|
Anyone running a game that needs a player?
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
Egypt is a fun country!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
Magnus Gallant posted:I agree with this, it definitely feels like there is a downturn in both players and activity lately. A GBS game would be good, it was one of the better ways we had of bringing in new blood to the scene. I also agree that role-heavy games make people too reliant on those roles and not reliant enough on critical thinking, but that's more or less how it's always been.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Dota vs League of Legends would be a fun one and you could probably do a lot of crazy poo poo but it'd require a mod who had actually played both games.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
busb posted:i have played both games. Highwire and I ran the LoL soldiers game way back, i think DbD ran a dota one? It's a lot of different guys with cool abilities who star in competing games, flavor wouldn't be too hard and you could go hog wild on mechanics.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
Has anyone ever ran a Civil War setup?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:Fair Mafia Thread tonight I am eating the flesh of an animal (a chicken in the form of general tso's chicken). Die Hard? It's a classic. The Raid and The Raid 2 are really badass if you haven't seen them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:What are your 5 favorite books of all time? Malazan Book of the Fallen series, by Steven Erikson - hardcore epic fantasy series written by an archaeologist/anthropologist by trade, so there's a ton of history going back several centuries and escalating tiers of badasses Vlad Taltos series, by Steven Brust - wizard assassin in a fantasy Mafia, follows the Rule of Cool all the way through and is very enjoyable and accessible Inherent Vice, by Thomas Pynchon - tough call between this and Gravity's Rainbow, but I can reread IV in a weekend and it's an LA story so it wins House of Leaves, by Mark Z. Danielewski - nontraditional page layouts and a story within a story, great take on the postmodern style Infinite Jest, by David Foster Wallace - a great take on modern living, excellent writing all the way and one of the few books I've read where you could really feel what the author was thinking all the way through
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:I like Infinite Jest but have started taking note summaries of each chapter after I finish it. Not because it's hard to read but just because of the bulkiness of the prose. I started reading on ebook before I had to switch to paperback just because of stuff like footnotes and referring back to previous chapters. I needed two bookmarks, one for the main text and one for the endnotes.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Allen Wren posted:Bob Costas has an amazing deadpan. As the resident boxing guy on SA it looks like I checked this thread again at the right time! One of the worst cuts I have ever seen anyone take in a boxing match, it's a shame the rematch never happened but probably for the best for Lewis, who I thought was lucky the fight had to be stopped.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 09:31
|
|
|
Crazy to think that fight signified a true changing of the guard, and on a late replacement like you said. Come check out the boxing thread in PSP sometime! Mostly people griping about corrupt decisions, but still 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 09:44
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Who's excited for golovkin-Lemieux? Triple G is a bad mother. Getting a bunch of people together for a PPV party this weekend to watch. Should be a good war, both guys are going right after each other from the start I think. Also, Roman "Chocolatito" Gonzalez on the undercard who many think is the best fighter in the sport now that Floyd has retired.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
They're setting up for a big fight with the Cotto-Canelo winner. Basically GGG is still "relatively unknown" so when it comes to negotiations he can't show up and say I bring XXX people to the PPV which translates into $YYY so give me 40% or whatever. By putting on a PPV where he's the big draw he can figure out how many people are interested in dropping money to see him fight, and then he can take that number to Canelo/Cotto who then might be enticed to fight him for a few more million dollars now that they know what he can do business-wise. Thanks for the thread love! Should have one up for the GGG fight this weekend too, check the main thread in PSP for it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
