Print

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

[Leafsnail]

Nice to have you back, Josh!

In the case of a tie, all tying players are winners.

So, who volunteers to be Nao?

Honestly, this sounds great.  If we can get the interest together I'd love to play.

[Darvi]

Well there's 5 games going on, one of which is almost done. However, there are already some new games being prepared...

Spoiler: Oh, and thanks for helping out in that one game~ (click to show/hide)

[JoshuaFH]

Nice to have you back, Josh!

In the case of a tie, all tying players are winners.

So, who volunteers to be Nao?

Honestly, this sounds great.  If we can get the interest together I'd love to play.

Yeah, I specifically added that in so as to not preclude the idea of team victories.

[Toaster]

Josh: Sounds like an interesting variant- I'd likely give it a go.  It seems few people are going to get the votes needed to live, though.  You're likely to hit D2 with two people many times, even with a large game.

[webadict]

Err, except 8p with 2 Mafia requires that 4 people with 1 Mafia be alive. Assuming that the Mafia will only vote for each other, all other players need to not vote for Mafia to win, resulting in 3- players winning.

Town will be highly less motivated to let people win, and should ALWAYS follows these rules:

Never ever secretly vote. Secretly voting is a scum tell.
Win on the first Day. You will lose otherwise.
Play with two scum or less. Three scum will result in another Day.

I think that having the Town win with only living players is flat-out wrong. Either both teams should have that or neither. The Town wins a smaller point win, even if you vote one person. The expected value is the same for both teams if all team players are awarded. The expected value is ALSO the same if neither team has the rule.

[JoshuaFH]

Josh: Sounds like an interesting variant- I'd likely give it a go.  It seems few people are going to get the votes needed to live, though.  You're likely to hit D2 with two people many times, even with a large game.

Thank you for your feedback. The trick with the points system I've devised strongly discourages letting only a few people win each round, as that will allow them to pull into a point lead very easily. it's in the best interests of those trying to prevent people from gaining points to get as even a point distribution as possible while also killing the mafia on the first day, so that the points awarded are thinly spread out among the winning players so they don't take an overwhelming lead for the following round. This is how I imagine it, atleast.

Err, except 8p with 2 Mafia requires that 4 people with 1 Mafia be alive. Assuming that the Mafia will only vote for each other, all other players need to not vote for Mafia to win, resulting in 3- players winning.

Town will be highly less motivated to let people win, and should ALWAYS follows these rules:

Never ever secretly vote. Secretly voting is a scum tell.
Win on the first Day. You will lose otherwise.
Play with two scum or less. Three scum will result in another Day.

I think that having the Town win with only living players is flat-out wrong. Either both teams should have that or neither. The Town wins a smaller point win, even if you vote one person. The expected value is the same for both teams if all team players are awarded. The expected value is ALSO the same if neither team has the rule.

Thank you for your feedback, Webadict. The ratio of players to mafia is intended to be very steep, with 1 mafia for every 8 players almost.

For your concern about having only living players be the only ones which score points, the way I’m imagining the game, this is the only setup that actually functions the way it’s intended. The way I see it, the game is a game of mafia, but it’s also a game where the town have to try to backstab eachother in order to try to put themselves on top. Due to the existence of point exchanging, players don’t even need to win the rounds in order to win, they only need to find creative ways to milk the leading players out of their points.

My decision for having the mafia share their points even in death is so that they have no incentive to backstab eachother, and are forced to work as a team to secure the entire pot for themselves.

The way I’ve envisioned it, it’s about players being forced to think about the long haul. Sure, a player might get lucky in the first round a take a large point lead, but then they might be discriminated against in the following rounds and then lose each successive round due to that.

I’ve invested quite a bit of thought, and really the only gamebreaking strategy I can think of is, of course, the Nao strategy where everyone shares their points so everyone can secure victory in a tie. Provided that everyone plays ball, every single player has a 100% of winning if they all share their points evenly. I might have to change the rules to preserve the ruthless spirit of the game to prevent this, but I’m willing to give it a chance.

