Dear Mafia Game Mods

[djthefunkchris]

A little bit of professional criticism, not to be taken as if you don't know, or I know something you don't, but just a reminder for all of us:

I just want to say that certain people are always going to be investigated in every game (I'm one it seems). To not have a way to protect these people when scum, you might as well just figure them out of the equation from the start as far as balancing is concerned, no matter how the ability works. If your one to normally have this covered unless there are other abilities/things at work, that provide just as much power, this doesn't really concern you or your mod.

I haven't played nearly as much as I'd like to..> Mostly because of real life getting in the way, but I have to admit something. Alot of it has to do with if I'm scum at anytime in a game, I'm going to be found out within' the first couple of phases. When I am scum, I try as hard as I can, but I never really can get wholely in it, because I've always got that over my head. There are other's I'm sure of that feel the same way, or I wouldn't bother writing this now. The funnest games for me when scum have always been the one's when my team has a way to fight against strong investigative players. In other words, if we choose wisely, and they don't... we have a chance of NOT being found out to be scum, which is in itself a check and balance I don't believe people/mods have been taking as seriously as they should.

BALANCE: It's not just about numbers. We have to give whichever team a fighting chance. If there is a vigilante, scum need a protector. If there is an investigator, scum need a framer with backwards abilities. IF scum can kill, the town needs a protector, etc... If you have two scum groups, there still needs to be these things going on.... UNLESS they can recruit/cults. Cults don't need it normally, especially if they can recruit most of the players (not necessarily all, but a majority). If they are limited up to a certain number or certain one's.... then they will need it as well, but then that's not really a cult.

Just think tit for tat. You cannot count on non-member's to make up for it (ie:SK). Probably Derek_b played the best SK I ever seen in a game I played... meaning he took out all the right townies..... In the game where we really needed it to happen. THAT NEVER NORMALLY HAPPENS. So you can't count on it.

This goes back and forward.... If Scum can do A, the town needs to be able to block A, if Town can do B, then scum needs to be able to block B.

For further notes, see Imarevenant/IER games:)

Thankyou for your attention on this matter.

[moon_lit_tears]

Don't get me wrong on this, but I don't see how it's fair to take a role and make it work for a player.

I thought it's the player makes the role work for them.

I just don't see why a mod has to change something because a player gets looked at a lot. Doesn't make sense to me.

[BHK1978]

Don't get me wrong on this, but I don't see how it's fair to take a role and make it work for a player.

I thought it's the player makes the role work for them.

I just don't see why a mod has to change something because a player gets looked at a lot. Doesn't make sense to me.

I agree with this. There is a reason why you get investigated every game DJ because you are a good player. The one time I was Scum with you, you provided me with insight that I have never had before (granted I never get to use it because I am always town). I guess what I am saying is you can't be a good player and not be investigated the two things kind of go hand and hand.

[i effin rule]

At the end of the day, in the immortal words of outlaw, "mods mod and players play".


That is why we do RNG to determine roles. The roles are made to balance the game. If we start changing things to "help" certain players then it could throw the entire game out of whack. You may as well just assign the roles to the players you want.

[djthefunkchris]

Don't get me wrong on this, but I don't see how it's fair to take a role and make it work for a player.

I thought it's the player makes the role work for them.

I just don't see why a mod has to change something because a player gets looked at a lot. Doesn't make sense to me.

As far as balance is concerned, you have to look at it from all angles. I don't think your getting out of it what I'm talking about to be honest. I'm not talking about "making" a role work for a player. I'm talking in more general terms reguarding balance. The first part is me explaining a little burn-out... mind you this can go both ways.

For example, Burn out option 2: Your a good townie, and scum kill your by day 3 every game for three or four years. Not fun after about year two.

I was town last game, and lasted the whole game without being bullet proof/etc. I'm not trying to complain here, although I certainly see how it can look that way.

I'm talking ying and yang... for every action there needs to be a re-action available. You have to consider what would happen is "X" dies night 1.... meaning you can't count on any singular ability to balance out the game for you. You have to look at them all together, and also in a "what-if" stance. What if Ability "A" is gone night 1? What if Ability A, B, and C are gone by night three. The town abilities can have place-holders/enablers, etc... for when the main ability dies, scum don't really have that, but they have each other and each other's abilities. If they aren't enough, it's certainly possible to still pull off a win, but that doesn't mean it's balanced. They have to be able to protect themselves just as much as the town can protect themselves. Now, by that I don't mean if the town has three protector's, that the scum should have three as well... not at all. Or if the town has three Vig's then the scum should have three protector's... not at all.

I mean, for every ability that the town does have, the scum need a way to prevent that ability from destroying them.

Example of "Unbalanced" Game: Town has two protector's and an investigator. Scum don't have a way to prevent them from getting a scum result. Scum get's a kill... Investigator is protected, and for three phases scum has no way to get rid of the investigator (they are protected), or longer if they have no idea who the protector's are (they haven't hinted or anything). Scum is at a diss-advantage for that game.

Example of "Balanced" game: Town has three investigator's, three protector's. Scum have a kill, and a framer/backwards framer. Now, they have a chance to protect at least one of their member's from being outed, and can work on getting rid of the investigator's. At least in this way they have an effective way to "block" the investigation if they choose wisely. The other way, they have absolutely NO chance at all.

NOW, an SK might make a difference, but quite often the SK DOES out themselves or at least out the fact they aren't town... meaning they don't last long alot of times, so it's really not going to help the scum out (they have around a 33% chance of killing scum as well).

Re-read what I'm saying there, and don't think about it in a personal way, or my personal thoughts about ME... think of it as a generic/overall thought.

[i effin rule]

At the end of the day, in the immortal words of outlaw, "mods mod and players play".


That is why we do RNG to determine roles. The roles are made to balance the game. If we start changing things to "help" certain players then it could throw the entire game out of whack. You may as well just assign the roles to the players you want.

*Forgot to add this.


But yes, every role needs a counter measure and every "power" ability should have some type of weak point. Specifically for SK's. There should be some conceivable way for them to win. Trackers/PGO's/Bulletproof are their mortal enemies, so they need some way to avoid them.

We've tried the Bounty Hunter store, the Sith/SK, and we keep tweaking. Who knows what you'll see next ;)

But yes, every scum ability should be counterable or a counter to another ability. Same with town.

[djthefunkchris]

Don't get me wrong on this, but I don't see how it's fair to take a role and make it work for a player.

I thought it's the player makes the role work for them.

I just don't see why a mod has to change something because a player gets looked at a lot. Doesn't make sense to me.

I agree with this. There is a reason why you get investigated every game DJ because you are a good player. The one time I was Scum with you, you provided me with insight that I have never had before (granted I never get to use it because I am always town). I guess what I am saying is you can't be a good player and not be investigated the two things kind of go hand and hand.

At the end of the day, in the immortal words of outlaw, "mods mod and players play".


That is why we do RNG to determine roles. The roles are made to balance the game. If we start changing things to "help" certain players then it could throw the entire game out of whack. You may as well just assign the roles to the players you want.

I'm not talking about ME personally guys. I'm talking in general terms of balance.... and IER, I've never played an unbalanced game that you modded, or was part mod of..... so it's not like I can debate you at all.

That's not the point I was trying to make, and I guess maybe I should give up, because it doesn't look like I'm able to get the point accross I wanted to. I hate the way I'm sounding right now, because I feel like MJD, lol.

I'm not saying "Make the roles to suit the player" in a personal way.

[djthefunkchris]

*Forgot to add this.


But yes, every role needs a counter measure and every "power" ability should have some type of weak point. Specifically for SK's. There should be some conceivable way for them to win. Trackers/PGO's/Bulletproof are their mortal enemies, so they need some way to avoid them.

We've tried the Bounty Hunter store, the Sith/SK, and we keep tweaking. Who knows what you'll see next ;)

But yes, every scum ability should be counterable or a counter to another ability. Same with town.

THANKYOU! THat's the point I was trying to make!!

[BHK1978]

Yes I agree as well every power town role needs a counter-role on the Scum side of things. That makes perfect sense, also I am all in favor of letting the SK have a chance of winning.

In fact that was something that eayragt did in Good Cop, Bad Cop. MJD need to kill a certain amount of Cops (4 I believe) and he would have won the game. Sadly, he did not live long enough to see this through.

[GruntMark]

*Forgot to add this.


But yes, every role needs a counter measure and every "power" ability should have some type of weak point. Specifically for SK's. There should be some conceivable way for them to win. Trackers/PGO's/Bulletproof are their mortal enemies, so they need some way to avoid them.

We've tried the Bounty Hunter store, the Sith/SK, and we keep tweaking. Who knows what you'll see next ;)

But yes, every scum ability should be counterable or a counter to another ability. Same with town.

It wasnt an accident that the "merc" was basically borrowed. ;)

[djthefunkchris]

Yes I agree as well every power town role needs a counter-role on the Scum side of things. That makes perfect sense, also I am all in favor of letting the SK have a chance of winning.

In fact that was something that eayragt did in Good Cop, Bad Cop. MJD need to kill a certain amount of Cops (4 I believe) and he would have won the game. Sadly, he did not live long enough to see this through.

I think the person that comes up with the "perfect" SK with a chance to win (by being able to play the whole game, as just leaving early is kind of cheap IMO), is going to be copied/duplicated alot, when it really happens in an obvious way.

The biggest problem I've had with it (when I try to think of a way) is bassically making a much too powerfull of a roll to work (example: Backwards miller/comes up town, unstopable kills/untrackable-watchable).