I've quit drinking for a few months and I've quit caffeine for a few months, and quitting caffeine was a lot harder even factoring in the social pressures of drinking. The first ten days were really awful. Good luck Magnus stick with it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
SirSamVimes posted:A player in WoWfia has requested a replacement, so I'm now looking for one. We're mid day 2, so not too much reading. I'll sub in if you still need a guy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
Allen Wren posted:Now here's a theory question - I know most of the time that games run to smaller numbers but have an even-numbered total, that's when people begin to suggest no-votes. I'm not great at the nuts and bolts of it. I've actually forgotten to poll for no-votes over the last few days, 'cos it's late and I don't have a complete flowchart of this written out, just fairly-poorly-organized procedures. Even numbers favor scum in theory because you need more people to agree on the person you're lynching which means it's harder to achieve consensus. There are also more suspicious people available for suspicion.; for example instead of just five people that could be scum there's now six, so the odds of you hitting scum are lower. In practice it may not matter so much. Say you have 6 people alive and 2 scum, you're pretty confident that 2 of the 6 living players are town, to the point where it would take a miracle or some crazy scum gambit for the town to lynch those guys. Letting the day expire just means you're going to lose one of those two people. Really it depends on the setup and the situation. If you have 6 people alive and none of them are obviously trustworthy, and you know there's only 1 kill at most that will happen in the night, then no lynching is the way to go. Town power roles may also tip the balance in favor of an extra night. Say you have a doctor still alive and you no lynch and the doctor stops a kill, bam you just confirmed a townie. (Of course that might not be the case in a game where the scum can withhold their kill, which is pretty common.) I'm usually in favor of no lynching down to an odd player count, but again that's if I'm confident there's not going to be a second kill. If you have six people alive and only one of them is a confirmed townie, then letting the Mafia kill that guy isn't so great. For better or worse, no lynching to odd numbers extends the game out by a night. That sometimes favors town but not always. The Ninth Layer fucked around with this message at 09:07 on Oct 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:a few pages back, but I think part of it is that big intense analysis is usually viewed as scummy, so one sentence/one paragraph cases are usually the most you can get out without people questioning you hard. It depends. Bad analysis will always make you look suspicious, especially if people don't agree at all with what you had to say. If you're summing up events or stating things that would be obvious to anyone that has been reading and paying attention, that looks scummy because you're not telling anyone anything they didn't already know. But if you're drawing things together into a pattern that maybe others wouldn't have noticed, that's Good Play and the foundation of a case. If you're town then you have two main goals. 1) Identify and vote for people that aren't town. 2) Persuade other townies that the people you've identified as scum are scum. The first point is obvious and even your worst, lurkiest townie is accomplishing it as long as they vote. The second point is where people struggle. Nobody's ever going to be persuaded by your one sentence of opinion, in fact they may not even notice you said it. A good case is a lot better because it forces people to really think about what you have to say, even if the only reason they're thinking about it is so they can decide to vote you or not. It gives people something to talk about, which is good for town regardless of whether you are right or not. Take advantage of all those five-paragraph essays they made you write in school, it's a very effective style for case-making.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:Another helpful casemaking tip: explain why someone is scum. Don't just list stuff they've done, explain why it's something scum would be more likely to do than town. When someone gets stuck with the "I wouldn't do that as scum" defense that's usually when I go in for the kill.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:11
|
|
").
