|
Post by Hobbes2 on Jan 16, 2015 21:31:16 GMT
Hey guys, just had a question about Cult setups (for example, Cult OS, a theme that ODM recently popularized on the server)
This might sound like a dumb question with a very specific scenario behind it, but it is possible, so I decided to go ahead and ask.
Consider the following, taken out of Cult OS.
Cult OS is a theme with an inquisitor (Role that can determine allignment), Alarmist (prevents conversion), and regular villies.
Let's say town is a situation where are potentially 3 cults and 6 town. Could inquisitor, at this point, come up with a false inspection under the hope that they will be culted later?
If they are never eventually culted this could be considered gamethrowing but what if they are? If they are culted then what they did in a past round effectively helped them.
While this situation has never happened on the server, I'm just wondering what the judgement on this kind of situation would be.
Sorry if this is confusing, if you need me to clarify something I can.
|
|
|
Post by Hobbes2 on Jan 16, 2015 22:12:09 GMT
I imagine if the inquis is claimed, then there isn't really a 1/8 chance of becoming a cult, but much higher based off whether the alarmist was culted or not. Now that I think about it, the likelyhood of the inquis pulling something like that off is really small.
I was just wondering if that kind of thing is even allowed.
Simply put, can a town role pull off an anti-town move under the hope of getting converted later? If they are converted later, it would be fine but if they aren't that's gamethrowing. I'm having trouble wording this, maybe someone who understands what I'm saying can word it better.
|
|
|
Post by incognito on Jan 16, 2015 22:27:57 GMT
I imagine if the inquis is claimed, then there isn't really a 1/8 chance of becoming a cult, but much higher based off whether the alarmist was culted or not. Now that I think about it, the likelyhood of the inquis pulling something like that off is really small. I was just wondering if that kind of thing is even allowed. Simply put, can a town role pull off an anti-town move under the hope of getting converted later? If they are converted later, it would be fine but if they aren't that's gamethrowing. I'm having trouble wording this, maybe someone who understands what I'm saying can word it better. To answer your question no. Any town role that gets info during the night but reveals false information on purpose during the day will get gamebanned. This counts as playing agains your win condition. Also ignore the troll @citrusfreakwho just wanted an excuse to use his 3rd grade maths skills that aren't even any good. Shitposting is an offense citrus, I don't care how nicely you word it.
|
|
|
Post by Mob Boss on Jan 22, 2015 3:13:22 GMT
I want to talk about the 2nd major issue of bad mafia play behind the obv lurking/fillering. It has to do with bussing. Bussing to me is not good as it pretty much makes mafia lose a valuable asset in a extra vote plus gives a lot of info to town as it pretty much is obv. Also you got other factors such as that your partner might not be as scummy as you think or people just saying they are clean because they got a mafia. I'm not saying to prey on the partner a little and then come to a lynch as this might not be as obv or prey on partner and the not prey anymore as this is generally viable but it's the way the players present it that makes it too bad such as even starting this from day 1. Players also don't keep the count of how much they do it and do not do it as preying on a partner a little too much and suddenly stopping can result in a mafia lynch and yeah as well as the constant on when they do it. Also not try to switch subject and attempt to bus when not needed as it is better to follow the pace of the town. Well I have a lot more thoughts but getting late rn and better to here from you guys on what you think about this.
