Rules Mafia Game Rules & Roles

[Evil3ye]

Also, I had like to add that there should be more clarification about changing your target during the Day/Night phase. Because in one of the games I played in (I think I was Hider) I could change my target to another one since I prefer to hide behind someone else instead and was allowed to change my target, however, in the lastest game(s), g01 for example (when he was the prostitute) said that he wanted to target Holt instead of me, but was not allowed to change his target since he already sent his PM to the Host while the Night Phase was still going on.

Gotta say, even that made me confused since I was allowed to change my target during the Night Phase in the game I have played in but he was not. Seems kinda unfair/confusing that some Host(s) allow(s) people to change their target(s), but other host(s) do not. I think this should be kinda clarified as well, imo.

Don't delete your posts. There are no stupid suggestions.
Personally I never had a problem with changes, unless you know, you have annoying troll players. What if someone decides to troll the host and change the target every 20 minutes? And what exactly is the problem waiting somewhat longer, making up your mind, and then sending the PM, rather than sending it in passionately, then rethinking it, rereading posts, changing it. Like hosts can expect that from you too, or not? It's a matter of perspective. I see a specific rule that says a player is allowed to change is night choice twice problematic though, as players would probably use it as votes as "placeholders", which increases the likelihood of mistakes being made drasticly, if you think of 20+ player games.

 

[Farfalla]

Plus... with a 12h night, day times end at different times daily. One day it will be a good time for some players, to other day it won't. It's super hard to come up with a way to give a fair moment and weight to everybody's votes. That way, you're at least opening it to more possibilities.

Edit: should have posted that as a continuation to my post but yeah, sry.

 

[Evil3ye]

If you completely remove the extra hour tiebreak you'll need another mechanism to help people preventing that the mafia will get 3 townies tied and dead in the 'normal' time, for example.

There is an I have.
1. Locked votes rule.
2. Double Kill, if that still applies.

And it's a misperseption, that this extra hour is more benefitial for townies. Due to experience I would say rather the opposite is the case.

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 29, 2016, Original Post Date: Aug 29, 2016 ---

But even with locked votes counting we can have cases where both tied players have the same number of locked votes too..

..so maybe just make it that ties never prolong the day phase, but instantly kill both tied players? Let's be honest, most people don't care about resolving ties right away because "it's just getting extended". Some ties happen many hours before the game ends but people don't care too much about it because the worst that happens is a longer day.

This is exactly one of the inofficial rules, that I for instance been carrying out for quite some time now, it has yet never made it to paper though due to it not being unanimously approved.

I do still want to advocate that it is the best solution over additional time, coinflips, or any other nonsense that we tried out over the years.

 

[GrySun]

It shouldn't be allowed to change your submitted night action.
Players have the entire night to decide, and since it's night they can't talk to others or find out more information so I don't see why people would change their night action to begin with.

Changing your targets could easily confuse the host and lead to incorrect night results, since a lot can change from just one role blocker or killer role changing thre target. It feels like a huge hassle for a host who's already preparing the night results.

 

[Farfalla]

Uh, I didn't say the current model benefits any side. I said I like the current model, we need a standard to go by when extra time is given tho, and that a reason why I like the current model is that I can't picture one that would work better.
You asked me if I think that the extra hour is fair for those who aren't online, I said that I think it's the fairest solution there can be (happening at different times + happening less often with locked votes count on normal time) if you don't wanna allow mafia to more easily force ties and multiple kills at the end of the day if there's no extra time and only normal votes are counted.

 

[Evil3ye]

Also, the host test needs an update

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 29, 2016, Original Post Date: Aug 29, 2016 ---

As in, completely new questions that actually test something other than if you read role descriptions

True, but personally I ain't got no time for this. This one test thing that digital and me worked out was a frame that we tried to built in some roles that needed bugfixes and basically what we checked for if the candidate would fix those bugs the way we would. Over the time those holes were filled though, and now its just a matter of reading the rules. But easier said than done - cuz hosting mistakes still happen with the possibility to check rules anytime, right?

The new host test could include current "under construction roles" such as politician, pirate, hypno, or anything James suggested....

 

[Copy Panda]

No my problem is that hosting goes further than having role knowledge, which the exam mostly tests on

 

[Evil3ye]

Uh, I didn't say the current model benefits any side. I said I like the current model, we need a standard to go by when extra time is given tho, and that a reason why I like the current model is that I can't picture one that would work better.
You asked me if I think that the extra hour is fair for those who aren't online, I said that I think it's the fairest solution there can be (happening at different times + happening less often with locked votes count on normal time) if you don't wanna allow mafia to more easily force ties and multiple kills at the end of the day if there's no extra time and only normal votes are counted.

This is utter bullshit, and if I'd give an extra hour, this forced second tie and double kill would be still possible, in what you suggest. Or do you want to add an extra-extra additional hour. I remember doing it too, and the results have not changed.

This forced change of votes imposed by the host is in my opinion not a solution, and exending the phase until you like the result is utter crap too. You get what you voted for. Everyone can influence if it will be a double kill, or single kill or triple kill. It's not just the mafia.

 

[Purity of Magi]

Don't delete your posts. There are no stupid suggestions.
Personally I never had a problem with changes, unless you know, you have annoying troll players. What if someone decides to troll the host and change the target every 20 minutes? And what exactly is the problem waiting somewhat longer, making up your mind, and then sending the PM, rather than sending it in passionately, then rethinking it, rereading posts, changing it. Like hosts can expect that from you too, or not? It's a matter of perspective. I see a specific rule that says a player is allowed to change is night choice twice problematic though, as players would probably use it as votes as "placeholders", which increases the likelihood of mistakes being made drasticly, if you think of 20+ player games.

