General Discussion & Mafia Ideas, Balancing, and Critiques

[RootRanger]

Can we talk about how silly it is to have a no-posting-during-night phase rule, while still allowing players to PM each other during night phase? This is just so ridiculous, but only a couple players have ever questioned it.

[Espithel]

Can we talk about how silly it is to have a no-posting-during-night phase rule, while still allowing players to PM each other during night phase? This is just so ridiculous, but only a couple players have ever questioned it.

I think it's a relic of more traditional mafias as opposed to something people want to enforce, but I really do agree.

[Linkcat]

I definitely agree that it doesn't make any sense. I had this rule removed in 53 and I think one other.

[Kuroaitou]

OKAY-

As of now, I will begin compiling a list of players who would like to volunteer their services in helping out balance a future mafia game onto the main post. If you're interested, please state so.

The list will be organized top-bottom by a combination of mafia activity (how many games have you played/hosted), as well as forum experience (players who have been on the forum longer will be placed higher on the list). Mafia hosts will then ask a few of the listed players (including the FGO, who will exclude themselves from the list automatically due to simplicity purposes) to assist in balancing, the FGO will create a pad to help edit, analyze, and look for any potential game exploits, controversial mechanics, or other broken rules/plays.

[Submachine]

I'm interested.

[Submachine]

OKAY-

As of now, I will begin compiling a list of players who would like to volunteer their services in helping out balance a future mafia game onto the main post. If you're interested, please state so.

The list will be organized top-bottom by a combination of mafia activity (how many games have you played/hosted), as well as forum experience (players who have been on the forum longer will be placed higher on the list). Mafia hosts will then ask a few of the listed players (including the FGO, who will exclude themselves from the list automatically due to simplicity purposes) to assist in balancing, the FGO will create a pad to help edit, analyze, and look for any potential game exploits, controversial mechanics, or other broken rules/plays.

Is there still a need for this? I haven't read Nae's rules yet, but if there is a need, I can start analyzing them.

[Kuroaitou]

OKAY-

As of now, I will begin compiling a list of players who would like to volunteer their services in helping out balance a future mafia game onto the main post. If you're interested, please state so.

The list will be organized top-bottom by a combination of mafia activity (how many games have you played/hosted), as well as forum experience (players who have been on the forum longer will be placed higher on the list). Mafia hosts will then ask a few of the listed players (including the FGO, who will exclude themselves from the list automatically due to simplicity purposes) to assist in balancing, the FGO will create a pad to help edit, analyze, and look for any potential game exploits, controversial mechanics, or other broken rules/plays.

Is there still a need for this? I haven't read Nae's rules yet, but if there is a need, I can start analyzing them.

Sorry, there's no need. I guess I will ask from a list of volunteers each time the new mafia game is to be analyzed, and we'll go from there.

[Kuroaitou]

Okay folks.


With Mafia 57 coming to a close, I'm going to ask if there's anyone interested in doing a little bit of game analysis for the upcoming Mafia 58 (being hosted by skyironsword) for any balance and thematic concerns. Depending on who responds, 2-3 people will look over sky's game for any minor adjustments if need be, and then the sign-ups for 58 will begin shortly.

[RootRanger]

We talked about this earlier, but I wanted to suggest incorporating popular vote into our process for selecting the next mafia host. My plan is outlined below.

- The next 4 players on the Mafia Sign-Up List send their ideas to Kuro, who creates a polling thread with the four ideas.
  * If someone does not have their idea ready, the next person in line submits in their place.
- Players vote on their favorite ruleset.
  * Would be easiest to do the voting as a regular forum poll, but alternate voting is a possibility as well.
- The most popular ruleset is selected.
  * The winner becomes the next host, and they are free to join back on the Sign-Up List.
  * If someone finishes in 4th place twice in a row, they are moved to the end of the Sign-Up List.
- The process repeats itself. Those who did not have their ruleset win may modify it if they wish.

The purpose of this idea is to give participants more control over the rulesets they play with. If there's a ruleset they won't enjoy, they won't vote for it. However, we still retain a Sign-Up List, and we avoid having the same 1-2 people from hosting every time. It's sort of a compromise between our current system and a direct popular vote. It's also more democratic than having an elite cabal of veterans tinker with the rules before they are enacted.