Edit: was tired when I posted this but will make it better when I have time.
|
|
|
Post by Floette on Jan 22, 2015 6:07:08 GMT
I want to talk about the 2nd major issue of bad mafia play behind the obv lurking/fillering. It has to do with bussing. Bussing to me is not good as it pretty much makes mafia lose a valuable asset in a extra vote plus gives a lot of info to town as it pretty much is obv. Also you got other factors such as that your partner might not be as scummy as you think or people just saying they are clean because they got a mafia. I'm not saying to prey on the partner a little and then come to a lynch as this might not be as obv or prey on partner and the not prey anymore as this is generally viable but it's the way the players present it that makes it too bad such as even starting this from day 1. Players also don't keep the count of how much they do it and do not do it as preying on a partner a little too much and suddenly stopping can result in a mafia lynch and yeah as well as the constant on when they do it. Also not try to switch subject and attempt to bus when not needed as it is better to follow the pace of the town. Well I have a lot more thoughts but getting late rn and better to here from you guys on what you think about this. You know, I'd actually read anything you write if you could press the enter button every time you finish with an idea or argument.
|
|
aknolan
Bodyguard
Aknolan the Unoriginal
Posts: 165
|
Post by aknolan on Jan 22, 2015 15:36:39 GMT
I want to talk about the 2nd major issue of bad mafia play behind the obv lurking/fillering. It has to do with bussing. Bussing to me is not good as it pretty much makes mafia lose a valuable asset in a extra vote plus gives a lot of info to town as it pretty much is obv. Also you got other factors such as that your partner might not be as scummy as you think or people just saying they are clean because they got a mafia. I'm not saying to prey on the partner a little and then come to a lynch as this might not be as obv or prey on partner and the not prey anymore as this is generally viable but it's the way the players present it that makes it too bad such as even starting this from day 1. Players also don't keep the count of how much they do it and do not do it as preying on a partner a little too much and suddenly stopping can result in a mafia lynch and yeah as well as the constant on when they do it. Also not try to switch subject and attempt to bus when not needed as it is better to follow the pace of the town. Well I have a lot more thoughts but getting late rn and better to here from you guys on what you think about this. You know, I'd actually read anything you write if you could press the enter button every time you finish with an idea or argument. This and the fact that I couldn't understand what you meant because of the grammar :x I did understand most but not anything. In reply to the post though: it's best to just think you're town the whole time tbh, that might make you a bit more scummy in my case but it's worth it in the end.
|
|
|
Post by Floette on Jan 22, 2015 20:30:49 GMT
You know, I'd actually read anything you write if you could press the enter button every time you finish with an idea or argument. This and the fact that I couldn't understand what you meant because of the grammar :x I did understand most but not anything. In reply to the post though: it's best to just think you're town the whole time tbh, that might make you a bit more scummy in my case but it's worth it in the end. I've actually had a few instances where I believed I was town as mafia for a period of the day. Weird.
|
|
|
Post by Pobaeto on Jan 22, 2015 22:05:21 GMT
This and the fact that I couldn't understand what you meant because of the grammar :x I did understand most but not anything. In reply to the post though: it's best to just think you're town the whole time tbh, that might make you a bit more scummy in my case but it's worth it in the end. I've actually had a few instances where I believed I was town as mafia for a period of the day. Weird. Pfft, that's nothing. I missed my mafia pm somehow, bussed my partner accidentally, and then made an argument convincing enough to get someone else lynched. The entire time I thought I was a villager.
|
|
|
Post by rssp1 on Jan 23, 2015 0:16:51 GMT
Almost as good as the time I subbed in and never realized that the host pm'ed me my role because I accidentally exited out of the role pm >_>
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2015 13:23:07 GMT
So lately I've been mulling over this idea for a NOC mafia theme, and I think it could work really well under the specific parameters on this forum. Essentially, the theme is nine treestump villies, who upon their death retain the ability to talk, but not vote, and one treestump mafia, who can do the same, but has a night kill when he is alive. The mafia also gain one silencing ability every even night that they can use whenever they want on a dead villager. The host will not announce when someone has been silenced. Upon their deaths, the host does not announce their alignment. If someone is killed at night, obviously, they are cleared; but if someone is lynched, the town has to figure that out. The town wins if they NL after correctly lynching the mafia. The mafia can NK in order to interrupt this. The mafia wins when they are among the final two people in the game. A treestump has all the requirements to stay active that a normal player does. Lynching is based on the completion basis; that is, the day will end when and only when every person has cast a vote. In order to discourage any instances of Happily Ever After, if the town NL's three times in a row, a random villager dies. If the mafia NK's three times (maybe twice) in a row, then they die that night. The theory behind this theme: -Though the odds seem hopelessly stacked against the mafia, I believe the treestumps add a level of chaos that works in the mafia's favor, though they have an optional even-night silencer to tone this down if need be. The mafia retains these silencing abilities even after death. -Because the town has to NL after getting the mafia to win, it allows the mafia to wrest control over the endgame if the town is not careful. -The Happily Ever After counter and the completion based-lynching forces the town to work more intensively at scumhunting while they have time. -A player is only considered 'dead' when both dead and silenced. -Because players probably would not want to continue to work much after their death, and not wait for their silencing to stop contributing, there should be a points system of a sort to encourage active play. Is this theme balanced? If not, what should be changed about it?