[BHK1978]

I think the person that comes up with the "perfect" SK with a chance to win (by being able to play the whole game, as just leaving early is kind of cheap IMO), is going to be copied/duplicated alot, when it really happens in an obvious way.

The biggest problem I've had with it (when I try to think of a way) is bassically making a much too powerfull of a roll to work (example: Backwards miller/comes up town, unstopable kills/untrackable-watchable).

I have something that I have been thinking about that might give the SK a legit shot of winning. However, I am afraid that it might not be balanced enough and could give the SK an unfair advantage.

[GruntMark]

I have something that I have been thinking about that might give the SK a legit shot of winning. However, I am afraid that it might not be balanced enough and could give the SK an unfair advantage.

Id be fine if the traditional SKer win condition of being the last man standing was gone forever.

Good Cop/Bad Cop mafia had a good SKer I thought.

Mercs/BH are good to.

If the point of adding the SKer is to add extra deaths, then making the goal post alittle easier to get to doesnt hurt anything. And depending on what the SKers goal is, may reduce claiming/hinting. (What if HH2 has a SKer that had to kill X many movie characters?)

The other win condition requires almost breaking the game to have a realistic shot of outlasting 30+ other people.

[BHK1978]

If the point of adding the SKer is to add extra deaths, then making the goal post alittle easier to get to doesnt hurt anything. And depending on what the SKers goal is, may reduce claiming/hinting. (What if HH2 has a SKer that had to kill X many movie characters?)

This was something along the lines of what I was thinking. Give the SK an objective or put them in a mini game where they have to hunt someone down and kill them in order to win. That way they can win the game and also stay in the game. Just because they won does not mean they have to leave in my opinion.

[mjdgoldeneye]

Ahead is a lot of mostly valid psychological babble mixed with random interpretations of stuff. You've been warned.

I don't know how others play but I only use player personalities to predict behaviors. I don't use them to gauge alignments.

If I have an investigative role, I'm going to be targeting people whose behavior warrants confirmation.

I don't ever say "Well, Derek is playing. I'll have to make sure I investigate him on Night 1". That's bad play because it's probably predictable.

THIS is why roles like the framer and bus driver exist. There were intentionally implemented to combat predictable behaviors. You can say "Well, what if I don't have one on my team?". Well, deal. There is no role that is biased for or against any given player unless an unfeasible amount of superstition takes hold that I haven't witnessed. I've read and watched and tested a lot of game theory sorts of social stuff (see my Cake or Die games) and you can break down how certain expectation bubbles grow and burst and grow again and burst again and reverse and so on and so on.

Biases might occur, but they eventually collapse under their own weight after they fail to show up consistently enough. There's nothing worse than stable reinforcement failing to be stable. Imagine you're playing a slot machine and you constantly win. Every pull you win. Down the aisle from you is a guy playing and he only wins once in a while at variable intervals. All of a sudden, both machines cease paying off completely. How many pulls will you make now before you walk off? Maybe 3? How about the other guy? He'll definitely keep playing for longer because he's not conditioned to expect constant reinforcement.

That's a basic trait of psychological conditioning. If a condition like "Derek is great and should always be investigated early" pays off, people will keep looking to it to pay off. Their expectations will continue to increase until it stops working. Because this concept will be widely known, the odds of people who can MAKE it stop working (framers, what have you) will catch on too. After they get a bunch of false positives leading to mislynches on him, they'll lay back a bit or, at least, they should if they're careful and aware of the past.

---

As for the SK thing, Outbreak is still relevant. Now, first, let me say that I don't advocate people giving the SK that much strength. However, in that game, the strength was intentional as certain factions were very early game heavy and I wanted something to matter later on. You can argue about what should have or could have happened, but it worked just as I planned it: the role gave a good player tools to avoid attention in thread and the safeguards dropped off proportionately with the safety from in-thread suspicion. At no point was the role unkillable, practical or otherwise, and when Rev was actually even vaguely on the radar, he would have been lynched without anyone knowing about the "all the votes" thing at all (no exaggeration, though he MIGHT have needed L+1 at that point at most).

HOWEVER... None of that is relevant. What I just said was the theory. The reality is that all of the SK's tools in that game ended up being irrelevant. Rev would have won the game without a scratch anyway. I don't remember so hopefully someone out there does, but I don't think he ever evaded any night kills during the body of the game. He may have evaded one night action result, but the fact that someone would normally be expected to question such a negation sort of evens that out. (I also don't think he was investigated or anything, I think it was just a mostly irrelevant action.) Nothing happened in the game to Rev that a completely ordinary last-man-standing SK couldn't get through. A very critical difference occurs during the game-ending night phase: Prophet, the last good guy standing, was a vig and could have killed Rev, winning for the town side at the last second. However, the point stands. A garden variety, un-bolstered SK would have made it to the last phase of the game and would have won if Prophet was out of bullets or if he was killed instead of anybody else. Regular SK's CAN win given the right circumstances. They need one of 2 things to happen. In a straight "mafia-town-sk" game, it needs to come down to 1 town, 1 mafia, and 1 SK and the SK has to not be lynched. Otherwise, if the GAME is conditioned to give the SK a chance, they can make it. Outbreak was a scenario where a lot of information was in the dark and there were a bunch of groups around so an indy could skate through (even without the extra padding).

You need to look at the game being modded and figure out an end game scenario where each of the factions can win. The scenarios don't even need to be equal, but they have to be plausible.

---

I really don't like the "leave the game and win half way through" thing. I don't think it's nearly as fun. You're giving a disadvantaged role the "benefit" of only having to play half the game. Being a fan of surviving, I don't like making my goal to stop participating 2 weeks before everyone else. I'm not going to suggest that such roles should be tossed out, but there's better ways to handle things. Roles are like organisms and the "climate" you create for the game determines what organisms can thrive. Certain roles work better in warring families games and certain roles work better in dark games, for example. Also, if a role has an unfortunate advantage, you can introduce "predators" to make things harder. If you've got a cult in a dark game, you're going to need to have a mill of investigators (perhaps with some sort of provable recruitment immunity) to combat it. Dealing with cults in general, for example, really requires a climate where people can prove they aren't cult one way or another or you're basically turning things into the movie Groundhog Day where everyone has to prove themselves over and over.

---

Also, a last note, if you want to introduce something new to a game, we, being old dogs, aren't going to catch on to new tricks very quickly.

The fake forensic investigator in CC? The vampire thing in Dust? The smoke monster?

They're great ideas, but to keep them from turning into game-flipping deus ex machina, you almost need to ruin them. It's really hard to make some stuff work. The best way to handle crazy mechanics like that are to make them "self destruct buttons" for powerful roles. However, when I say "powerful", I don't mean "gargantuan". In my opinion, a randomized game mechanic that kills or roleblocks (CC storm, smoke monster) is kind of too much. The CC storm didn't end like the monster could have, but the monster actually ended players' gameplay experiences with a virtual roll of the dice and to kill it we needed to lynch a mod. It was clever and I appreciate the brilliance, but killing is a big deal. The hints were subtle and/or temporary and only accident would actually result in something happening and that isn't nearly as cool as someone figuring it out. When you take into consideration that people spent fair amounts of time trying to figure out what the deal was with the things I mentioned, you see how it kind of surrounds the game in an aura. They're garlic flavored game mechanics. :p

(Also, the fake FI wasn't really that bad. It was just mishandled. Maybe I have unfair bias, though, seeing as it probably helped us win that game.)

[eayragt]

Rev did avoid one nightkill from the L4D scum group in Outbreak. However, that was his only night kill he avoided, and he was never anywhere near getting lynched. I can understand people saying he was overpowered - but it didn't matter. He could have been oneshot bulletproof with no lynch protection, and he still would have won Outbreak.

MJD - I do agree with you that people don't often get mechanics that mods think they will. Another example of that would have been derek's Pokemon game where two players became one Pokemon (or something like that). Neither would die until both were killed, but scum never got that, so wasted resources on just one of the players. In derek's mind it was probably balanced, however it worked out dominating the game, and with so few scum in that game it probably shifted the balance.

But then the question is do you want to hint at new abilities that might just end up giving things away? PM hints may work, but these are the types of things you either get on Day 1 or don't get at all. HH2's dream ability wasa good tool for this.

But MJD I have to disagree with some part of your post, and that about beign primiarily about survival, and anything random (or a win condition) cutting that time down. I think that mentality's really bad for a game of mafia when the majority of people aren't going to be lasting the game, and a large portion won't reach halfway. I accept surviving is an achievement (having only done it once) but it isn't the be all and end all - half a game played isn't a failure (all the time) and nor should it be, otherwise you're setting up a large portion of players to fail.

[BHK1978]

I agree with you on the first part. On the first night I never try and target the big name players for the most part. Because in the back of my mind I am always thinking, "What if I target Wallbanger, he gets killed, and there is someone watching him." (Just using Wallbanger as an example). I mean I could be a Protector and then the watcher can come in the thread and say they saw me and the killer targeting Wallbanger so one of us has to be Scum. Well that forces me to have to out my abilitly. Therefore, I tend to try and stay away from the bigger names.

As for the Smoke Monster, I had no problem with it. Granted, I was not killed by it but still. There was a way to kill it (albeit it a very tough way because I know I would have never been able to get the hints), and it really is no different than getting killed by a VIG or Serial Killer who has not sent in their night PM.

