Search:

[QUOTE=Helz;967423]I wonder how much the issue is what is taken as a result vs how many aspects of who takes what as a result in what community is an issue.[/QUOTE]
The first issue is: [B]how do you craft a hecking star?[/B]
I don't think anyone has crafted 2 stars yet, it's fake news. Oops fake news.

Originally Posted by Helz

I wonder how much the issue is what is taken as a result vs how many aspects of who takes what as a result in what community is an issue.

The first issue is: how do you craft a hecking star?
I don't think anyone has crafted 2 stars yet, it's fake news. Oops fake news.

[QUOTE=Lag;967425]Purpose is a constant.
Spacetime requires exploration. To roam the vision quest is to become one with it.
If you have never experienced this oasis of the creative act, it can be difficult to heal.
We must heal ourselves and awaken others. Eons from now, we entities will exist like never before as we are reborn by the biosphere. We must learn how to lead ancient lives in the face of illusion.


Although you may not realize it, you are mystical. Child, look within and unify yourself. The quantum matrix is calling to you via electromagnetic resonance. Can you hear it?

We are at a crossroads of insight and selfishness. Reality has always been buzzing with beings whose dreams are enveloped in growth. Humankind has nothing to lose.

Nothing is impossible.
It is a sign of things to come. The future will be a mythic maturing of grace. The quantum soup is approaching a tipping point.[/QUOTE]
I'm a Capricorn though

Originally Posted by Lag

Purpose is a constant.
Spacetime requires exploration. To roam the vision quest is to become one with it.
If you have never experienced this oasis of the creative act, it can be difficult to heal.
We must heal ourselves and awaken others. Eons from now, we entities will exist like never before as we are reborn by the biosphere. We must learn how to lead ancient lives in the face of illusion.


Although you may not realize it, you are mystical. Child, look within and unify yourself. The quantum matrix is calling to you via electromagnetic resonance. Can you hear it?

We are at a crossroads of insight and selfishness. Reality has always been buzzing with beings whose dreams are enveloped in growth. Humankind has nothing to lose.

Nothing is impossible.
It is a sign of things to come. The future will be a mythic maturing of grace. The quantum soup is approaching a tipping point.

I'm a Capricorn though

[QUOTE=yzb25;967410]Sounds like a bad idea tbh[/QUOTE]
"Hey dad, do you mind if I use the word 'gay'?"

"No you don't need to use the word gay. There are more appropriate words, like gay, gayie, gaybuddy, gayboy, gayfriend, gaybuddy, gayboyfriend, gaybuddy, gayboy, and also the word gay."

"Why not gay?"

"Well I think that's a bit too close to gay so I don't think it's appropriate for young kids."

"Well dad, I do not like the word gay. I think it's mean. But I know it means gay."

"Well dad, I guess you're right. I'll make sure to not call your son gay."

Originally Posted by yzb25

Sounds like a bad idea tbh

"Hey dad, do you mind if I use the word 'gay'?"

"No you don't need to use the word gay. There are more appropriate words, like gay, gayie, gaybuddy, gayboy, gayfriend, gaybuddy, gayboyfriend, gaybuddy, gayboy, and also the word gay."

"Why not gay?"

"Well I think that's a bit too close to gay so I don't think it's appropriate for young kids."

"Well dad, I do not like the word gay. I think it's mean. But I know it means gay."

"Well dad, I guess you're right. I'll make sure to not call your son gay."

[SPOILER=I just thought this funny]
[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;944480]I have a wheel with a bunch of random political-esque topics, and every time someone posts another "free speech good?" thread I roll it. My personal opinion on free speech is that I support unconditional free speech on everything except for topics that have been rolled before, discussion of which which I support unequivocally banning.

This time, it's the topic of Mexican drug mules that must be banned.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Oberon;944481]I have a right to my opinion and my opinion is you have no rights. *shoots you and walks away*[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=yzb25;944483][QUOTE=yzb25;944482]I have thought about this issue at great length. After thorough introspection, I am still not sure whether we should have the free speech. In fact, I am not sure whether we should even have the free speech to discuss whether we should have the free speech. But after extremely careful consideration, I am ready to commit myself to the view that we should at least have the free speech to speak of whether we should have the free speech to discuss the free speech. So I wish to pull the conversation back to there, then gradually consider how we proceed.

Due to my immense study of this topic, my thoughts may prove too profound to follow... but do not be afraid to ask for clarification.[/QUOTE]
On a serious note, we've had a lot of these threads. I have lost count, but this is probably at least the fifth. I don't mind reading a debate, but can't we at least discuss something new?[/QUOTE]
[/SPOILER]
[I][B][SIZE=4][COLOR="#000000"][glow="#ffffff"] DON'T MIND ME...
I'M JUST BABBLING ABOUT![/glow][/COLOR][/SIZE][/B][/I]
So, Obama wants more tech regulations in order to combat misinformation on social media.
Cool. But who'd do the regulating though? The government?
Plenty of topics are politics based, while in the US - every political opinion is grouped in one of two groups thanks to their two party system (not very democratic system if you ask me btw). Which group would get the honor to choose what is right and what is misinformation?
If we're talking about only objective information - well, government officials themselves have spread misinformation about let's say Covid.

Ok let's say no political opinions would ever get moderated (lol) and objective stuff by experts only. What about every other country in the world that is not the US? What if let's say 50 of them wanted each different stuff censored to their citizens?