|
Lumpen posted:A third goal, which helps with the second, is to demonstrate that you are Town in a way that others can recognize, so they can feel that considering your cases is worth thier time and feel assured that they won't get burned trusting you. The best way to give others confidence you're Town is to make clear honest reads throughout the game, as your reads change lay out a clear, brief sign of your train of thought that caused the change. Then when you have a read that you want to drive the lynch to, the most persuasive way to get people to pay attention and follow you is to make a clear, brief, 3-bullet-point case on your target, then answer every question or objection that is raised by other players you think are Town, while ignoring people you think are Scum so they can't sidetrack. Demonstrating to other players that you're town and trustworthy is a scum objective, not a town one.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:Yes, that is a Scum objective as well, which means Town have to do it more convincingly, and Scum need to prevent Town from doing it. It's a scum objective that town shouldn't be focusing on. IMO being overly concerned about other players' perceptions of you is a BIG scumtell because the Mafia is the faction that can't win if they die. As a townie you should expect to be killed at some point. It's far more important to catch scum as a townie than it is to have people think you're town.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Asiina posted:Being townie is definitely a town objective as well, since if you aren't it gives scum an easier time to make bad cases off of you and you are more likely to be mislynched. In the vast majority of cases, you are at least partially responsible for when you get lynched, and not letting yourself get into that position is part of your job as town. There's nothing townier than pursuing people you think are scum and persuading others to do the same. If you're doing anything else to "seem town" then you're doing it wrong. Good town play looks townie. Stressing about other people thinking you're town does not. I've seen more instances than I can count of a townie that gets cased, spends 90% of their posts defending themselves, and gets lynched. Guess what, this is Mafia and people are going to think you're scummy for arbitrary reasons no matter what you do or how well you play, in fact sometimes they'll think you're scum precisely because you're having a good game and hey maybe you should have been killed by now. You shouldn't take it for granted that people will think you're town and you certainly shouldn't go out of your way to make sure that they do. The Ninth Layer fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Oct 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I think you need to be totally oblivious though to not know how your posts will be read by other players; if you are a townie and you know you've made posts that aren't good, pretending like you didn't make them and shouldn't address them doesn't help anyone. Defending yourself is a bad thing if you're doing nothing else. The one post you make announcing your suspicions right before the town hammers you isn't going to do anything to help the town out.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:nah it's not like that. it is Not Bad to defend yourself, it is Bad to not make cases and scumhunt. if you defend yourself that's independent to not scumhunting. Your first big paragraph here is exactly why it's a bad idea to worry overmuch about what other people think about your alignment. Every problem you cite can be solved by simply not caring if you get lynched or not. The idea of not casing someone who isn't voting you just because they might vote you is such a backwards way of looking at the game. If someone is scum why should you care if casing them turns them against you? If your case has salient points then those points have entered the thread's consciousness whether or not you're around to push them the next day. If your time is so limited that you can only pick one of: defend yourself or case, then it's because you're taking too much time defending yourself. Your job is not to convince the person casing you that you're not scum (although it certainly helps) but to convince everyone else. The best way to do that is to play like a townie and go hunt scum. Nobody is going to go back to read your posts but they'll still remember who you cased and what you said about them. Better leaving that in the thread than a bunch of defensive posts that end in a town flip anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:nah, seriously when a player dies nine times out of ten it's like they never existed for most people (it's why scum can nightkill anyone and nobody ever asks why the scum killed them, they are dead and gone and erased from history). so it doesn't matter what cases you made, your best chance of having any influence on the game after your death is hoping that your case "entered the thread's consciousness," which is kind of insane. part of my point is you can't just "play like a townie" once people start suspecting you; it inherently colors how people view you, and once you're dead you're dead. I think this is a really pessimistic way of looking at the game, if you hold this view then why even case at all? Dead players get looked at all the time for who they are suspicious of, it doesn't always mean their cases get pushed after the game but it's still something that a lot of townies will look at and keep in mind. If I make a case on someone and get voted out, it's not like my opinion disappeared, someone will remember what I said even if they don't remember it was me who said it. Depending on how I was voted out, or who the other candidates were, my case could gain traction the following day. It's better than doing nothing. I arouse suspicion all the time but I rarely dignify