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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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]

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by BHK1978

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by i effin rule

*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]

Originally Posted by i effin rule

*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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by djthefunkchris

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]

Originally Posted by BHK1978

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]

Originally Posted by GruntMark

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.

(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.)