|
|
|
Post by rssp1 on Feb 19, 2015 8:37:52 GMT
I'm horrible at determining whether a game is balanced or not. However, it does look like an interesting concept.
|
|
|
Post by Rabac on Feb 27, 2015 2:31:07 GMT
Well since rssp1's question died, I have one that I found myself wondering about (mainly bc i died in a game of LH bc of it)
Is it necessarily scummy to ask people to claim to you in pm, when you arent confirmed, and when would be the best time, before you are revealed, to ask people to claim via pm? Also, is it wise to claim your role via pm when asked by those unconfirmed ppl, and what should you claim in these circumstances?
Supposedly only two roles that would find it useful to ask for claims via pm (which isnt true, obv): Mafia, and GS. But I personally feel that you can gather lots of info through pming asking for roles D1 N1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2015 2:50:10 GMT
First question: Heck yes, it's scummy. The only two roles that would really want that information are the mafia and the GSes. And if the GSes do it, the mafia know what's happening and they kill the sap. So GSes don't do it. Second question: No, it is not. Do not give any info to any unconfirmed person in LH Mafia, unless you are cross-claiming with an individual you trust, or attempting a Citrus Fort gambit. Neither of us will tell you what that is, it's our little secret. Fort Colorcastle wrote an almost completely comprehensive strategy for LH that I disagree with in 49% of circumstances, you might take a look at it.
|
|
|
Post by Rabac on Mar 14, 2015 23:48:15 GMT
Is there a comprehensive strategy for GI? For obvious reasons
|
|
Galom
Villager
Everybody's doing their time.
Posts: 63
|
Post by Galom on Mar 20, 2015 13:44:07 GMT
Is there a comprehensive strategy for GI? For obvious reasons I'm assuming you're referring to Town strats. As a team, no. There's not really anything you can do like hypo since there could potentially be any amount of one given role. But as an individual? To an extent. On Day 1, there is really not much to do except scumhunt and watch for people that look "off" to you, as well as examine discards. I tend to just dick around like I always do and act ***ed to get people to say things that incriminate themselves. Besides the discards, you often have absolutely nothing to go off of, but they can often help you to find potential targets for your actions night 1. (I.E. if someone discards Alpha Werewolf, they're probably worth an Inspect/Roleblock/etc.). The Doctor, if present, should protect someone that discarded a town role, unless a cop was stupid enough to claim. I would not recommend lynching just off of a discard, however, since the other scum factions tend to take care of that for you. They're generally somewhat afraid of a guy that discarded something like Mafia Godfather.
|
|
|
Post by Rabac on Mar 20, 2015 23:30:29 GMT
huh? Why invest scum discards, but not town discards? I dont understand that Galom
|
|
Galom
Villager
Everybody's doing their time.
Posts: 63
|
Post by Galom on Mar 21, 2015 1:18:29 GMT
I like to abuse the "I wanna be scum" mentality. Say someone's discard is Bulletproof Werewolf. Most people would not discard Bulletproof werewolf for a weak town role like Supersaint. People would most likely only discard Bulletproof Werewolf for an even more powerful role--and there are a lot more "powerful" scum roles than town.