it because it's almost always not worth engaging. Either people think I'm suspicious in a game or they don't. It's almost never worth spending more than 2 or 3 posts arguing about why someone finds me scummy, and if I'm spending that much time doing it then I'm almost always building to case the person that voted me anyway. Defending myself all day isn't going to catch scum. BTW, not engaging with someone's case against you is one of the most effective ways to defuse it, because they then can't directly engage with what you're posting without looking like they're trying to twist everything you're saying into being scum. If all you do is defend yourself, they can case you forever and eventually their points will stick just through sheer momentum. If I'm getting voted out no matter what I say, then absolutely I'm going to push my suspicions on my way out because it helps advance my win condition (try to get scum lynched) whereas pointlessly defending myself doesn't.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:Ultimately what I'm trying to say is, it's okay to defend yourself. People shouldn't think someone is scummy for defending themselves in lieu of scumhunting. It's just one of those stupid things people do as a shortcut to actual scumhunting. It is scummy to defend yourself in lieu of scumhunting. That's why I'm saying town players shouldn't do it. My entire point from the beginning. If you can't do both for whatever reason, you should be scumhunting. If defending yourself is preventing you from scumhunting, stop defending yourself. Town can win if they get killed. They can't win if they get killed but nobody figured out who the scum were.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Well I always look at fundamentals. Scum by necessity need to avoid lynches, they can't win if they don't. If that's your priority as a townie, you have scummy priorities.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:It's Bad not to scumhunt. It's not Scummy. What makes it Scummy is the way player goes about it. It's legitimate to defend yourself and it's problematic to defend yourself in lieu of scumhunting but it's not Scummy because it's not something scum are more likely to do than town. It's scummy not to scumhunt, because scum don't have to and town do. That's a fundamental part of the game. If nobody says anything or votes, the scum win by default because the days end in no lynches and then the scum kills people until they hold majority.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:Town need to avoid being executed too, though. If the town only executes town they're going to lose the game. If you are town and it looks like you're going to be executed, you know the town is making a mistake and not voting out scum. You shouldn't be okay with that since that kind of complacency loses games for town the same way it'd lose a game for you as scum. Avoiding lynches isn't a built-in part of the town win condition. Lynching scum is. That's an important difference. If I know I'm town being executed, but I didn't help the town find scum in any capacity, then it doesn't matter if I got lynched or another townie got lynched, either way we didn't hit scum.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I think you're focusing too much on fundamentals and less on how things play out. If you're town you have to play the game in order to have any chance of winning, true. But if you're town you also have to seek executions on players who are not-you, because an execution on you hurts the town and helps the scum. If the town only votes out other town it's no different, functionally, than the town not playing at all (it's probably even worse, since it'd be better to fail because you didn't try than to try still fail). Seeking executions that are not-you is precisely what scumhunting is. Defending yourself without scumhunting doesn't accomplish that. From a town's perspective there's no difference between you as a townie being voted out vs any other townie, notwithstanding roles. If your attitude is "better anyone else gets voted out but me" then you're fundamentally no better for the town than a scum player. It's way worse to fail because you didn't try. The only way in which it's better is if you never cared to begin with, in which case why even bother with playing this game in the first place?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
Authorman posted:A town player who acts against the town's interest is still town. Self-preservation at any costs regardless of role isn't particularly admirable, but it is a personal trait not a role derived one. When people usually call something "scummy" what they mean is suspicious. It's not inherently scummy to flail around but it is suspicious, for example. It's scummy to want to avoid your own lynch at all costs, because that's what scum must do to advance their win condition. That's a characteristic that if scum don't have will lose them the game.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I think this is ultimately where we disagree. The motivation for scum to avoid being voted out is very, very similar to the motivation town should have. Getting voted out ultimately loses the game for your team. The stakes are higher with scum because there's fewer of them in a game but the result is essentially the same regardless of alignment. Scum have a much higher motivation for avoiding lynches and benefit much more when they're not lynched. Consider the question: Is it better for the town to lynch you, or to no lynch? If you're scum, it's an easy answer: no lynch. If you're town, both are bad outcomes, it's hard to say that one is better than the other.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:what? no they're not. It's better for the town to fail to execute anyone than a player you know is town. No, because you bought the scum another nightkill and the town is still going to be suspicious of you the next day.