MTG Salvation

Quote from Artifice 101

I mean they aren't all the same, but they were all scum wins in one form or another in part because of the recruiting.

My recruiting was poorly balanced and I wish I had stuck to my gut on how to make the Cult work in my game. I disagree that recruiting breaks games, it just must be done carefully.

We are talking about Minis specifically though Jobie. In a 12 person game, changing an alignment creates a swing of 15% of the total voting power even if it happened Day 1. When it happens Day 2 or Day 3, you could be moving 30% or more of the voting power easily. That is a ridiculously huge swing.

Quote from Jobie

My recruiting was poorly balanced and I wish I had stuck to my gut on how to make the Cult work in my game. I disagree that recruiting breaks games, it just must be done carefully.

BTW, absolutely nothing personal. I mentioned your game only as a point of record. This trend is just starting to get to me.

Maybe a disclaimer that recruiting may be part of games? I agree with Dragonheart about the smaller games making recruiting all the more powerful.

The other problem is that alignment changing games require a different set of analytical skills than a normal game of mafia. In any game where the town doesn't know there will be an alignment change, they are at an unfair disadvantage and will be unable to effectively scumhunt. I would propose two restrictions on alignment changing roles personally:

#1 No alignment changing in games with less than X players. (X=20 or so is probably fair)
#2 The existence or possible existence of such roles should always be revealed to the players at the start of the game, except in bastard set-ups.

Basically, unknown alignment changes are bastard IMO. Just like any other bastard mechanics, the players need to know that it could be there going in.

DH: I disagree with #1. I'm working on a Cult-based 18-player game that won't see the light for a looong time, but it's still one I'd like to see happen. It's actually really interesting how it works and it'll change the way the town scumhunts, for sure.

I thought that it was decided that traitor-esque roles just needed to be banned in general, after Matrix and Return to Amistaria 2?

Alignment switching is just completely bad news. If Azrael and DYH couldn't do it right, then I don't see whom on here could.

Iso, 20 people was a rough guess at the minimum number needed to make it work. If you think you can handle it at 18 players, that is not impossible.

Quote from Cyan

I thought that it was decided that traitor-esque roles just needed to be banned in general, after Matrix and Return to Amistaria 2?

Alignment switching is just completely bad news. If Azrael and DYH couldn't do it right, then I don't see whom on here could.

It was frowned upon and advised to use with great discretion but never made official.

Quote from Cyan

I thought that it was decided that traitor-esque roles just needed to be banned in general, after Matrix and Return to Amistaria 2?

Alignment switching is just completely bad news. If Azrael and DYH couldn't do it right, then I don't see whom on here could.

If they were, no one told the reviewers or the new crop of Mini mods.

If there are reviewers that do not have experience with recruiting roles, then they probably shouldn't be reviewing those games.

Quote from Emo_Pinata

If there are reviewers that do not have experience with recruiting roles, then they probably shouldn't be reviewing those games.

Can I be a reviewer now?

Because boy howdy!

Quote from Artifice 101

Can I be a reviewer now?

Because boy howdy!

you will just kill them on the spot it seems, which might not be the best choice

Quote from poggydude

you will just kill them on the spot it seems, which might not be the best choice

Eh, not necessarily. But I might strongly recommend heavy conditions and making them the only scum team.

I'm in need of a nap at the moment, so pardon my shoddy memory, but I'm pretty sure all three of my cult experiences lately have been Cult + Second Scum Faction (SK + Hitman + Mafia, whatever) vs relatively underpowered towns.

Recruit is a double kill, basically, and a mind"twist" to use polite language. I would think a balancing role for such a thing would be a town reviver or some such, with untargetability after being revived...?

Eh, I dunno. They are OP. I think they should be left for larger games, personally.

Cult is always weird as I feel that there has to be a right way to do it that not only makes sense and is winnable but also doesn't have the problem of everyone hating it from people changing alignments.

The best I could come up with is instead of the cult being able to recruit anybody it is only able to recruit neutrals since neutrals are already in the ever shifting alignment of I only care if I win.

Quote from Guardman

Cult is always weird as I feel that there has to be a right way to do it that not only makes sense and is winnable but also doesn't have the problem of everyone hating it from people changing alignments.

