at least for when people aren't going to be able to log in and check on things by the end of the phase.

That seems like it could get a bit thorny, though, given the diversity of things that you could condition on. What kinds of conditions were you talking about?

[Pandarsenic]

Things like Vote for Inaluct, unvote Inaluct if he posts, for lurker-lynching. Stuff like that, at least, seems like it would be fine - less abusable than double-lynching, to be sure

[Rysith]

Things like Vote for Inaluct, unvote Inaluct if he posts, for lurker-lynching. Stuff like that, at least, seems like it would be fine - less abusable than double-lynching, to be sure

Yeah, that kind of condition seems fine. What I'd be worried about would be the current "vote for whoever is needed to tie between X and Y", or "Vote for X until he roleclaims" and similar things.

[Alexhans]

It's a burden for the mod to need to check everyone's conditions and act accordingly. 

Besides, it would only be fair if those conditions appeared then in the votecounts...

If you're going to vote someone.  Vote him.  Don't condition your vote to appear to be voting him for good enough reasons....

Vote Pandarsenic if he role claims, unvote if Webadict votes pandarsenic but vote Whoever claims survival alien overruling any other votes...

see my point?  What sucks little, sucks big....

I know how you enjoyed voting whoever someone voted and stuff like that but this kind of things can not be made automatic... either you come and vote or you don't.  But you just can't have everything covered like that. 

Ultimately, It'll make people careful when voting...

[Mr.Person]

I doubt people will seriously get that intricate with their conditions.

[Rysith]

Ultimately, It'll make people careful when voting...

Possibly, though I like Pandarsenic's reasoning that we want to avoid making everyone show up in the thread at the last minute to get their votes in or changed. Limited conditional voting seems like a good answer to that, though I might actually limit it to conditional unvoting: I am voting, here are conditions that would make me reconsider my vote. How does that seem as a solution?

[Pandarsenic]

I say for limitations, make it so you can have one condition which alters your vote listed, and that condition will cause it to default to one other person or to Abstain or NL

[Mr.Person]

I would be ok with really simple conditional voting, but it's the players that have to be careful with conditional voting. It's the guys' who did the conditional votings fault that ToonyMan got lynched when he shouldn't of. You have to be careful, so I don't think I'll conditional vote even if it is allowed, tbh.