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:Voting out town advances the scum win condition. Each time a town player is voted out, exlo draws half a day closer. Killing townies* advances the scum win condition. It doesn't matter how those kills happen. A town that no-lynches every day will lose because scum will keep killing them until majority.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Authorman posted:You assume that people are rational actors that will make the optimal choice in each given circumstance. Yes, a scum should value staying alive much more than a town should, that doesn't mean that each will. Whittling down players who 'act scummy' according to the unwritten rules of the community will lead to 'scummy' players being voted out, not necessarily the scum. I mean this is Mafia, obviously people play how they want. But if you're not scumhunting, you're not contributing to the town win condition. If nobody scumhunts, then the town loses because they'll just no lynch every day and get killed off at night. The scum win condition is to survive long enough to outlast the townies you kill off at night. If that's how you're playing, just to survive to the end game, it is indeed scummy regardless of your alignment.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
Authorman posted:Ideally everyone would be punching away at each other in a free for all and only taking a breath to check out everyone else's bruises. But if someone is cowering in the corner, that doesn't make them automatically a bad guy who doesn't want to get punched. They just might not like punching people. Mafia as a game is possible because the factions have fundamentally different win conditions. A word like scummy is absolutely appropriate if it is capturing the essence of what makes those factions different.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
In a lot of situations, yes! No lynching is a pretty bad outcome for the town in any case, it basically resets the day minus the person the Mafia wanted gone the most. It's probably better to vote out nobody than vote out the town cop, but even then a no lynch isn't great. If I'm town up for a hang and there's nobody else even close to getting it instead, I'd rather the town gets rid of me because at least then the 3-6 townies voting me can move onto someone that can actually flip scum and advance my win condition. Ideally it's someone I was pushing for when I was still alive.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:it's connected, too, with why I don't think scum should bus each other except in very special (ecco confidential) circumstances and conditions. numbers are always better than information or cred or what-have-you, because ultimately you don't win because of cred or because of information or because town got to move on or because someone's ego got satisfied (" I was going to post about busing a few times but held off. The reason busing is so powerful is precisely because voting for scum is one of the only things you can reliably do in Mafia to make yourself look town. That's because it comes at the cost of the scum win condition, so anyone who voted scum is either town, or deliberately made the game last longer for themselves. If there was a better way of looking town than busing, scum would be doing that instead. Defending yourself in lieu of scumhunting is suboptimal play at best. I'm glad we can both agree on that. I think townies putting any focus on living to the next day, above making sure their opinions on scum are heard, are doing their team a disservice. Again I can't count the number of times I've seen a town player spend the day defending themselves over and over, adding nothing to the conversation, before they get voted out anyway. Obviously you don't want yourself to be voted out if you're town. But if that's your priority, you're fundamentally, mechanically no better than a scum player. The difference is that a scum player can still win the game even by putting in zero effort. If everyone did that, games would always go to scum. If we're talking numbers, really only half the town needs to be doing nothing for the scum to win, because scum will kill off the other half. The Ninth Layer fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Oct 17, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 05:03
|
|
???" yeah shut up). games are won because of numbers, because there was too many of one team and not enough of another.
|
Birdstrike posted:I think I'm done for a while. Three d1 turbos in a row as town hasn't been good for my mental health. It's a rite of passage.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
That Mafia movie makes me kind of upset to think that I could have found a way to profit off this dumb internet game if only I had been fast enough on the script. Actually I have an idea for how to make money on Mafia and just to learn how to program. In any case I look forward to the Mafia Mafia game, which ideally would be spoiled by just having the two scum be the canonical movie villains.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
This looks like it may be a bad time to announce a game, but my sequel to the Viet Nam Mafia game I ran a few years ago, with HP mechanics and night actions for everyone, is nearly completed and I hope to be able to run it sometime mid-November. I'll be posting an official announcement with a full feature list for World War I Mafia once I figure out which elements I'm scaling down because hoo boy this game needs some scaling down. Let me know via PM if you'd be interested in comodding this very mechanically unique, complicated game with me, or at least if you'd be interested in looking at the setup before backing away in horror.
The Ninth Layer fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Oct 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 02:31
|
|