[RedWarrior0]

Simple. Just limit the points that can be gifted by each player.

Alternatively, throw in a Bastard Round or two: All points gifted are lost forever, all points gifted are quadrupled, and standard-ish bastard modes such as "Everyone is a serial killer go go go!"

Finally, you could just make a sudden death round in the case that nobody loses. If nobody loses, then there is a turbo round in which only one person can emerge victorious.

[IronyOwl]

BM XXI has reassured me of the need (or at least merits) of a beginner's vengeful.

Any objections to putting one up sometime over the next few days?

[Mr.Person]

If there's a tie at the end, don't say all the people tied win, just do another round.

[Book]

BM XXI has reassured me of the need (or at least merits) of a beginner's vengeful.
Any objections to putting one up sometime over the next few days?

I have no objections and wish it great success. I also, for the record, will hold a period of mourning after such shameful debacle and will refuse to join games run by Ottofar, Tyberix or Poop until they have mended their ways or time has healed the grievous wounds they have inflicted upon the community.

Regardless of our grief, and concurrent with a beginner's vengeful, BMXXII should be up for signups; there should always be a BM for signups. Who's up for it?

^{Here's to hoping our next batch of newbies is better than the last!
Cheers!}

[Vector]

Dear Book:

Don't be a dick <3

[webadict]

I'm saving my next BM for XXX. I'm waiting for BYOR to finish before starting KWN, which I'd have to actually start planning soon in order for it to actually start.

I should probably see IF I can get the required 13 first, though. If I can't, I'll probably run another BYOR. I have plenty of ideas for BYORs, and they aren't nearly as nightmarish as KWN.

In fact, I might save KWN for summer. I'd have a lot of writing time... Hmm.

Yeah. I'll do that. Sorry Darvi and Leafy. It's getting delayed to when I have lots more spare time.

So, BYORs is up next, unless I have more people wanting a different game (Such as Vector calling for a Color Mafia or some such jazz.)

Anyone care to vote?

[Vector]

If you run KWN over the summer, I will be a very happy girl.

I'd like to see Color eventually, but maybe not right this minute.  I already promised Pandar I'd play the flavor-heavy NSBM when he brings it out, and I'd rather not be in more than one game at a time.

[Book]

Dear Book: Don't be a dick <3

I calls'em as I sees'em. Book is as Book does. Challenge the arguments, not the arguer. Hate the sin, not the sinner. Or hate the sinner, but have the courage to tell him why. I make my choices, I take my chances. "But I say unto you, whosoever shall call his brother fool [...] shall be in danger of hell fire."


...take your pick.

^{In short: either state your arguments or challenge mine with reasons, don't just resort to name-calling... or in other words: don't be a lack-of-thereof.}

[Vector]

I'm sorry, I thought I was sparing your feelings by simply telling you to quit it rather than publicly reaming you.  Don't construe it as lack of courage, or as hatred.


This is not boot camp.  We are here to have fun.  The newbies know that they screwed up.  You already called them out in the thread where they were played their game.  I don't think it's at all necessary to come out here and say this batch of newbies is bad, or that you're boycotting certain players.

It's overkill.  It's ridiculous that you'd think shaming them would be appropriate.  I thought the policy we had here was "play rough in games but be gentle outside of them."  Why?  Because then we have a good atmosphere here.

Basically, you can keep your negative opinions to yourself.  If you're running a game, then yeah, say "I'd prefer if you didn't join this, because I think the behavior you've displayed would cause problems and I really don't want to take the risk."  If someone is running a game that you don't want to participate in, then don't participate in it.  It's in no way necessary to come over here and tell everyone "man, our newbies suck and are shameful, and I'm boycotting them."  We can make our own opinions, and all you're doing is broadcasting information they might really rather not have put everywhere.

This isn't like Org, who is something of a running joke and has a good sense of humor about everything.  These are not people who have been here for years.  They are players who have been having issues in a couple of games, and this overreaction is entirely unnecessary.