The best I could come up with is instead of the cult being able to recruit anybody it is only able to recruit neutrals since neutrals are already in the ever shifting alignment of I only care if I win.

How would that math out? If the town is already down players due to more slots being filled with neutrals....

Ooooh oooooh! I just got a sick idea for a Specialty level game. *note to self*

Quote from Artifice 101

How would that math out? If the town is already down players due to more slots being filled with neutrals....

Ooooh oooooh! I just got a sick idea for a Specialty level game. *note to self*

You would probably have to have it be with a non-mini and basically count all neutrals as potential cult. You would then have to adjust the number town and scum appropriately.

There was one role I read about with a Master and Student cult. The Master could only have one student at a time, so the cult didn't get out of control. However, if the Student died, the Master could just recruit again.

Quote from Guardman

Cult is always weird as I feel that there has to be a right way to do it that not only makes sense and is winnable but also doesn't have the problem of everyone hating it from people changing alignments.

The best I could come up with is instead of the cult being able to recruit anybody it is only able to recruit neutrals since neutrals are already in the ever shifting alignment of I only care if I win.

Something similar to this that I saw on mafiascum was Succession Mafia. it uses 2 opposing recruiters. The first one was pretty unbalanced, as the recruits could just out themselves as long as the recruiter was still alive.. The 2nd game fixed this in a way by white flagging and tree stumping the Recruiters, which added a fun and interesting twist to the setup. He also fixed the setup by making some roles unrecruitable (Like vigs,) and also making it so scum could either kill OR recruit.

It's amazing how intolerant of new ideas this group is. From the first moment I arrived, everything I have said has been discounted without analysis. I've been shouted down, insulted, marginalized.

I don't know what else to say. I showed you my theory by winning my first scum game in a perfect victory. In response I'm told that it had nothing to do with me, and the town simply played badly.

Excuse me if I'm a bit upset, but wow you guys can't adapt at all.

Or perhaps no one thought you needed to be told you did a good job. You seemed to know it and make sure everyone else did too. Generally people don't go looking to give you a pat on the back when you act as prideful as you have over the game.

You did a good job in that game. I didn't read you as scum until the very end, as a person just reading along with the thread. Happy now?

It's not about doing a good job or getting a pat on the back. It's about a weakness in the local meta for scumhunting, which is what I keep trying up and getting shouted down about.

I believe the biggest issue with the local meta is focus on scumtells instead of mindsets. While a lot of scumtells are tried and true, they can't ALWAYS be right, as DH has exemplified - however, not everyone can be convinced to look into a player's motive for their posts.

I have personally been trying to better myself at it.

Quote from Dragonheart91

It's not about doing a good job or getting a pat on the back. It's about a weakness in the local meta for scumhunting, which is what I keep trying up and getting shouted down about.

You exploited the fact that you 'never lie' and got away with it. You can get away with something like that exactly once. Good job buddy. Come offer up some ideas when you win a second scum game. OR when you've played more than 5 games here.

The way you act Cyan, do you even want me to keep playing games here? Every game I get in and try to explain my intentions, I get run up for thinking differently. Now I got modkilled for being too aggressive and a slanderous false cheating charge.

The players in games don't seem to want me there and here in the theory threads my ideas are unwanted. If I am just getting in the way, I can and will leave. I have a unique contribution to make, but I don't stay where I am not wanted.

I'm quite displeased with all the bashing of DH... You should be happy we have more players Cyan.

Quote from Dragonheart91

The way you act Cyan, do you even want me to keep playing games here? Every game I get in and try to explain my intentions, I get run up for thinking differently. Now I got modkilled for being too aggressive and a slanderous false cheating charge.

The players in games don't seem to want me there and here in the theory threads my ideas are unwanted. If I am just getting in the way, I can and will leave. I have a unique contribution to make, but I don't stay where I am not wanted.

I am torn between wanting the site to have more players and not really liking you. I am holding out hope that you settle into some kind of groove and stabilize, but this doesn't seem to be happening. It's just some different issue every single game.

Because I treat every game differently. Playing the same way is a good way to stagnate in your thoughts and meta.