[GruntMark]

They're great ideas, but to keep them from turning into game-flipping deus ex machina, you almost need to ruin them. It's really hard to make some stuff work. The best way to handle crazy mechanics like that are to make them "self destruct buttons" for powerful roles. However, when I say "powerful", I don't mean "gargantuan". In my opinion, a randomized game mechanic that kills or roleblocks (CC storm, smoke monster) is kind of too much. The CC storm didn't end like the monster could have, but the monster actually ended players' gameplay experiences with a virtual roll of the dice and to kill it we needed to lynch a mod. It was clever and I appreciate the brilliance, but killing is a big deal. The hints were subtle and/or temporary and only accident would actually result in something happening and that isn't nearly as cool as someone figuring it out. When you take into consideration that people spent fair amounts of time trying to figure out what the deal was with the things I mentioned, you see how it kind of surrounds the game in an aura. They're garlic flavored game mechanics. :p

(Also, the fake FI wasn't really that bad. It was just mishandled. Maybe I have unfair bias, though, seeing as it probably helped us win that game.)

If you take issue with the mechanics of the storm or the smoke monster, where is the line drawn? Do we not RNG mandatory abilities that dont get a PM sent in? Mandatory kills? I dont see a difference.

I think the storm and smokey where both handled well. Bias? Sure. But neither decided the game for their side. In fact, they both probably hindered the side that ended up winning anyways.

As for the SKer leaving early, ways to fix that to. MLT had to reach her monetary goal AND survive. And the continued flow of money gave her incentive to put in some overtime. So, theres one solution. Im sure more creative mods can come up with plenty of others.

Im just no longer onboard with the traditional SKer win condition. Everyone should have an equal chance at onset (or as close as you can aim for) of winning. Tossing in a SKer and not giving them a fair chance to win just cause you need the extra kills strikes me as lazy modding.

[moon_lit_tears]

If you take issue with the mechanics of the storm or the smoke monster, where is the line drawn? Do we not RNG mandatory abilities that dont get a PM sent in? Mandatory kills? I dont see a difference.

I think the storm and smokey where both handled well. Bias? Sure. But neither decided the game for their side. In fact, they both probably hindered the side that ended up winning anyways.

As for the SKer leaving early, ways to fix that to. MLT had to reach her monetary goal AND survive. And the continued flow of money gave her incentive to put in some overtime. So, theres one solution. Im sure more creative mods can come up with plenty of others.

Im just no longer onboard with the traditional SKer win condition. Everyone should have an equal chance at onset (or as close as you can aim for) of winning. Tossing in a SKer and not giving them a fair chance to win just cause you need the extra kills strikes me as lazy modding.


Not because it's one of my favorite roles/games, but yes that role was great.

I think the SK is at a huge disadvantage like most Indy players.

Now this wouldn't be a thread without a huge block of text from MJ.

DJ I didn't mean just you. I don't think it's fair to *fix* a role depending on who has it. If people look at someone because of a name and not play that makes them a bad townie. Granted night 1 is almost predictable, but like Mr B says. It comes and goes. I agree.

Each player has the same chance of being town or scum. Therefor should have the same chance of being investigated.

By changing a role because it's in the hands of a *vet* or *great player* doesn't seem in the spirit of the game. I could be wrong though.

Anyway that a all for my rant. :)

[Astil]

Huh. Never played a broken game, but maybe that's because I don't play to win, I play to have fun?

/shrug

[Antithesis]

They're great ideas, but to keep them from turning into game-flipping deus ex machina, you almost need to ruin them. It's really hard to make some stuff work. The best way to handle crazy mechanics like that are to make them "self destruct buttons" for powerful roles. However, when I say "powerful", I don't mean "gargantuan". In my opinion, a randomized game mechanic that kills or roleblocks (CC storm, smoke monster) is kind of too much. The CC storm didn't end like the monster could have, but the monster actually ended players' gameplay experiences with a virtual roll of the dice and to kill it we needed to lynch a mod. It was clever and I appreciate the brilliance, but killing is a big deal. The hints were subtle and/or temporary and only accident would actually result in something happening and that isn't nearly as cool as someone figuring it out. When you take into consideration that people spent fair amounts of time trying to figure out what the deal was with the things I mentioned, you see how it kind of surrounds the game in an aura. They're garlic flavored game mechanics. :p

(Also, the fake FI wasn't really that bad. It was just mishandled. Maybe I have unfair bias, though, seeing as it probably helped us win that game.)



This I agree with absolutely. Its very rare that the playerbase ever catches on to some scheme of the mods or is able to discern behind the scenes changes with scum because that information is often treated as priviledged.

For example, I was part of a successful usurpation in FG Mafia that resulted in a change in our scum groups name. This was never clearly shown (perhaps because the former Don was lynched and not night killed). Same thing happened in HH2. But even with the scum group's name change and color changing it never occurred to me or most others that the group had been altered.

Or how about the Mercenary mechanism in games. It is very rare that a write up shows the process of someone getting paid off to kill... it usually takes players coming forward to share that info(assuming someone does).

Yes this is a narrative issue, but it impacts on game balance because it entails essential game information that is kept from the town until the game is over.

I think mods need to keep in mind that there needs to be a narrative theme to their tricks and gimmicks seperate from however they want to describe player characters. What I am saying is, there can't be twists and turns if you first don't establish enough of something to then twist it.

Its true of me as a player that I often don't even try to bother explaining strange stuff in games or even give much credence to theories attempting such. Some gimmicks are important to the game, but without the mod illuminating them more often, it just becomes hypothesizing... in those situations I just hunker down and concentrate on finding scum or killing townies and figure the real explanation will come after the game is over.

[Antithesis]

Not to toot horns, but I'll give an example of where a gimmick worked, and was made clear at the outset what was going on.

Marvel Mafia, from the very first write up, Rev established what the scum were looking for, and quickly after that he showed you why they wanted it and it becomes apparent over time what it would mean to the town if they got it. No one could read that game and become shocked that Outlaw eventually became as powerful as he did as Thanos because the town was warned every night about what was coming, and they had an entire Mason group dedicated to stopping it.

Yes it takes extra planning and more effort to write out, but in the end no one from town could say they didn't know what was going on, or it was cheap or unfair, etcetc.

[Astil]

Does this imply that because I don't get investigated early and often I'm a bad player?

[eayragt]

Does this imply that because I don't get investigated early and often I'm a bad player?

No, because bad players often get investigated early too :cool:.

[Astil]

No, because bad players often get investigated early too :cool:.

So what DOES that make me?

[eayragt]

So what DOES that make me?

A good Cult Leader?

[moon_lit_tears]

A good Cult Leader?

I Don't like you anymore.....:(

[Astil]

A good Cult Leader?

Shuddyouface... :P

[The Two]

On the subject of how to give the SK a chance to win; it was that concern which led us to give the SK a delayed (poisoner) kill in Medical Mafia. That way a tracker or watcher wouldn't immediately make the connection between the SK targetting somebody and the player dying. It would take a concentrated targetting of the same player on consecutive nights to get an idea of what was going on.

It was all thrown out a little when Kobe (our SK) started basically announcing that the SK had a delayed kill - something which hadn't occured to the town by that point - and led to her own downfall. No matter how hard you plan, you can't make allowances for stupidity. :D

[djthefunkchris]

Each player has the same chance of being town or scum. Therefor should have the same chance of being investigated.

By changing a role because it's in the hands of a *vet* or *great player* doesn't seem in the spirit of the game. I could be wrong though.

Anyway that a all for my rant. :)

Hmm, see this is what I'm not talking about. I really don't understand how you keep coming to this conclusion of what I was saying.

I'm not saying "Wait and see who gets what role, and change it". I'm saying, before the game starts, make sure the game is balanced... meaning, do Scum (or town) have a fighting and FAIR chance of winning? Can all sides equally achieve their win conditions.

This before anyone gets a role at all. I merely used an example that some people will always be investigated, etc. at least to a point. So you have to consider the possibility that scum (or sk, or whatever) will be investigated, and do they have a way to block the investigation. IER said exactly what I was talking about. As I said, I don't know where you get the "change the role depending on who gets it" from. That's not anything near what I meant.

[eayragt]

Hmm, see this is what I'm not talking about. I really don't understand how you keep coming to this conclusion of what I was saying.

It's because one of the first things you said was

I just want to say that certain people are always going to be investigated in every game (I'm one it seems). To not have a way to protect these people when scum, you might as well just figure them out of the equation from the start as far as balancing is concerned, no matter how the ability works.

I think you started off not quite saying what you meant to say, which had me going "what are you talking about?" before realising that actually wasn't what you were talking about.

[djthefunkchris]

It's because one of the first things you said was



I think you started off not quite saying what you meant to say, which had me going "what are you talking about?" before realising that actually wasn't what you were talking about.

/nod, I knew I said that, but I can't fathum equating that with "You should change the role depending on whom gets it".

That was just a "put yourself in the place of the players" kind of talk, but sorry for the confusion there. I really didn't mean to make it sound in any way shape or form that a role should be changed to match a player.

[moon_lit_tears]

Yes that is the part I was going to quote. I took that as If certain people are scum they should have something that allows them to investigate town as an example. If that's not how you meant it imsorry. That's just how it came across to me.

[Astil]

I'm not saying "Wait and see who gets what role, and change it".


Not to butt in, but I got that from your post too.

[Wallbanger]

Not to butt in, but I got that from your post too.

I didn't.

[djthefunkchris]

I didn't.