Thought it was not relevant enough to be mentioned, but apparently it was.

Anyway, personally I do not see why a troll player or any other player would do that. That is not even trolling anymore, just rather being stupid and mindless. I do not see the fun and the point in it at all. I think there should be some consequences if someone would do that to begin with. Back to my point, that is exactly what I mean. I do not see the point of why they cannot change their target. A host should expect it regardless how the situation of the game is. But as you said, you see it as a 'specific rule' and so do I, but well apparently not everyone sees it that way if I look at the current games that people were not allowed to change it at all (and I highly doubt they were trolling). Of course, maybe it had their reason(s) but still tho. It caught my eye and made me a little bit confused. That is why I mention this in the first place.

There should be more communication about such 'small' things like these. Since those 'specific rules' are nowhere stated. It is not like everyone would think that way, people can think differently about it (and they totally do, check GrySun post for example).

 

[GrySun]

No my problem is that hosting goes further than having role knowledge, which the exam mostly tests on

I agree. I almost passed the test the first time, but even if I passed it back then I wouldn't feel safe to host a game now. The test doesn't prepare you for the real, cruel world. Although I know that making a new test is time consuming, especially when it needs to have good questions. It's at least something to consider.

 

[Evil3ye]

No my problem is that hosting goes further than having role knowledge, which the exam mostly tests on

I agree. I almost passed the test the first time, but even if I passed it back then I wouldn't feel safe to host a game now. The test doesn't prepare you for the real, cruel world. Although I know that making a new test is time consuming, especially when it needs to have good questions. It's at least something to consider.

There's also the part of building a balanced game. But this "balanced" is subjective. Digital, Imp, Gusto, Ust and I tried to rate every role on how much benefit it gives for each side, and we brought it almost to the step of publishing it in a host-guide, but that idea was discarded, because it was very mathematical and for new hosts inexplicable and hard to comprehend.

 

[Copy Panda]

For newer games, should current roles that exist (for instance, mafia assassin) be scrapped? Or put under construction or w/e for the moment? I'm all for spicy games and roles, but with hosting I learned that role descriptions don't contain all info on game mechanics (like with the politician).

 

[Farfalla]

This is utter bullshit, and if I'd give an extra hour, this forced second tie and double kill would be still possible, in what you suggest. Or do you want to add an extra-extra additional hour. I remember doing it too, and the results have not changed.

This forced change of votes imposed by the host is in my opinion not a solution, and exending the phase until you like the result is utter crap too. You get what you voted for. Everyone can influence if it will be a double kill, or single kill or triple kill. It's not just the mafia.

Evil, just quit the aggressive tone with the avalanche of "crap/bullshit" and propose whatever sounds better to you.

 

[Copy Panda]

This is utter bullshit, and if I'd give an extra hour, this forced second tie and double kill would be still possible, in what you suggest. Or do you want to add an extra-extra additional hour. I remember doing it too, and the results have not changed.

This forced change of votes imposed by the host is in my opinion not a solution, and exending the phase until you like the result is utter crap too. You get what you voted for. Everyone can influence if it will be a double kill, or single kill or triple kill. It's not just the mafia.

The difference would be that vote locks do count now. With this, couldn't town take a difference stance? I do agree with ending ties with kills in over time.

 

[Evil3ye]

The difference would be that vote locks do count now. With this, couldn't town take a difference stance? I do agree with ending ties with kills in over time.

I don't think I understand what you mean. Digital, Hardy and I are united on the issue of locked votes over first votes, I think the only deviation is the additional time, as in is it even necessary giving it and for what I believe might have been seen as random to players, because each did it differently.

 

[GrySun]

There's also the part of building a balanced game. But this "balanced" is subjective. Digital, Imp, Gusto, Ust and I tried to rate every role on how much benefit it gives for each side, and we brought it almost to the step of publishing it in a host-guide, but that idea was discarded, because it was very mathematical and for new hosts inexplicable and hard to comprehend.

For game balance, it can and will always be skewered by something. Players afk on good roles, hostkills, random interactions in the night phases..
The best that could be done with game balance is making sure there's the correct number of mafias in a game, and that some obviously very strong roles shouldn't be put in several times in a single game.

The worst thing that affects the game balance is definitely making more than 1 mafia group or adding 3rd parties. With several night kills at once it becomes much harder to calculate possibilities and gauge how balanced a role setup is.

 

[Evil3ye]

Evil, just quit the aggressive tone with the avalanche of "crap/bullshit" and propose whatever sounds better to you.

I said it so many times, and if you would have read the words in between the craps/bullshits, you could have once again hopefully followed my argument why it makes no sense to extend the phase, and instead cutting to the results, no matter what the vote looks like (under consideration of locked votes).

 

[GrySun]

When solving ties I think it should matter how many votes the tied players have on them. If like 70-80% of the players are divided between 2 people an extended time would be a must, and when the ties are with few votes just immediately kill both at the end without adding time.

 

[Evil3ye]

From my perspective, as hosting numerous games, the extended phases give no benefit to the game. Perhaps you can explain to me why this extra hour is so important to you as a player. What extra value do you have by receiving it @Farfalla. And you are not alone with it. But I am very opinionated about it, because of how it requires a lot of flexibility from the host. And I'd like to hear some hard facts, of how it is an essential thing to this format.

 

[Farfalla]

Ah yeah, cute, Gry.
I'm done with the off topic in an important thread. Wanna rant, use the PM box.
---
I'm not alone 'cause Hardy share similar opinion. You're not opinionate, you're rude and personal. And that's really it.