I think differently and I act differently from everyone else. That seems to be the bigger problem. Honestly, I got over my issue with you. You are a supremely arrogant person and are treated like a god by everyone here. As annoying as that is to watch, it doesn't personally harm me. I'm arrogant myself, but at least I admit it. Why do you still have issues with me?

We are here to play games. My fun comes from analyzing and improving more-so than even the actual playing. That's why I'm always trying new ideas and discussing ways to improve. It frustrates me when people are "settled into their groove" as you put it.

Read this and thought it could be applied to Mafia in some ways:

http://www.spring.org.uk/2010/03/boost-creativity-7-unusual-psychological-techniques.php

Enjoy.

Hahahaha! Nice Iso, that's like my theory put into a nice readable package. (And with a lot of cool ideas.)

Quote from Dragonheart91

The way you act Cyan, do you even want me to keep playing games here? Every game I get in and try to explain my intentions, I get run up for thinking differently. Now I got modkilled for being too aggressive and a slanderous false cheating charge.

The players in games don't seem to want me there and here in the theory threads my ideas are unwanted. If I am just getting in the way, I can and will leave. I have a unique contribution to make, but I don't stay where I am not wanted.

Maybe it's because you've just appeared, have played like 5 games, and now consider yourself an expert on everything related to Mafia on this site and feel not only justified in but also obliged to explain how everything about how mafia on this site is played is wrong, and you can do better. Not going to win a lot of friends with that attitude. Getting modkilled for flaming isn't going to win you many friends either.

I hope you stay, as the site needs new players, but I'd say the course you're on right now is going to lead to you flaming out in the relatively near future. Maybe if you took it easy for a while, built up a reputation based on consistently successful play using your ideas, and then presented theories in a less - how to say this? - superior manner, you would get somewhere.

Quote from Dragonheart91

It's amazing how intolerant of new ideas this group is. From the first moment I arrived, everything I have said has been discounted without analysis. I've been shouted down, insulted, marginalized.

I don't know what else to say. I showed you my theory by winning my first scum game in a perfect victory. In response I'm told that it had nothing to do with me, and the town simply played badly.

Excuse me if I'm a bit upset, but wow you guys can't adapt at all.

A few things, quick.

1. Part of the way you won was because of your trust tell that you broke. It will not work a second time. Cyan has a valid point with that, though he could have stated it a bit better.
2. I was pretty certain you were scum that game mid-Day 2. That game very nearly swung completely around to the town.
3. Catching people as scum is different than catching people as town. As town you have no alignments at all to judge with; as scum you have a reasonable idea on most. You have even said you have difficulty playing as town.
4. Adaptation is a two-way street. I'm open to new ideas, but they have to have firm logical basis. Also, if you are having difficulty as town, perhaps you need to adapt as well?
5. And this ties into 4, but if people find you scummy, you need to work on your play. It's that simple. I know from whence I speak; in my first 5 town games, I was called out as being scummy in 4 of them. Now I have even odds of being considered town when I'm town.
6. You seem to be giving as many or more insults as you get.

Also Zindabad has it exactly right.

Unlike some people here, I like you, DH. But you need to realize that people here know what they are talking about too. Play more games. Get more experience. Refine your techniques. Prove your techniques successful. And above all, remember that you can only change the play of one person reliably, and that person is you.

Quote from Dragonheart91

I think differently and I act differently from everyone else.

Everyone thinks they think and act differently from everyone else.

You are a supremely arrogant person and are treated like a god by everyone here.

There's plenty of people who dislike Cyan. At the same time, a track record of wins is a track record of wins.

Quote from Cyouni

The interesting thing's that most scumtells are derived from a player's motivations. For example, the well-known one of "first person to third party hunt"? Brought about by the mindset of scum wanting to legitimately hunt but with the issue that they already know the person they're "hunting" isn't scum.
That was probably terribly explained.

No, I understand what you mean - but my point is that things like that aren't ALWAYS applicable. For example, Artifice went SK hunting in Seasons and Avatar and he was town in both.

Quote from Cyouni »

I'm also trying something new, and we'll see how that turns out.

Lemme know how that works out!

Quote from Cyouni »

As a random side note, I've found that working on your town game also improves your scum game, and is probably easier than the opposite.