I sometimes believe it's because my posts are so long, and people tend to think they get the content by reading the first few sentences, and the last few, and have what is said.

In alot of content (instructions, books, etc.) this is actually true. However, I of jump around when I post.

[moon_lit_tears]

I sometimes believe it's because my posts are so long, and people tend to think they get the content by reading the first few sentences, and the last few, and have what is said.

In alot of content (instructions, books, etc.) this is actually true. However, I of jump around when I post.


I read the entire thing.

Just that first part kind of stuck with me through the entire thing. Like I said if that's not what you meant I apologize. :)

[Astil]

I didn't.

Ah, it must be an old people thing then :cool::cool::cool:

/shrug

I dunno if I read it wrong, but it was the middle paragraphs that gave me that impression. If I just read the first and last pieces I actually would've gotten what you were trying to get across. (and did for most other people) :p

[djthefunkchris]

I read the entire thing.

Just that first part kind of stuck with me through the entire thing. Like I said if that's not what you meant I apologize. :)

No worries, you weren't the only one. I'm glad I could clear it up.

I would never suggest changing roles to suit the person stuck with it....

With that said, you do get what I am saying though, right?

[mjdgoldeneye]

But MJD I have to disagree with some part of your post, and that about beign primiarily about survival, and anything random (or a win condition) cutting that time down. I think that mentality's really bad for a game of mafia when the majority of people aren't going to be lasting the game, and a large portion won't reach halfway. I accept surviving is an achievement (having only done it once) but it isn't the be all and end all - half a game played isn't a failure (all the time) and nor should it be, otherwise you're setting up a large portion of players to fail.

I just meant that modifying an otherwise underpowered role so they only have to play half a game isn't an ideal situation. I regret giving the Shaun of the Dead guys the win condition I gave them in Outbreak because the people who won with those roles just sat around and then the game ended for them. That isn't very fun.

For a "walk away early and win" mechanic to be justified, the role that has such a condition needs to be poorly equipped to last longer than necessary (otherwise they're overpowered). Instead of giving a crappy role a stunted win condition, just make the role better. No one wants to play half a game with half a role.

If you take issue with the mechanics of the storm or the smoke monster, where is the line drawn? Do we not RNG mandatory abilities that dont get a PM sent in? Mandatory kills? I dont see a difference.

I see a very distinct difference. As was said, players play, mods mod. When you take the in game experience out of the player's hands or at least intentionally subvert their expectations with mechanics contrary to the normal rules, you're making it "players play, mods mod, and random game mechanics play too but can't win or lose". Players are supposed to be the ones who determine what happens in a game and players only. That's what mafia is all about, Charlie Brown. Random mechanics are okay. However, EVERYTHING has to trace back to a player making a decision. A disembodied RNG isn't swayed by player choice.

Do you randomly determine mandatory abilities? Yea. However, that, by default, disobeys the "players play" part of the golden mafia rule. Players aren't supposed to wander off and not participate. There's a big difference between a player failing at a fundamental aspect of the game (showing up) and a mechanic working exactly as it's supposed to, no? Randomly assigning mandatory abilities is something that should be avoided at any necessary cost (like by replacing someone who misses sending in such an ability with zero tolerance). It's bad and to be avoided. Adding mechanics solely to replicate a player not showing up is clearly to be avoided too.

It's all about the unwritten expectations that are signed by both players and mods. Mandatory kills SHOULD exist because players sort of count on them. When kills disappear from write-ups, all hell breaks loose. We've all seen it. The number of kills in a write-up gets it's own several hours of conversation every game. Can you make kills non-mandatory? Yes. However, mods have to take the resulting player reaction into consideration just like any other mechanic. The entire purpose of randomly determining targets for mandatory abilities that aren't sent in is to establish consistency.

Consistency is important within games and in the grand scheme of things. As a few people have said, something radically changing inside of a game really throws things of balance. This doesn't necessary have to be bad, but it should always be expected and considered in game creation. Cults usurp the balance nightly because they throw every bit of consistency into question continually. Scum group names suddenly changing have repercussions as well.

If you add something unprecedented, you're really skewing the balance by simply injecting novelty. That's fine as long as you can find a way to keep it from running the show. (Nothing we've seen has really been that bothersome, but in my opinion some have been unideal.)

Does this imply that because I don't get investigated early and often I'm a bad player?

Such behavior hasn't consistently yielded positive results so it isn't a behavioral trait for players to investigate you early. If someone investigates you early a few times with success, it'll catch on quick.

[djthefunkchris]

(Snipped: GOOD GRIEF)
Everyone doesn't play like you do, nor do they feel the same.... Everyone doesn't play how I do either, and on and on. We are all unique people.

You keep going on about consistancy and such, but honestly your don't really have any idea what actually happens, because you don't pay attention enough to see it. You actually think that a "Scum" result or "Town" result going a certain way multiple times would change someone's mind that wants to know if they can trust someone else or not? Your only looking at if from one viewpoint in that respect: Catching scum.

Sometimes people get investigated to just relieve another person's uncertainty.... For example, maybe I really like playing with Anti in the game, but he scares the heck out of me if scum. Perhaps everytime I get an investigation ability I'm going to investigate him, so that I can at least deduct that he is either town or don. From there I feel more comfortable and can move on to other's.

[moon_lit_tears]

No worries, you weren't the only one. I'm glad I could clear it up.

I would never suggest changing roles to suit the person stuck with it....

With that said, you do get what I am saying though, right?

Yes. With what Mr B and I have talked about and what you are saying makes sense.

I do think a lot of the games are great. Even those that people complain about. I think it's more because I just like to have fun.

But yeah keeping things balanced for both sides is a must.

I personally have only seen one mod get to my *I won't join list* so yeah....


Anyway carry on..:p

[mjdgoldeneye]

Everyone doesn't play like you do, nor do they feel the same.... Everyone doesn't play how I do either, and on and on. We are all unique people.

You keep going on about consistancy and such, but honestly your don't really have any idea what actually happens, because you don't pay attention enough to see it. You actually think that a "Scum" result or "Town" result going a certain way multiple times would change someone's mind that wants to know if they can trust someone else or not? Your only looking at if from one viewpoint in that respect: Catching scum.

Sometimes people get investigated to just relieve another person's uncertainty.... For example, maybe I really like playing with Anti in the game, but he scares the heck out of me if scum. Perhaps everytime I get an investigation ability I'm going to investigate him, so that I can at least deduct that he is either town or don. From there I feel more comfortable and can move on to other's.

If you don't want to give me the courtesy of actually reading the whole post, just skip to the last paragraph or so. ;)

Humans are humans. That's a fact. Take it or leave it but it doesn't change the truth. I've got 2 centuries of other people's work behind me. It's weird, but it always resolves back to be pretty predictable. You don't need a doctorate to just look at the big picture.

I'm not speaking to individual behavior, I'm speaking to group behavior.

It's like the nature of a coin. It's always a 50/50 shot on every trial. You can get heads every single time forever and ever but in the grand scheme of things, the nature of coins is to come up 50/50.

Any one player can do the same thing all the time. It can be rational, irrational, spiteful, well-meant, randomized, or whatever. The more people you're talking about, the quicker it zeros out because personal behavior isn't secret. People are good at learning. Hell, stuff tends to even out on accident. People don't even have to TRY. Depending on the group, it can take ages for memes (not internet memes, the original meaning) to develop and fade, but they do. It's not a mafia thing. It's a "why we've developed civilization" thing.

Also, I apologize if you notice me starting to take your responses to me less seriously considering you just assign personalities to people and then demand they fit into them. At this point, I've went through and read more games here than people would ever expect of me. It's ignorant and not very polite to TELL someone that they don't know what's going on. I tell YOU when that happens in an effort to be honest. Eventually I reconcile for it in the end (even if it means reading games months after they end). If you don't take ME seriously, then this is just a chicken chase.

I don't expect anyone to pretend I'm an expert in psychology, but this stuff is simple. I'm not trying to make it look like some deep insight.

Certain players do certain things. If every person knew what every other person was likely to do all the time, we wouldn't have any reason to play this game because we'd be able to call all of each other's shots and it'd be boring and stupid. However, I KNOW you like to indulge in the more social side of things and both A) pay attention and B) don't take the ins and outs of things too seriously. That makes your play style antagonistic to my play style and I always try to keep tabs on your stance on me because you're going to naturally be more likely to thwart me (on purpose or otherwise) than a lot of people. I could put up a sincere post where I point out a lot of common knowledge facts and I'll still have to be wary of you basically saying "too long, didn't read, you feel like scum" and voting for me anyway (and sometimes you're right). Astil does that to me too.

Then there's the people who I get into personality wars with (GM, Glotnot, Anti, praguepride, probably others, varies a lot). Sometimes by the end the point doesn't even matter and everyone just wants us to stop posting. :p

Then of course there's people who I can normally trust to more or less be on the same page as me in the thread regardless of how we actually feel about each other's alignment (Arrows, MLT, eayragt, TBP).

None of what I said actually has to be true. However, that's how I feel. Once taking stock in those ideas stops working, I'll stop considering them. Everyone has these sorts of tendencies. None of them last forever. THAT is my point. Sooner or later you'll have a good scum game. Did I make a thread appealing to the mods when, for about 2 years, I kept getting forced to claim in the first 3 phases way too often? No! I just kept reminding people what was happening until me reminding them became so played out that it was a joke. Finally, late last year, it started fading away and I suddenly started making to the end of games without having to fully claim in the first 11 minutes. There's a lot of reasons why that happened (at least half of which are completely random happenstance), but the point is that it stopped (thankfully). :D

[djthefunkchris]

If you don't want to give me the courtesy of actually reading the whole post, just skip to the last paragraph or so. ;)
Fair enough.
Humans are humans. That's a fact. Take it or leave it but it doesn't change the truth. I've got 2 centuries of other people's work behind me. It's weird, but it always resolves back to be pretty predictable. You don't need a doctorate to just look at the big picture. No, but you do need proper information to come to a realistic conclusion, something many people don't realise they do not do.

