(Serenes Forest Mafia) General Discussion

[Bluedoom]

I totally forgot about vanilla. Being vanilla is fun because you can pull off all sorts of bullshit. xD

I don't think cult/masons are fun tbh. Its makes the game less balanced and blahhh.

[eclipse]

While this wasn't written for mafia, the techniques described are some of the things I do when scumhunting. Don't mind the URL; it's the Sophos blog, and their naming scheme is terrible.

How Fox News and mafia are related

[Helios]

but emotion is a null tell

I'm late to the party but my favorite and least favorite roles are:

1. Probably vanilla actually, because it keeps me focused on scumhunting, and if I die nothing of value was lost.

2. Either Bodyguard (I don't want to die!) or Town!Roleblocker (because unless there's obvscum, it's a difficult role to use correctly and could end up being detrimental to town).

[Percivalé]

Being cult is hard and stressful tbh

[Psych]

only when you start out alone

basically i like roles where i don't have to do all the work

[Shinori]

>.>

[Prims]

let's talk about mafia rules, what do you guys prefer to see in them?

i am pretty consistently against global nighttalk. aside from generally ruining the point of a "night phase", imo a short 24 break from posting in mafia where you can relax or re-read the game without pressure is basically necessary to prevent people from tiring of playing. it's also a lot more town-biased than it really should be lategame, just look at nostalgia where we were free to co-ordinate actions without much worry of scum fucking w/ them. i'd go as far to say that it encourages massclaim. unicycle is in a similar boat, only instead of helping town coordinate it buffs scum by making it so town have to send actions in before the flip instead of after. tbh i fail to see why people even host unicycle when half of the time they don't do anything with the gimmick and it doesn't enhance gamplay at all

i prefer 72 hour days, 24 hour nights, but sometimes i think talking gets a little excessive and makes games annoying to re-read (global nighttalk also makes games annoying to re-read), and in those specific cases i'd prefer like a 48 hour day 1 or something. i was considering having 96 hours for kelsey maf and spellcard since they're large games, but i'm not sure that'd be a good idea. it'd probably discourage re-reading.

hammer to lynch is also good (i usually go with hammer to lynch with less than 15-16 players, deadline lynch with that amount or more) since it discourages being lazy and is pro-town anyway. btw i hate grace period since people should only hammer somebody once that person has fucked up beyond repair, it usually just stalls the flip

imo anon games would be better if identities were kept hidden until postgame but that's not too big of a deal

other stuff uhhhh. i don't like modkilling people for claiming flavor, that's silly and makes the game less enjoyable aesthetically. i don't like allowing or even encouraging tactical modkills and loopholes. i like it when mods promise information about the set-up so that you know what you're getting into. and that's about it.

edit: also this post was made with noc in mind. global nighttalk is oc is fine

Edited November 10, 2012 by Prims

[Percivalé]

global nighttalk being taken away makes people lose interest in everything generally (and I like to prevent that) plus other reasons I can't talk about atm due to currently running a game.

also I like it when mods specifically state whether their game is multifaction or not, whether the game has hidden players or not, whether there are vanillas or not, etc.

Edited November 10, 2012 by Sentamos

[eclipse]

Whatever the game calls for. I'm personally against hammers, because it gives people an excuse to late-bandwagon, which in turn gives people a way out in the form of "I had to vote X or the lynch would not have happened." This would be ideal, if people weren't so damn lazy/uninterested. Thus, my rule to end the game if enough people don't give a shit.

I have grace periods because I think insta-hammers are lame. Why not give people a chance to second/third-guess whether or not that person is a good target, especially after the hammer?

Scumhunting by flavor is stupid, and should not be taken into consideration. Flavor should be just that - something to spice the game up without influencing it.

Lastly, I keep punishments vague precisely because I'm a firm believer of the spirit of the rules being more important than the strict wording of it, and that the punishment should fit the crime and circumstances. Be glad I wasn't hosting CMV, or I would've ended the game on the spot with an automatic town loss.

[Percivalé]

Personally I feel that hammers are more traditional to mafia but everyone has their own opinions on that (banning nighttalk is more traditional to mafia too but shrug)

[Sunwoo]

While I'm not against global night-talk, I think I like games without them better (plus I'm more used to it). But honestly, this isn't really a big issue with me. If a game I join has night-talk, I'll night-talk. If a game I join doesn't have night-talk, I'll shut up and reread the thread. The ONLY TIME I had an issue with no night-talk was in ICBINSFMM3, where Helios was an insomniac who portrayed me as super scum (and I was town) and I couldn't respond because it was night, and I couldn't respond during the following day phase either because I had class at phase start and when I came back I got lynched before I could even say anything. But eh, that has less to do with the rules I guess.

I'm fine with 72 hour days and 24 hour nights. 96 hours is excessive (unless the game is just that large and enough people have "getting online" issues that it's warranted).