I dunno - I've always found it easier to play as scum because I guess I just have the kind of mind that enjoys being a villain.

Quote from Iso

I dunno - I've always found it easier to play as scum because I guess I just have the kind of mind that enjoys being a villain.

Too true. One of the greatest pleasures of playing as scum is seeing a post by a townie where they call you likely town and/or agree with a lot of your ideas. I love to sit back and say "Yessssss! Dance, my puppets!"

Quote from arimnaes

Too true. One of the greatest pleasures of playing as scum is seeing a post by a townie where they call you likely town and/or agree with a lot of your ideas. I love to sit back and say "Yessssss! Dance, my puppets!"

This truly is what mafia is all about.

I think you learn far more as scum. It makes you much more hypersensitive to what you and your teammates are saying, and much more critical about why you are accusing people of what you accuse them of. Being "right" as town is a lot easier than being right as scum.

Quote from Archonoid

Everyone thinks they think and act differently from everyone else.

We are all unique little snowflakes, just like everyone else.

There's plenty of people who dislike Cyan. At the same time, a track record of wins is a track record of wins.

Is this reputation? Or is this documented somewhere? I'm curious actually.

Quote from Iso

No, I understand what you mean - but my point is that things like that aren't ALWAYS applicable. For example, Artifice went SK hunting in Seasons and Avatar and he was town in both.

See, you're stuck on this "first to mention the SK" thing, when in truth if a town wincon says that you have to eliminate all non-town, then discussing the SK is a valid conversation.

You need to drop this line of reading and attacking a game IMO. There are valid reasons to note the presence of third party when you are town. Both instances you cited are good examples.

Quote from Emo_Pinata

I think you learn far more as scum. It makes you much more hypersensitive to what you and your teammates are saying, and much more critical about why you are accusing people of what you accuse them of. Being "right" as town is a lot easier than being right as scum.

I want the word "right" to be "righteous" as in righteous indignation and genuine passion. Is that what you're saying?

I've won 4/5 scum games now (one was loss mainly because of mod) and I think its because people don't pay much attention to me.

Does being lazy help you? It helps me.

Position: When constructing a setup, it is bastardly to include two roles that are very similar in either function or mechanical (as opposed to flavorful) role name on a town team.

Examples: Full Cop/Role Cop; Every-other Day Vig/Two Shot-Night Vig; Stalker/Tracker or Watcher (Tracker/Watcher is acceptable, but either overlaps with a Stalker which serves both functions).

<Discuss>

No.

It's bastardy to include a completely misleading or useless role, but not very. Including multiple instances of a role is fair game (unless it's two cops or two full bigs or something like that).

I realized I forgot a step. The reason it is bastardly is that it creates a false, Mod-generated dichotomy. In most of my reading on game construction, I've seen where (unless Cop sanities are in question and the game is notifed as such) most roles are unique so as not force the town into mislynches.

Scum should not receive basically 4 kills because of name/role similarity.

<continue to discuss>

Well once the town realizes they made a mistake by gaming the mod (and there should be punishments for gaming the mod), I doubt they will continue to make the same mistake. It also gives mafia an out; they would be arguing that 'there's no way the mod would do that'. It's false logic, and the town should lose points for following it.

EDIT: I should mention I'm speaking for normals. I don't think this would be a good idea for a basic; basics should always be very straightforward with minimal roles and never duplicates.

Quote from Artifice 101

Position: When constructing a setup, it is bastardly to include two roles that are very similar in either function or mechanical (as opposed to flavorful) role name on a town team.

Examples: Full Cop/Role Cop; Every-other Day Vig/Two Shot-Night Vig; Stalker/Tracker or Watcher (Tracker/Watcher is acceptable, but either overlaps with a Stalker which serves both functions).

<Discuss>

Quote from Artifice 101

I realized I forgot a step. The reason it is bastardly is that it creates a false, Mod-generated dichotomy. In most of my reading on game construction, I've seen where (unless Cop sanities are in question and the game is notifed as such) most roles are unique so as not force the town into mislynches.

Scum should not receive basically 4 kills because of name/role similarity.

<continue to discuss>

I dunno - ever read Janus Mafia?