Basically, it's nothing guaranteed; you're just trying to abuse the power-hungry tendencies players have when they pick roles.
|
|
aknolan
Bodyguard
Aknolan the Unoriginal
Posts: 165
|
Post by aknolan on Mar 21, 2015 10:37:00 GMT
you're right though it also depends on who is playing, sure it's fun to be mafia but I for one don't always want to be mafia, the problem with discarding scum is that people will be likely to kill you for it though... but on the other hand it also means that it's 1 less actual good town member killed! What I'm trying to say is that not everyone will pick scum > town even if town role is very shitty.
Also, if someone discards a great town role that's also a bit suspicious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2015 18:24:12 GMT
It's a bit more than just a little bit suspicious to discard a great town role, though I suppose certain circumstances can be justified in getting rid of a better role in favor of a lesser one. My theory is that if someone is put in the position of choosing between two town roles, they will choose the better one; two anti-town roles, and they will choose the better of the two (taking into account factional abilities); and one town one and one anti-town, they will choose the one that is more fun to play as. In my opinion, the public should be given the number of anti-town players, but not necessarily their faction, and the host, in turn, should never announce if it is L/MyLo. This would, in theory, require more ingenuity on the part of the players; scum should determine if they should exert their energy into scumhunting or self-preservation, and the town needs to analyze past occurrences to determine if lynching in, for example, a 5-5 situation is good, or if it is possible to use the scum factions' fears of one another to keep themselves alive. I remember reading a game on Mafia Scum (another forum Mafia environment), I think it was Large Closed 25-Player something based on Ender's Game. There were four competing factions; a town and three mafias, no defined "third party" as we know it. Eventually it got to the point where it was 2 town - 2 first mafia - 3 second mafia. But the town ended up winning because the players decided to nl that day and the scum teams destroyed one another. That's actually the metagame-avoidance theory I'm working on testing in U.S. v. S.C. Mafia, though I'm still refining the roles and in-game details. Democrats OP right now.
|
|
|
Post by Rabac on Mar 22, 2015 23:01:41 GMT
It's a bit more than just a little bit suspicious to discard a great town role, though I suppose certain circumstances can be justified in getting rid of a better role in favor of a lesser one. My theory is that if someone is put in the position of choosing between two town roles, they will choose the better one; two anti-town roles, and they will choose the better of the two (taking into account factional abilities); and one town one and one anti-town, they will choose the one that is more fun to play as. In my opinion, the public should be given the number of anti-town players, but not necessarily their faction, and the host, in turn, should never announce if it is L/MyLo. This would, in theory, require more ingenuity on the part of the players; scum should determine if they should exert their energy into scumhunting or self-preservation, and the town needs to analyze past occurrences to determine if lynching in, for example, a 5-5 situation is good, or if it is possible to use the scum factions' fears of one another to keep themselves alive. I remember reading a game on Mafia Scum (another forum Mafia environment), I think it was Large Closed 25-Player something based on Ender's Game. There were four competing factions; a town and three mafias, no defined "third party" as we know it. Eventually it got to the point where it was 2 town - 2 first mafia - 3 second mafia. But the town ended up winning because the players decided to nl that day and the scum teams destroyed one another. That's actually the metagame-avoidance theory I'm working on testing in U.S. v. S.C. Mafia, though I'm still refining the roles and in-game details. Democrats OP right now. Ive actually looked over your game rules (which btw I wouldnt mind joining) However I dont see why the Democrats are OP. Do you mind explaining how they are OP?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2015 18:34:55 GMT
I'm still configuring the roles for all factions for now. I'll try to get it as equal as possible, but in the end, since it's a closed setup (no role list), I may end up needing one of the mods to sacrifice being able to play in order to ensure balance. And it has yet to be formally confirmed for hosting yet; I want to host it later in the year for Holiday Flavor, so I'll submit it for approval after it's been balance tested.