I'm not speaking to individual behavior, I'm speaking to group behavior. Ok. I'm with you.

It's like the nature of a coin. It's always a 50/50 shot on every trial. You can get heads every single time forever and ever but in the grand scheme of things, the nature of coins is to come up 50/50. Actually testing was done. Here again your assuming you have proper information. Although it's not "HUGE" difference, it's not 50/50.

<TABLE border=1><TBODY><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>TOTAL FLIPS</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER># HEADS</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER># TAILS</CENTER></TD><TD width=95># (HEADS-TAILS)
</TD><TD width=86>PROP. HEADS
</TD><TD width=82>PROP. TAILS
</TD></TR><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>1,000</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>510</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>490</CENTER></TD><TD width=95>
<CENTER>20</CENTER></TD><TD width=86>
<CENTER>.51</CENTER></TD><TD width=82>
<CENTER>.49</CENTER></TD></TR><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>10,000</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>5,050</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>4,950</CENTER></TD><TD width=95>
<CENTER>100</CENTER></TD><TD width=86>
<CENTER>.505</CENTER></TD><TD width=82>
<CENTER>.495</CENTER></TD></TR><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>1,000,000</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>500,400
</TD><TD width=114>499,600
</TD><TD width=95>
<CENTER>800</CENTER></TD><TD width=86>
<CENTER>.5004</CENTER></TD><TD width=82><CENTER>.4996</CENTER></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Any one player can do the same thing all the time. It can be rational, irrational, spiteful, well-meant, randomized, or whatever. The more people you're talking about, the quicker it zeros out because personal behavior isn't secret. People are good at learning. Hell, stuff tends to even out on accident. People don't even have to TRY. Depending on the group, it can take ages for memes (not internet memes, the original meaning) to develop and fade, but they do. It's not a mafia thing. It's a "why we've developed civilization" thing.
See, this is where your taking in too much for very little. Your talking huge number's, but even the largest mafia game is very small numbers. It's like a "cult" so to speak. Just because the world around them is NOT thinking the same as they are, does not mean that they do not think differently then the rest of the world. When you take into account EVERYONE, then it becomes a more general influence... However, we are talking mafia, with a very, very small amount of people, of which a huge percent come for a cult phenom game like TEW or WMMA, etc. You take that small group, and make another small group that also like to play Mafia, you have a different outlook then the rest of the world.

For example: We are all from different places around the globe. GDS is a small company. We are just a small group of people scattered around the globe that likes both the game(s), and mafia. So you have a unique bunch that thinks differently in comparison to your everyday life... and even more unique then the rest of the globe (not saying that's a bad thing).

Also, I apologize if you notice me starting to take your responses to me less seriously considering you just assign personalities to people and then demand they fit into them. At this point, I've went through and read more games here than people would ever expect of me. It's ignorant and not very polite to TELL someone that they don't know what's going on. I tell YOU when that happens in an effort to be honest. Eventually I reconcile for it in the end (even if it means reading games months after they end). If you don't take ME seriously, then this is just a chicken chase.
I take you seriously, I just think sometimes your too unspecific to be really saying anything, and other times your just not really saying anything. If I take another 30 words to say what I just said, I would be in the same boat as you.

That doesn't mean what you have to say isn't important. However, you come to your conclusion with ussually a very weak statement to support it, and then generalise everything down by the end of your speach. It's unfair, and it's unreasonable for you to feel that people should just believe what you said is more important then what they said. It's actually absurd to the point of feeling as though your trying to put someone down for not being as intelligent as yourself, even though it's obvious your missing what's being said.

However, I do feel what you or anyone else has to say is important, and I do not wish to belittle anyone's opinions. I wouldn't want mine to be. So don't take me the wrong way (and you ussually do). Read what I'm saying as if I'm saying it about someone else, and then if you feel that I was being cruel or extremely rude, let me know... because no matter what you think that has never been my intention, especially with you. Your one of my favorite people around here, even if it's because I like to mess with you or like to see people aggrevate you..... But it's not in a mean way. It's more in a fun-lovin' way, and never meant to actually bring you grief.

[I don't expect anyone to pretend I'm an expert in psychology, but this stuff is simple. I'm not trying to make it look like some deep insight.
Ok.
[Certain players do certain things. If every person knew what every other person was likely to do all the time, we wouldn't have any reason to play this game because we'd be able to call all of each other's shots and it'd be boring and stupid. However, I KNOW you like to indulge in the more social side of things and both A) pay attention and B) don't take the ins and outs of things too seriously. That makes your play style antagonistic to my play style and I always try to keep tabs on your stance on me because you're going to naturally be more likely to thwart me (on purpose or otherwise) than a lot of people. I could put up a sincere post where I point out a lot of common knowledge facts and I'll still have to be wary of you basically saying "too long, didn't read, you feel like scum" and voting for me anyway (and sometimes you're right). Astil does that to me too.
Because it's a tell tell side of you in the game. Sometimes it just means you dont' want anyone to know your ability, but that's rare.

[Then there's the people who I get into personality wars with (GM, Glotnot, Anti, praguepride, probably others, varies a lot). Sometimes by the end the point doesn't even matter and everyone just wants us to stop posting. :p
Because it goes on and on about nothing in the game itself. We can tell it's not going anywhere (like leading us to a lynch), and it sometimes appears childish.

[Then of course there's people who I can normally trust to more or less be on the same page as me in the thread regardless of how we actually feel about each other's alignment (Arrows, MLT, eayragt, TBP).
I think some people take you too seriously, and try to change your opinion. These that you just mentioned probably just acknowledge your opinion and realise it's your own thing and dont' try to change your mind. It's something I need to work on myself.

[None of what I said actually has to be true. However, that's how I feel. Once taking stock in those ideas stops working, I'll stop considering them. Everyone has these sorts of tendencies. None of them last forever. THAT is my point. Sooner or later you'll have a good scum game. Did I make a thread appealing to the mods when, for about 2 years, I kept getting forced to claim in the first 3 phases way too often? No! I just kept reminding people what was happening until me reminding them became so played out that it was a joke. Finally, late last year, it started fading away and I suddenly started making to the end of games without having to fully claim in the first 11 minutes. There's a lot of reasons why that happened (at least half of which are completely random happenstance), but the point is that it stopped (thankfully). :D

I've had many good scum games (at least I felt they were). My main goal is having fun, so I rate it differently. And to be honest, I sort of like having the challenge of trying to pull out a victory even when the odds are we won't get one. When you do, it's very fullfilling.

Now going throughout this whole post you just made, can you tell me in one paragraph what I was to get out of it? You seen, I read and responded to everything, yet I have no idea if you agree or dissagree with me because your being vague.

EDIT: And so you know, this isn't a personal thing. I've won more then I lost since I started playing again, and even in this last game I made it to end game. I was town.... and made it to end game! Let me repeat it one more time. I WAS TOWN, and no one killed me!!

I didn't post this to make things easier for me MJD. I Posted this to help future mods hopefully, in how to balance out a game. People seem to agree when they understand what I said (I take full responsibility for not making it clear in the first paragraph, which I should have). Other's will either ignore it or go "hey, that's a good point. I'm going to remember that!"

It's not a personal thing for me at all. I'm not looked at half as much as I used to, and everything you said bassically has panned out for me over time (things aren't bad for me personally). Fact is, I would be lieing if I didn't say I miss it, but I always knew I was over-rated:).

[mjdgoldeneye]

This is my last big post. It's almost over. :D Unless you're bored, it isn't really worth reading. If you aren't DJ, definitely don't read anything except maybe the last paragraph. I know I post endlessly about nothing so I'll do my best to protect you from it if I can't stop typing all together. Also, right now, I'm a little loopy on codeine cough medicine (prescribed to me for my cough, not mixed with grape kool-aid or anything nefarious like that... :rolleyes:). However, the stuff I say below isn't BS. Don't make me whip out the textbooks. :D

Actually testing was done. Here again your assuming you have proper information. Although it's not "HUGE" difference, it's not 50/50.

<TABLE border=1><TBODY><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>TOTAL FLIPS</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER># HEADS</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER># TAILS</CENTER></TD><TD width=95># (HEADS-TAILS)
</TD><TD width=86>PROP. HEADS
</TD><TD width=82>PROP. TAILS
</TD></TR><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>1,000</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>510</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>490</CENTER></TD><TD width=95>
<CENTER>20</CENTER></TD><TD width=86>
<CENTER>.51</CENTER></TD><TD width=82>
<CENTER>.49</CENTER></TD></TR><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>10,000</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>5,050</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>
<CENTER>4,950</CENTER></TD><TD width=95>
<CENTER>100</CENTER></TD><TD width=86>
<CENTER>.505</CENTER></TD><TD width=82>
<CENTER>.495</CENTER></TD></TR><TR><TD width=68>
<CENTER>1,000,000</CENTER></TD><TD width=114>500,400
</TD><TD width=114>499,600
</TD><TD width=95>
<CENTER>800</CENTER></TD><TD width=86>
<CENTER>.5004</CENTER></TD><TD width=82><CENTER>.4996</CENTER></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

This is... I'll do my best... :p

I'm not even going to come close to putting into words how mixed up what you said was. I'm not using hyperbole to insult you, I'm just saying I'd need to explain the scientific method, probability, chaos theory, a little calculus, physics, and a few things I don't even think I CAN explain on my own in order to properly refute you. :p Here's the hyper abridged (yes, this is abridged) version.