I would be willing to implement this system beginning with Mafia #59, which I am scheduled to host. I would happily risk losing my spot as a host in order to implement a better overall system for deciding hosts.

[Solaris]

We talked about this earlier, but I wanted to suggest incorporating popular vote into our process for selecting the next mafia host. My plan is outlined below.

- The next 4 players on the Mafia Sign-Up List send their ideas to Kuro, who creates a polling thread with the four ideas.
  * If someone does not have their idea ready, the next person in line submits in their place.
- Players vote on their favorite ruleset.
  * Would be easiest to do the voting as a regular forum poll, but alternate voting is a possibility as well.
- The most popular ruleset is selected.
  * The winner becomes the next host, and they are free to join back on the Sign-Up List.
  * If someone finishes in 4th place twice in a row, they are moved to the end of the Sign-Up List.
- The process repeats itself. Those who did not have their ruleset win may modify it if they wish.

The purpose of this idea is to give participants more control over the rulesets they play with. If there's a ruleset they won't enjoy, they won't vote for it. However, we still retain a Sign-Up List, and we avoid having the same 1-2 people from hosting every time. It's sort of a compromise between our current system and a direct popular vote. It's also more democratic than having an elite cabal of veterans tinker with the rules before they are enacted.

I would be willing to implement this system beginning with Mafia #59, which I am scheduled to host. I would happily risk losing my spot as a host in order to implement a better overall system for deciding hosts.

Support, 100%.

[CleanOnion]

We talked about this earlier, but I wanted to suggest incorporating popular vote into our process for selecting the next mafia host. My plan is outlined below.

- The next 4 players on the Mafia Sign-Up List send their ideas to Kuro, who creates a polling thread with the four ideas.
  * If someone does not have their idea ready, the next person in line submits in their place.
- Players vote on their favorite ruleset.
  * Would be easiest to do the voting as a regular forum poll, but alternate voting is a possibility as well.
- The most popular ruleset is selected.
  * The winner becomes the next host, and they are free to join back on the Sign-Up List.
  * If someone finishes in 4th place twice in a row, they are moved to the end of the Sign-Up List.
- The process repeats itself. Those who did not have their ruleset win may modify it if they wish.

The purpose of this idea is to give participants more control over the rulesets they play with. If there's a ruleset they won't enjoy, they won't vote for it. However, we still retain a Sign-Up List, and we avoid having the same 1-2 people from hosting every time. It's sort of a compromise between our current system and a direct popular vote. It's also more democratic than having an elite cabal of veterans tinker with the rules before they are enacted.

I would be willing to implement this system beginning with Mafia #59, which I am scheduled to host. I would happily risk losing my spot as a host in order to implement a better overall system for deciding hosts.

Support, 100%.

[Espithel]

After poking around in Root's rules, I've noticed a potentially huge exploit in most people's rules.
Root's rules are immune to this exploit, so I can talk about it freely.
I'd like to raise it to shield you lot from it in future rulesets.

Most rulesets have a rule that prevent people from throwing the game. This is a good rule.
This is the version of that rule used in Root's mafia:

- Players are not allowed to intentionally try to lose. Mafia may not kill each other through night kills or abilities, but they are allowed to lynch each other.

Here's how this exploit works:

A civilian, at the start of the game, PMs 2-4 people this exploit.
All people PMed and the person sending out the PMs all try to act as if they're throwing the game by claiming mafia; because they aren't mafia, the mod can't punish them. If any of the people PMed or PMing is mafia, they'll be modkilled if they try to do this, as that'll count as throwing the game.

This baffling show should cause one of the claimants to be lynched; this is why you PM multiple people. During the nightphase, everyone in on the plan then explains this exploit, and by the process of the host modkilling any mafia, essentially become confirmed. Assuming this all works, the civilians would start with 2-3 confirmed civs before the second day.

Obviously, this requires usage of PMs; if the host, or the majority of town, understand what the hell's going on, the plan fails. So me telling you all about this should cause this plan to fail.

Fix it as you please.