|
|
|
Post by TheWhoDoctor on Mar 23, 2015 18:51:17 GMT
I like to abuse the "I wanna be scum" mentality. Say someone's discard is Bulletproof Werewolf. Most people would not discard Bulletproof werewolf for a weak town role like Supersaint. People would most likely only discard Bulletproof Werewolf for an even more powerful role--and there are a lot more "powerful" scum roles than town. Basically, it's nothing guaranteed; you're just trying to abuse the power-hungry tendencies players have when they pick roles. you're right though it also depends on who is playing, sure it's fun to be mafia but I for one don't always want to be mafia, the problem with discarding scum is that people will be likely to kill you for it though... but on the other hand it also means that it's 1 less actual good town member killed! What I'm trying to say is that not everyone will pick scum > town even if town role is very shitty. Also, if someone discards a great town role that's also a bit suspicious. This. This is the logic that got me lynched on Snnivy's GI on Day 1, after I discarded Town Doctor for Town Watcher
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2015 19:47:18 GMT
It's an entirely different logic for your case, TheWhoDoctor. You were not concerned with the fun-ness of your role because they were of the same alignment; that's as far as it goes in relation to Galom's and Aknolan's theories. You were of the disposition that a watcher would be more useful than a doctor in this setup, which is arguable; even though a watcher is buffed in GI and a doctor is nerfed because it could stop cross-anti-townie-faction-fire, the general feeling of people is that, if someone discards something understood to be a great town role, then there has to be some unfamiliar logical processes going through that individual's mind; in our case, the belief that you would choose a more 'un anti-town role made more sense than that you would choose the admittedly buffed watcher role.
|
|
|
Post by TheWhoDoctor on Mar 23, 2015 21:01:32 GMT
It's an entirely different logic for your case, TheWhoDoctor. You were not concerned with the fun-ness of your role because they were of the same alignment; that's as far as it goes in relation to Galom's and Aknolan's theories. You were of the disposition that a watcher would be more useful than a doctor in this setup, which is arguable; even though a watcher is buffed in GI and a doctor is nerfed because it could stop cross-anti-townie-faction-fire, the general feeling of people is that, if someone discards something understood to be a great town role, then there has to be some unfamiliar logical processes going through that individual's mind; in our case, the belief that you would choose a more 'un anti-town role made more sense than that you would choose the admittedly buffed watcher role. I was mostly calling out Aknolan's logic that most roles that are more fun and better to play as than Town Doctor are scum-related. Just because that is true does not automatically make them scum - I did state my logic behind the Doctor discard, and yet the faulty scumhunting still lead to my lynch.
|
|
Galom
Villager
Everybody's doing their time.
Posts: 63
|
Post by Galom on Mar 24, 2015 13:11:56 GMT
I like to abuse the "I wanna be scum" mentality. Say someone's discard is Bulletproof Werewolf. Most people would not discard Bulletproof werewolf for a weak town role like Supersaint. People would most likely only discard Bulletproof Werewolf for an even more powerful role--and there are a lot more "powerful" scum roles than town. Basically, it's nothing guaranteed; you're just trying to abuse the power-hungry tendencies players have when they pick roles. you're right though it also depends on who is playing, sure it's fun to be mafia but I for one don't always want to be mafia, the problem with discarding scum is that people will be likely to kill you for it though... but on the other hand it also means that it's 1 less actual good town member killed! What I'm trying to say is that not everyone will pick scum > town even if town role is very shitty. Also, if someone discards a great town role that's also a bit suspicious. This. This is the logic that got me lynched on Snnivy's GI on Day 1, after I discarded Town Doctor for Town Watcher I'm pretty sure I stated you shouldn't lynch day 1; I just mean that they're worth a roleblock or something.
|
|