Quote from Zionite

Well once the town realizes they made a mistake by gaming the mod (and there should be punishments for gaming the mod), I doubt they will continue to make the same mistake. It also gives mafia an out; they would be arguing that 'there's no way the mod would do that'. It's false logic, and the town should lose points for following it.

EDIT: I should mention I'm speaking for normals. I don't think this would be a good idea for a basic; basics should always be very straightforward with minimal roles and never duplicates.

Yes, Normals. Man, I skipped a lot of details in my head when composing this.

But, see, when for example the scum gambit that they are the same role as another player they should be ignored? This is how the town lost to a Cop gambit is Seasons.

I disagree that a town should be punished for inherantly poor game design with traps designed to punish them with no consequence to the scum. That hardly seems fair and balanced. Town are the uninformed minority. To deliberately include misleading information in a setup (in this case overlapping roles when setup construction theory generally agrees that roles should be unique: one Cop, one Doc, etc.) gives the scum, who know they have access to four straight kills if they manipulate the situation, a huge unfair advantage.

EDIT: @Iso, not that I recall. On these boards I assume?

It's not 'a trap'. Everyone who has looked into the theory behind the game of mafia knows that logic is king and fallacies should be avoided when playing. Some even go so far as to say anyone using fallacies to push their agenda is probably scum, because their argument isn't based in fact.

One such fallacy is known as 'gaming the mod'. Players take guesses at what the mod would or wouldn't do, but in reality this is based on absolutely nothing. No one knows what the mod decided to do in a particular setup unless it is stated in the rules.

A game can be designed very well and still have duplicate roles. It isn't a trap to have a duplicate role; it's a feature to prevent players from assuming they know the setup. Yes, it does favor the mafia. That should be considered when balancing. For example, a game with two town trackers vs. a scum team without daytalk would be balanced in my opinion.

For further reading, check out dethy, which completely relies on having multiple similar roles to even work.

Quote from Zionite

For example, a game with two town trackers vs. a scum team without daytalk would be balanced in my opinion.

Would would create such a game (without waring the players on the OP), if it was a mini or basic?

Quote from DRey

Would would create such a game (without waring the players on the OP), if it was a mini or basic?

Again, normals here. Basic and minis are different beasts that I don't particularly like designing for.

Quote from Zionite

It's not 'a trap'. Everyone who has looked into the theory behind the game of mafia knows that logic is king and fallacies should be avoided when playing. Some even go so far as to say anyone using fallacies to push their agenda is probably scum, because their argument isn't based in fact.

One such fallacy is known as 'gaming the mod'. Players take guesses at what the mod would or wouldn't do, but in reality this is based on absolutely nothing. No one knows what the mod decided to do in a particular setup unless it is stated in the rules.

A game can be designed very well and still have duplicate roles. It isn't a trap to have a duplicate role; it's a feature to prevent players from assuming they know the setup. Yes, it does favor the mafia. That should be considered when balancing. For example, a game with two town trackers vs. a scum team without daytalk would be balanced in my opinion.

For further reading, check out dethy, which completely relies on having multiple similar roles to even work.

Trap, feature: semantics.

About Dethy, I mentioned the idea of multiple Cops and questionable sanities. You are strawmanning the argument. As you've said multiple times, and I've agreed I should have mentioned when I started the conversation, we're talking about MTGS Normals here.

I 100% agree with this baseline for the conversation because Specialties are their own thing and much more variable and unreliable when trying to understand our environment. Minis should likely not have redundancy unless announced before the game, and in Basics it should go without saying that roles should be unique (with the exception of Masons, for obvious example). So to restate, we're talking about Normals.

Given that you say that to name two players similarly, or include two of the same town role, favors the mafia in such a way that is should require the mafia to lose something for balance I think you are actually agreeing with me here.

EDIT: Gaming the Mod isn't a fallacy. It is a very risky strategy with a highly variable rate of success/failure.

Quote from DRey

Would would create such a game (without waring the players on the OP), if it was a mini or basic?

I think in the end, it all depends on the game type itself. For example in a chosen setup, one should fully expect duplicate/similar roles, given the nature of the game itself. Same goes with a deathy style game, where it RELIES on duplicate roles.