1. You can't determine the probability of something (well, most things without actual mathematical functions attached to them) through testing. All you can do is get a more and more accurate approximation. Do you know calculus? If not, let me just say that this sort of thing is like the concept of a limit. Let's just say it was a big deal when Isaac Newton worked out how limits and the things related to them worked. You'd have to flip a coin an infinite amount of times without anything in the environment, universe, or the coin itself changing to get an actual measurement.

2.Objects don't ACTUALLY have legitimate and constant probabilities in real life. The heads and tails of coins have different masses and textures so using basic knowledge of physics you can deduce that flipping them won't give you actual 50/50 odds. Plus, ANYTHING changing can change the outcome. A little breeze, the coin wearing down (which it's doing constantly, little by little), or anything you can fathom simply happening NEAR the coin changes the odds. I was talking about an ideal, massless, uniform coin. It was just a metaphor. We can't have perfection in the real world. However, NONE of this has any bearing on my coin reference in the post you quoted. The actual odds doesn't matter. You could have a rigged coin that's 70/30, but so long as nothing screws the coin up so much that the odds change by an amount that human beings can actually notice, it doesn't matter. You took a minor extraneous detail from a metaphor and tried explaining it literally with incomplete and inaccurate information. I'm not holding it against you, but our whole conversation accidentally flew off a cliff (hence this crazy tangent).

3. Each coin flip is an individual trial. As I said before, you can flip a coin a million times and get a million heads and that has nothing to do with the odds of getting a head or tail. If you DID get a million heads in a row, that doesn't mean you have any more chance of getting a head than a tail on the next flip. (If the coin is rigged you may, but once again, not the point. You can get a million heads with a coin skewed 99/1 towards tails. Doesn't matter.)

4. The data you presented is completely meaningless out of context. Coins in general are not skewed towards any one result. It has been shown with some level of consistent replication that modern American coins will skew one way or the other, but you didn't even say which one (probably the quarter). However, I'm not talking about quarters or dimes or nickels or pennies. Just "coins". Once again, you're getting into the individual factor but THAT doesn't even matter.

5. My ENTIRE point was that inherent nature doesn't have anything to do with what you witness over a finite period of time. You gave me evidence supporting that! Do you even realize? Notice how the coin looks less and less skewed as it is flipped. It goes from 51% to heads to 50.5% to 50.04%. You were talking about how here things don't work consistently. My point was that looking at a few months or only a few people here and there is meaningless, but looking at GDS for a few years and the full player base makes a difference. You supported that point. I think you both didn't realize what my point was AND didn't realize what you were saying. We're not in the same city, let alone on the same page... :p

Don't be offended as I'm not trying to throw out big academic terms and drown out your point with random jargon. It's just that things went all loopy in that section of post and I wanted to clear things up because of just how loopy they went.

As for the rest, the only thing I have to say in response is that when I provide actual proof and give "what I am saying is true" speeches in game, scum or town or otherwise, I'm normally actually trying to get people to pay attention to real, legit facts. I'm very selective about what I use to defend myself and I almost never just make stuff up (and when I do it's tragic and hilariously bad). When I fake claim, I make my claim fit the facts, not the other way around. When I'm scum and people lynch me despite facts, it's not a problem because if they trusted me, I'd win (or at least not get lynched). Normally I'm able to make it look like I know something only town would know or that I have an ability only town would have by hiding stuff people don't know I have. For example, in CC, I used info from other people in my group to hold up my claim (knowing Arrows was a blackjack dealer, for example). I also used preexisting information about the mercenary to try to get the mercenary lynched (which would have made it look like I got the info from my "role"). Then, I used OTHER info that I had to save myself without just saying "nothing to see here, move along". I don't backpedal and I don't get caught in lies (almost never at least until something I didn't know about suddenly appears). Even when just making crap up would help, I avoid it with negative repercussions sometimes because I just suck at it. That said, when I'm town and actually have a solid defense of real facts, and I get lynched anyway, it sucks. I know I can't have it both ways, so what I ask for in the game is for people to at least admit they can't explain my facts away if they can't find holes in my defense. I don't ask that so I can get cheap satisfaction while dying, it's so people can't say "Oh, I knew he was scum" and pretend like they figured something out despite never actually addressing the elephant in the room that I desperately flail around whenever I'm about to get lynched. It makes it look like ya'll aren't even trying... :p

+5 internets to you if you made it to the end without using any health potions/taking any bathroom breaks.

[djthefunkchris]

Don't be offended as I'm not trying to throw out big academic terms and drown out your point with random jargon. It's just that things went all loopy in that section of post and I wanted to clear things up because of just how loopy they went.
Believe it or not I took Calculus. In fact Math is my best subject, if I have one. Now don't get scared, because I'm not going to go into it THAT much.

Believe it or not, I actually agree (and agreed during my last post) with you. However, there you go again.

First off, your talking about theorys. Theorys are not proofs. Proof's have been proven. Theorys have not. Scientifically, a bumblebee shouldn't be able to fly, because the equation for flight doesn't hold true with them. Not that they fly all that great, lol.

Anyways, we can only be talking about the first number in your theory. 1 or 200 mafia players in a small environment of GDS gamers. SO you even if your assumptions were correct, it would only be 51% of the time, not the latter 50.04%. We don't have 1 million people to test a theory on here.

As for Chaos Thoery.... come on, we aren't talking about the weather here. We are talking about a little game in a little community. It applies very loosely here, if at all.


As for the rest, the only thing I have to say in response is that when I provide actual proof and give "what I am saying is true" speeches in game, scum or town or otherwise, I'm normally actually trying to get people to pay attention to real, legit facts. I'm very selective about what I use to defend myself and I almost never just make stuff up (and when I do it's tragic and hilariously bad). When I fake claim, I make my claim fit the facts, not the other way around. When I'm scum and people lynch me despite facts, it's not a problem because if they trusted me, I'd win (or at least not get lynched). Normally I'm able to make it look like I know something only town would know or that I have an ability only town would have by hiding stuff people don't know I have. For example, in CC, I used info from other people in my group to hold up my claim (knowing Arrows was a blackjack dealer, for example). I also used preexisting information about the mercenary to try to get the mercenary lynched (which would have made it look like I got the info from my "role"). Then, I used OTHER info that I had to save myself without just saying "nothing to see here, move along". I don't backpedal and I don't get caught in lies (almost never at least until something I didn't know about suddenly appears). Even when just making crap up would help, I avoid it with negative repercussions sometimes because I just suck at it. That said, when I'm town and actually have a solid defense of real facts, and I get lynched anyway, it sucks. I know I can't have it both ways, so what I ask for in the game is for people to at least admit they can't explain my facts away if they can't find holes in my defense. I don't ask that so I can get cheap satisfaction while dying, it's so people can't say "Oh, I knew he was scum" and pretend like they figured something out despite never actually addressing the elephant in the room that I desperately flail around whenever I'm about to get lynched. It makes it look like ya'll aren't even trying... :p

+5 internets to you if you made it to the end without using any health potions/taking any bathroom breaks.

See... You go on about Chaos theory and the likes, then you say something like this. You don't see the inconsistancy here? When your scuttering around trying to point over there to try to get the fingers from pointing at you, and yet you get lynched anyways, because your scum. It's not because people aren't paying attention. It's because they know your pointing over there so that people won't pay attention to you. It's like throwing a baseball threw the window and going "Hey, look at that! I haven't seen a bluebird this time of year in a long time!" That's not going to make people think it wasn't you breaking the window.... at least not if they are on to you.

You do give yourself away, as do I and other's here, when we are scum. It's only "Natural". You can provide as much chaos as you want to the picture, but in the end, if people are determined and paying attention, it's not going to work.

Now, if you want to have a conversation about mathematical equations, thoerys and proofs, and even delve into science a bit, let me know. We can get a thread going in the dog pound, and have fun with it.

[moon_lit_tears]

You know what would make this thread epic??? Ollie and Kobe putting up huge posts too.

[Derek B]

You know what would make this thread epic??? Ollie and Kobe putting up huge posts too.

Personally, I think Jman should take chunks of it with him to bad. That'd help a lot of people who are trying to keep up. :p

Seriously though, the basic ideas from the start of the thread are a very good baseline for anyone to put a mod together. The basic principle of mafia is uninformed majority vs informed minority, which is where the balance is. In order to maintain balance, you have other roles that go against each other too, as described earlier. It's the basic mafia balance that should be present in any standard game. It's good advice for all mods. :)

[Destiny]

I was thinking about this advice from djthefunkchris earlier today, and will look back at the notes for my upcoming LOST game to make sure that the game is properly balanced.

[mjdgoldeneye]

Believe it or not I took Calculus. In fact Math is my best subject, if I have one. Now don't get scared, because I'm not going to go into it THAT much.

Believe it or not, I actually agree (and agreed during my last post) with you. However, there you go again.

First off, your talking about theorys. Theorys are not proofs. Proof's have been proven. Theorys have not. Scientifically, a bumblebee shouldn't be able to fly, because the equation for flight doesn't hold true with them. Not that they fly all that great, lol.