Hammer to lynch is something I'm starting to get used to. I mean, I have no problem with it but in the cases where someone gets hammered before they even get a chance to GET ONLINE it's infuriating. I actually modified hammer rules a bit in my games, where a "soft hammer" is the minimum votes required to lynch at the end of the phase, and a "hard hammer" is the number of votes required to end the phase immediately. I think that's fair.

The "no lynch twice, universal loss" rule is one thing I don't like as much, but that's just a me thing, I guess. Anyway, I find on SF that people are usually good about getting in their votes at the end of the day. Usually.

Modkilling for flavor is pretty annoying, yes, unless there are specific reasons why you cannot do so (like, doing so would ruin the game or put one faction at a disadvantage).

[Psych]

I'm against all these "you require a majority hammer to lynch" and not just have the most votes.

[Elieson]

Second. Why someone having 3/7 votes doesn't count for a lynch by phase end when no one else has 3+ is silly to me. Hammers seem unnecessary. I'd rather see Randolynch or nolynch then be forced to hammer or ruin the game.

[BBM]

Not really rule-oriented but Insomniac is a generally lame role because it's just you talking to yourself. It was fine in Trainwreck where there were three Insomniacs, but then because that was Trainwreck people didn't think that there wouldn't be some duplicates, for the most part. That's not the case in most games.

[Grace]

people against hammers: you do realize that it's a mechanic chosen by the mod which has its own effect on the balance of the game?

I honestly prefer hammers because it means people can't be lazy and they actually need to put some effort in (which you should be if you actually sign up for a game)

however that said I think No Lynch should always be a hammer option alongside

[Percivalé]

Manix has it down 8)

Generally my rules revolve around keeping interest in the game. I like hosting and playing in active games.

[Sunwoo]

People need to be more active in all mafia games. >_>

I'm astonished (in a good way) by how fast-paced this most recent game's D1 is.

[Elieson]

As do I, but if only some players agree with me on one person, and some agree on another, and some just are like afk, weird, scummy and not voting, whatever, it makes things difficult.

I find it really frustrating to know that I have to simply "Settle" to keep the game going, with fear of a universal loss if me/someone else doesn't just conform with the masses.

[Grace]

i am pretty consistently against global nighttalk.

most people don't actually use nighttalk effectively is more the problem ;/

I'm not against it at all, but again it's part of mechanics which is part of balance

i prefer 72 hour days, 24 hour nights,

I don't really have much of an opinion on this because it's become standard?

however that said look forward to Mystery Mafia and it's 48 hour day phases 8)

also with hammer game and no second chances if you don't achieve hammer (although I'm considering modifying the hammer rule a bit)

yeahhhhhhh fun times

imo anon games would be better if identities were kept hidden until postgame but that's not too big of a deal

actually yeah this is good. because if people flip identity, meta seeps back in subconsciously which kinda defeats the point of anon games

EDIT: I did decide to modify the hammer rule for Mystery Mafia considering the shorter dayphases

Edited November 10, 2012 by Manix

[riariadne]

I don't like hammers being required because it makes the end of days dumber. sometimes it brings about situations like "better switch your vote from someone who you think is scum to someone you might not to there's a lynch at all!" and that encourages what eclipse mentioned of "oh I voted so we'd have a lynch" being reasoning you can have and I don't really like that

I do enjoy having them as an option to end a phase early if necessary/possible, but not required

[riariadne]

Favorite is cult

I don't actually know why but I love it

I like third parties in general because they offer more room for creativity

Tactically omitting least favorite because I don't want to be host meta'd for CMV (and I'm pretty sure most people know I love cult)

(also anything hidden is obviously super terrible, even a hidden cult would suck)

Back on this

Ignoring cult, and among more conventional roles, I like watcher because it's kinda versatile in that it can be investigative and pseudo-protective by the thread of a watcher being around. Doctor actually stops kills yeah, but watcher can find scum and I like that better than making someone not die.

I dislike roles that lie to players as well. I think tailor is dumb despite it being in cmv and I don't like framer or miller. otoh I don't mind godfather, and to a lesser extent lawyer. I guess I think mafia having a failsafe against cop seems better to me than creating a road bump for it in the town or something, I don't actually know why exactly.

also I like alliance cop better than full cop for town, but am not opposed to the latter either

[Sunwoo]

[Least favorite role] Vanilla. Sucks not doing anything and not having benefits (like bulletproof) either.

You can add third parties to that now. Something that can swing the balance of a game so dramatically in favor of one side or another is a big pain to balance, plus they're unpredictable.

[BBM]

Well, look at the list of game winners. There have been a handful of SK victories over tens of games, and that's mostly because the game isn't supposed to be balanced so they can win.

[Sunwoo]

Well, look at the list of game winners. There have been a handful of SK victories over tens of games, and that's mostly because the game isn't supposed to be balanced so they can win.

SKs aren't the only third parties though. Also, not every game HAS a third party.

[Grace]

here's the thing with SK's; you still need to balance around them in the setup. it's also less likely that they will win by nature (although the more stuff you give them to work with, it's easier to win)

heck apply this to most thirds. game balance should be fully considered with the possible swing of whatever the thirds can do