Anyways, we can only be talking about the first number in your theory. 1 or 200 mafia players in a small environment of GDS gamers. SO you even if your assumptions were correct, it would only be 51% of the time, not the latter 50.04%. We don't have 1 million people to test a theory on here.

As for Chaos Thoery.... come on, we aren't talking about the weather here. We are talking about a little game in a little community. It applies very loosely here, if at all.

That has nothing to do with mafia. You started talking about coins literally. I was talking about coins. Mafia was totally stripped from that whole post until near the end.

Also, your point is totally off about the 51% thing. You're taking random, literal, recorded information about a certain particular coin and trying to apply it somewhere. I was just using a metaphor. The fact I compared things to coin tosses is so totally irrelevant.

Besides, it wouldn't be the number of players, it'd be the number of games. The number of games is continually increasing. The more games played, the more patterns emerge. The number of players is staying about the same. You're supposed to measure the variable and our player base is metaphorically supposed to represent a constant.

See... You go on about Chaos theory and the likes, then you say something like this. You don't see the inconsistancy here? When your scuttering around trying to point over there to try to get the fingers from pointing at you, and yet you get lynched anyways, because your scum. It's not because people aren't paying attention. It's because they know your pointing over there so that people won't pay attention to you. It's like throwing a baseball threw the window and going "Hey, look at that! I haven't seen a bluebird this time of year in a long time!" That's not going to make people think it wasn't you breaking the window.... at least not if they are on to you.

That's not what I do at all. That's a fact. I know because it's something I have direct personal control over. You can't argue otherwise because you aren't me. I think I'd be more of an authority on my own decisions than anyone else, eh? I never use misdirection. Misdirection doesn't work (for me). I point out relevant and direct facts. I know because I purposely set myself up to be able to use them. When I can't, I fail. However, I don't fail by resorting to misdirection. I just use progressively less important facts.

What I actually do would be more like throwing a ball through a window at the exact time that I know someone will be walking by the window with an axe and an "I hate windows" t-shirt. I wouldn't throw the ball through the window in the first place if I couldn't explain how it happened.

If you think I'm trying to point somewhere else to divert attention, I'm not. I'm never doing that. That's such a horribly ill-conceived tactic.

I tell you this because we're not in a game now and you can trust I'm being sincere. If you want to reliably lynch me, the goal would be to either just prove what I'm saying is factually incorrect (which happens a lot without anyone bothering to point it out, as frustratingly ironic as it is... Nothing is worse that being flat out wrong and getting lynched for a DIFFERENT and invalid reason) or try to think of something I might know that you don't know that I could have used to make my claim look believable.

Like, if I say "I have X ability because I know Y". A good way to support lynching me would be to say "You could have known Y because of Z. Therefore you don't necessarily have X ability". A bad way to support lynching me would be to say "You just seem like scum. I think you're trying to trick us". It might work, but you're going to be wrong a lot of the time and it's going to make the person on the other side of the lynch feel crappy for taking the time to defend themselves. I just think, like in the U.S. court of law, that the burden of proof should be on the prosecutor. If someone has a valid defense, ignoring it and hoping for the best is kind of a sham. If someone's defense is invalid, SAY it's invalid and why. It's just better that way. No one feels like they're wasting their time that way.

You do give yourself away, as do I and other's here, when we are scum. It's only "Natural". You can provide as much chaos as you want to the picture, but in the end, if people are determined and paying attention, it's not going to work.

Now, if you want to have a conversation about mathematical equations, thoerys and proofs, and even delve into science a bit, let me know. We can get a thread going in the dog pound, and have fun with it.

You totally didn't get what I was talking about... :p None of my stuff about coins just before had to do with mafia. Most of that post was just a random tangent.

Here you seem to suggest that I at some point was trying to apply chaos theory to my old tactic of randomly throwing doubt on everything. I never said that. Also, I don't do that anymore.

If I understand your misunderstanding correctly, you think that I said that I try to misdirect people with "chaos" like I'm some sort of stage magician. :p

It's the exact opposite, really. I use static, unchanging, unquestioned information that can be relied on by everybody. I hide behind what's already there. Sometimes I get a maze to hide in, sometimes I get a cardboard box. However, I always use real stuff.

Now, when I'm just trying to survive and I don't want my actions to be predicted, I'll sometimes imply contradictory things or whatever in the thread, and this might be what you were thinking of, but that doesn't have to do with defending myself from getting lynched. That's just about trying to avoid getting killed at night.

[Destiny]

I believe that the stubbornness of both djthefunkchris and mjdgoldeneye means that this debate will likely rage on.

[BHK1978]

I believe that the stubbornness of both djthefunkchris and mjdgoldeneye means that this debate will likely rage on.

I was thinking the same thing. I am not sure how this went from talking about mafia and ended up being about Sir Isaac Newton. And people say that I go of topic...:D

[Destiny]

Nevermind. I believe that djthefunkchris' point has been taken and we can all move on, for sure.

[djthefunkchris]

That has nothing to do with mafia. You started talking about coins literally. I was talking about coins. Mafia was totally stripped from that whole post until near the end.

Also, your point is totally off about the 51% thing. You're taking random, literal, recorded information about a certain particular coin and trying to apply it somewhere. I was just using a metaphor. The fact I compared things to coin tosses is so totally irrelevant.

Besides, it wouldn't be the number of players, it'd be the number of games. The number of games is continually increasing. The more games played, the more patterns emerge. The number of players is staying about the same. You're supposed to measure the variable and our player base is metaphorically supposed to represent a constant.



That's not what I do at all. That's a fact. I know because it's something I have direct personal control over. You can't argue otherwise because you aren't me. I think I'd be more of an authority on my own decisions than anyone else, eh? I never use misdirection. Misdirection doesn't work (for me). I point out relevant and direct facts. I know because I purposely set myself up to be able to use them. When I can't, I fail. However, I don't fail by resorting to misdirection. I just use progressively less important facts.

What I actually do would be more like throwing a ball through a window at the exact time that I know someone will be walking by the window with an axe and an "I hate windows" t-shirt. I wouldn't throw the ball through the window in the first place if I couldn't explain how it happened.

If you think I'm trying to point somewhere else to divert attention, I'm not. I'm never doing that. That's such a horribly ill-conceived tactic.

I tell you this because we're not in a game now and you can trust I'm being sincere. If you want to reliably lynch me, the goal would be to either just prove what I'm saying is factually incorrect (which happens a lot without anyone bothering to point it out, as frustratingly ironic as it is... Nothing is worse that being flat out wrong and getting lynched for a DIFFERENT and invalid reason) or try to think of something I might know that you don't know that I could have used to make my claim look believable.

Like, if I say "I have X ability because I know Y". A good way to support lynching me would be to say "You could have known Y because of Z. Therefore you don't necessarily have X ability". A bad way to support lynching me would be to say "You just seem like scum. I think you're trying to trick us". It might work, but you're going to be wrong a lot of the time and it's going to make the person on the other side of the lynch feel crappy for taking the time to defend themselves. I just think, like in the U.S. court of law, that the burden of proof should be on the prosecutor. If someone has a valid defense, ignoring it and hoping for the best is kind of a sham. If someone's defense is invalid, SAY it's invalid and why. It's just better that way. No one feels like they're wasting their time that way.



You totally didn't get what I was talking about... :p None of my stuff about coins just before had to do with mafia. Most of that post was just a random tangent.

Here you seem to suggest that I at some point was trying to apply chaos theory to my old tactic of randomly throwing doubt on everything. I never said that. Also, I don't do that anymore.

If I understand your misunderstanding correctly, you think that I said that I try to misdirect people with "chaos" like I'm some sort of stage magician. :p

It's the exact opposite, really. I use static, unchanging, unquestioned information that can be relied on by everybody. I hide behind what's already there. Sometimes I get a maze to hide in, sometimes I get a cardboard box. However, I always use real stuff.

Now, when I'm just trying to survive and I don't want my actions to be predicted, I'll sometimes imply contradictory things or whatever in the thread, and this might be what you were thinking of, but that doesn't have to do with defending myself from getting lynched. That's just about trying to avoid getting killed at night.

No... Honestly I got you. I was just showing you how what it feels like (what you were doing to me, I was doing back to you). But you still don't get it, so I guess I'll just say.... hmm.. You won?

You win!:D

[djthefunkchris]

I believe that the stubbornness of both djthefunkchris and mjdgoldeneye means that this debate will likely rage on.

Naw, I'm just playing around. I couldn't resist, but I can't keep it up, would be no time for mafia if I did. Maybe next time we can talk about Quantum Mechanics or the String Theory.;)

I was thinking the same thing. I am not sure how this went from talking about mafia and ended up being about Sir Isaac Newton. And people say that I go of topic...:D
/nod. I was thinking the same thing, but couldn't resist.
Nevermind. I believe that djthefunkchris' point has been taken and we can all move on, for sure.

Thankyou Destiny, and I'm glad you understood what I was saying.

[Astil]

the String Theory.;)

http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/121/9/a/_excited__by_CookiemagiK.gif OMG OMG OMG Yes.

But back to Mafia. Sir Issiac Newton would make a great vig in a Apple themed game.

[mjdgoldeneye]

No... Honestly I got you. I was just showing you how what it feels like (what you were doing to me, I was doing back to you). But you still don't get it, so I guess I'll just say.... hmm.. You won?

You win!:D

There's nothing to win sir. There is only... pizza?

[Wallbanger]

There's nothing to win sir. There is only... pizza?

And the last word, apparently.

[eayragt]

I was thinking about this advice from djthefunkchris earlier today, and will look back at the notes for my upcoming LOST game to make sure that the game is properly balanced.

All I would say for your Lost game is have the scum got an opporunity to fake claim? Personally I think that Lost is similar to Buffy in the fact that by making it a large game you have to use all the main "good" characters, leaving scum backed into a corner. If the end games come to five people who have claimed Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Hurley and Hurley's mum / a Polar Bear / someone who only appeared in one episode, I know who's going to get lynched.

There are several ways around it (Cults help to not clear claims that are definately in the game, but don't help scum fake claim; leaving some major characters out; playing around with the good / bad split so people can't judge scumminess from a claim) and I trust you'll find one, but it is one of (several) games on the Long list where I feel that almost all the main characters are going to be used up as townies, leaving the scum nowhere to go.

Obviously spoken as someone who's had their fair share of scum games in the last 18 months :p.

[Jaded]

All I would say for your Lost game is have the scum got an opporunity to fake claim? Personally I think that Lost is similar to Buffy in the fact that by making it a large game you have to use all the main "good" characters, leaving scum backed into a corner. If the end games come to five people who have claimed Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Hurley and Hurley's mum / a Polar Bear / someone who only appeared in one episode, I know who's going to get lynched.


Agreed - I enjoyed the Buffy game in many ways, but as scum in it, it was insanely difficult to try and find a fake claim.

[masterded]

There's nothing to win sir. There is only... pizza?

And the last word, apparently.

Pizza sounds like a good reward to me. Mmmmhhhh Pizza.

[djthefunkchris]

Pizza sounds like a good reward to me. Mmmmhhhh Pizza.

10$ for any large Pizza at one of my favorites right now. PAPA JOHN'S!!

[JackalBane]

10$ for any large Pizza at one of my favorites right now. PAPA JOHN'S!!
Papa John's is like... sooo good. Especially THE WORKS!!

/drooling

[masterded]

10$ for any large Pizza at one of my favorites right now. PAPA JOHN'S!!

Papa John's is like... sooo good. Especially THE WORKS!!

/drooling

Papa John’s is some of the worst Pizza I have ever had. I would rather have Papa Murphy’s and that you cook yourself and isn’t all that better then frozen pizza. Which is why I would rather eat Pizza Hut and it is over priced for its poor quality. Which is why I would rather eat Little Caesars, which is also is poor quality but cheap. Which is why I would rather eat Dominos, as it is slightly better quality with a slightly higher price (but still cheaper then pizza hut). Though none of that matters as I use to go to a local pizza place called Parkway Pizza, which is great. Though none of that matters as I haven’t ate pizza in 8 months now.

On the balance thing a couple thing I would like to talk about.

Some roles don’t need a counter role as they are already balanced. The main one I am thinking of is the PGO. The mafia does not need a way to kill him as the pgo it is already balanced as it kills indiscriminately.

About the have enough false role claims I have to agree that it should be one of the highest priorities. That is the reason when I do Ghostbusters the town will be the ghost and they will come form many sources and not just Ghostbusters. It gives me a very large base for the town (even though it is a small game) and allows for plenty of opportunities for the scum to come up with a false role claims. Also I would love some help from an experienced mod to help me set up and run the game (as I have never moded before).

[i effin rule]

Papa John’s is some of the worst Pizza I have ever had. I would rather have Papa Murphy’s and that you cook yourself and isn’t all that better then frozen pizza. Which is why I would rather eat Pizza Hut and it is over priced for its poor quality. Which is why I would rather eat Little Caesars, which is also is poor quality but cheap. Which is why I would rather eat Dominos, as it is slightly better quality with a slightly higher price (but still cheaper then pizza hut). Though none of that matters as I use to go to a local pizza place called Parkway Pizza, which is great. Though none of that matters as I haven’t ate pizza in 8 months now.

On the balance thing a couple thing I would like to talk about.

Some roles don’t need a counter role as they are already balanced. The main one I am thinking of is the PGO. The mafia does not need a way to kill him as the pgo it is already balanced as it kills indiscriminately.

About the have enough false role claims I have to agree that it should be one of the highest priorities. That is the reason when I do Ghostbusters the town will be the ghost and they will come form many sources and not just Ghostbusters. It gives me a very large base for the town (even though it is a small game) and allows for plenty of opportunities for the scum to come up with a false role claims. Also I would love some help from an experienced mod to help me set up and run the game (as I have never moded before).

First off, you're nuts. Papa Johns is Awesome.


As for the PGO, it isn't so much something is needed for the mafia, but the SK. If the SK has the "last man standing" condition, they have to have a way to get rid of the PGO other than lynching.

[masterded]

As for the PGO, it isn't so much something is needed for the mafia, but the SK. If the SK has the "last man standing" condition, they have to have a way to get rid of the PGO other than lynching.

Now that is a good point. One of the many problems the SK role faces.

The one time I was a SK I only had to have all the humans dead. Though sadly night 2 I hit a robot bomb.

EDIT: To be clear when I talked about the one time I was an SK it was to illustrate I have little to no experience in that role (so forgot about it during my PGO point) and not an example of an unfair role or death.

[Destiny]

On the subject of my upcoming LOST game, it has the potential to be a very balanced game.

[MichiganHero]

On the subject of my upcoming LOST game, it has the potential to be a very balanced game.

Is it going to be as confusing as the TV show?

[masterded]

Is it going to be as confusing as the TV show?

Nes Yo

[moon_lit_tears]

No telling. I just started watching it.

[masterded]

No telling. I just started watching it.

Spoilers: She is a He.

[Destiny]

No telling. I just started watching it.

You'll have to get through it all relatively quickly if you want to play my game then, as it should take place in the next few months.

[moon_lit_tears]

You'll have to get through it all relatively quickly if you want to play my game then, as it should take place in the next few months.

Won't take that long. My iPad has an app called ABC player. It has all the shows that the channel runes. It has all the Lost episodes on it. I just finished watching the 2 hour Pilot episode where the plane crashes and the Pilot gets killed. What I like is that there is a thing at the bottom that tells little things about the show. Like Shannon has a relationship with one of the guys (I can't spell his name) and then dies.

:)

I will have watched the entire show by the time your game starts.

[BHK1978]

I should spoil it for you because the show is so old now and you should have watched it in the first place. Heck, Michigan Hero ruined Ashes to Ashes for me, so I might as well spoil Lost for someone.:D

[eayragt]

I should spoil it for you because the show is so old now and you should have watched it in the first place. Heck, Michigan Hero ruined Ashes to Ashes for me, so I might as well spoil Lost for someone.:D

The thing is... you can't really ruin Lost. You can ruin Season 6. But apart from that you can reveal some twists and turns along the way that don't ruin the entire show.

[moon_lit_tears]

I should spoil it for you because the show is so old now and you should have watched it in the first place. Heck, Michigan Hero ruined Ashes to Ashes for me, so I might as well spoil Lost for someone.:D

I would never speak to you again. Plus I would kill you in ever game we played together. :D

You don't want the wrath of MLT do you? It's not a pretty thing... You have been warned...:D

[BHK1978]

I would never speak to you again. Plus I would kill you in ever game we played together. :D

You don't want the wrath of MLT do you? It's not a pretty thing... You have been warned...:D

I will just get your father's parrot after you.:p Okay and I shall stop with the off topic posting, sorry ladies and gents.

[moon_lit_tears]

I will just get your father's parrot after you.:p Okay and I shall stop with the off topic posting, sorry ladies and gents.


Good luck. She bites everyone. :p

[djthefunkchris]

I will just get your father's parrot after you.:p Okay and I shall stop with the off topic posting, sorry ladies and gents.

I think we got the message together for the most part of what the thread "was" about.

Several of our favorite mods did chime in with agreement. I wouldn't have posted it if I didn't think it mattered.

I think sometimes when we create a mod (even if you haven't thrown it up yet, I think alot of us do tend to play around with the idea of doing one anyways), we lose sight of the more important aspects of balance, and look at number's too much.

I know I have a few mods I've been thinking/working on (mostly pen and paper/old school), and I'm trying hard to not get into the "X" amount of bad guys vs. "Z" amount of good guys, before adding proper balance first. Then I will look at numbers and ensure that is well rounded as well. I personally like 3 town vs 1 scum, but it also depends alot on what else is out there. However, these numbers also depend on what else is out there... For example, I can't start a cult type group out with that many people, even if they are the only ones...> Unless they are harshly restricted on who they can bring into their cult. For example, a group of three vampires with abilities, in a big sized game can do alot of damage by night 3, if none of them have been killed and three recruits (turned into vampires or whatever) have happened, bringing in these recruits abilities as well.

So it all depends on your set up, as to the count, as well as how you can give scum a chance.

The SK keeps popping up alot, and I know it's not been perfected yet, but I think we will see them get a realistic chance (not just by luck) at some point. Then we can all steal the idea of whomever comes up with the "perfect" SK, lol.

[theoutlaw321]

At the end of the day, in the immortal words of outlaw, "mods mod and players play".




;):cool:

[masterded]

;):cool:

Its a g-g-g-g-g-g-ghost!

[i effin rule]

;):cool:

...woah

[Wallbanger]

;):cool:

Dude!

[Astil]

Epic thread just became epic.

[Astil]

...woah

How did you do that? Are you a summoner?