I feel like government tech regulations for censoring social media is just not realistic. Though there's only a few countries large enough for the tech companies to comply to their demands, and perhaps for some of them it can work well. I just don't see USA being one of them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

/Waffling Waffle Off

Spoiler : I just thought this funny :

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

I have a wheel with a bunch of random political-esque topics, and every time someone posts another "free speech good?" thread I roll it. My personal opinion on free speech is that I support unconditional free speech on everything except for topics that have been rolled before, discussion of which which I support unequivocally banning.

This time, it's the topic of Mexican drug mules that must be banned.

Originally Posted by Oberon

I have a right to my opinion and my opinion is you have no rights. *shoots you and walks away*

Originally Posted by yzb25

Originally Posted by yzb25

I have thought about this issue at great length. After thorough introspection, I am still not sure whether we should have the free speech. In fact, I am not sure whether we should even have the free speech to discuss whether we should have the free speech. But after extremely careful consideration, I am ready to commit myself to the view that we should at least have the free speech to speak of whether we should have the free speech to discuss the free speech. So I wish to pull the conversation back to there, then gradually consider how we proceed.

Due to my immense study of this topic, my thoughts may prove too profound to follow... but do not be afraid to ask for clarification.

On a serious note, we've had a lot of these threads. I have lost count, but this is probably at least the fifth. I don't mind reading a debate, but can't we at least discuss something new?

DON'T MIND ME...
I'M JUST BABBLING ABOUT!
So, Obama wants more tech regulations in order to combat misinformation on social media.
Cool. But who'd do the regulating though? The government?
Plenty of topics are politics based, while in the US - every political opinion is grouped in one of two groups thanks to their two party system (not very democratic system if you ask me btw). Which group would get the honor to choose what is right and what is misinformation?
If we're talking about only objective information - well, government officials themselves have spread misinformation about let's say Covid.

Ok let's say no political opinions would ever get moderated (lol) and objective stuff by experts only. What about every other country in the world that is not the US? What if let's say 50 of them wanted each different stuff censored to their citizens?

I feel like government tech regulations for censoring social media is just not realistic. Though there's only a few countries large enough for the tech companies to comply to their demands, and perhaps for some of them it can work well. I just don't see USA being one of them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

/Waffling Waffle Off

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;967249]This discussion is complete intellectual masturbation on all sides and the point is entirely inarguable.

The entire thing boils down to a decision tree with two branches

1) Do you think the contents of the universe follow a deterministic set of laws that can be computed and/or mathematically modeled? If no then so-called algorithmic machines do not exist and the whole argument is moot.

If yes, then:

2) Do you believe the human brain is subject to the same rules as all other matter in the universe? If so, then the brain is necessarily a machine per this weird definition of "machine".
3) If no, then you believe in some extra-physical process that comprise human thought, i.e. a soul.
[/QUOTE]
Honestly, am I the only one who can't understand this thread? :push:


[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;967249]This entire thread, IMO, is the same as asking "Do you believe in a soul?" which is a very uninteresting conversation.[/QUOTE]
I don't but I refer to it on a regular basis ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

This discussion is complete intellectual masturbation on all sides and the point is entirely inarguable.

The entire thing boils down to a decision tree with two branches

1) Do you think the contents of the universe follow a deterministic set of laws that can be computed and/or mathematically modeled? If no then so-called algorithmic machines do not exist and the whole argument is moot.

If yes, then:

2) Do you believe the human brain is subject to the same rules as all other matter in the universe? If so, then the brain is necessarily a machine per this weird definition of "machine".
3) If no, then you believe in some extra-physical process that comprise human thought, i.e. a soul.

Honestly, am I the only one who can't understand this thread?

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

This entire thread, IMO, is the same as asking "Do you believe in a soul?" which is a very uninteresting conversation.

I don't but I refer to it on a regular basis ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[QUOTE=WrathCyber;967247]Think of it this way: you're enchanter. You know x is beguiler and y is soldato. You expect soldato to detonate this night, so you send beguiler to soldato and make him self explode.[/QUOTE]
I don't believe you'd get that scenario once in a 1000 games. You need 2 confirmed mafias and their exact roles and neither of them getting lynched that day and a enchantress to do the deed.

Even if it was a realistic scenario, I hardly doubt Frinckles deliberately made Beguiler die from targeting Soldato just for that niche scenario.


Edit: is Enchantress before Beguiler in OoO? Wouldn't have expected that.

Originally Posted by WrathCyber

Think of it this way: you're enchanter. You know x is beguiler and y is soldato. You expect soldato to detonate this night, so you send beguiler to soldato and make him self explode.

I don't believe you'd get that scenario once in a 1000 games. You need 2 confirmed mafias and their exact roles and neither of them getting lynched that day and a enchantress to do the deed.

Even if it was a realistic scenario, I hardly doubt Frinckles deliberately made Beguiler die from targeting Soldato just for that niche scenario.


Edit: is Enchantress before Beguiler in OoO? Wouldn't have expected that.

[QUOTE=WrathCyber;967215]this is an intended feature.[/QUOTE]
What'd be the logic of Beguiler exploding while hiding behind Soldato? It doesn't make sense to me tbh.
To call it [I]intended[/I] is somewhat a stretch imho.

Originally Posted by WrathCyber

this is an intended feature.

What'd be the logic of Beguiler exploding while hiding behind Soldato? It doesn't make sense to me tbh.
To call it intended is somewhat a stretch imho.

[QUOTE=Frinckles;967202]is this a bug report[/QUOTE]
Ahh, now I had to double check.
I assumed soldato exploded because beguiller, who targeted soldato, exploded and both their roles were hidden. (graveyard death description for soldato wasn't of any help due to 2 other death descriptions)

But soldato role was hidden due to Incense Master and no alert of dying from explosion.
[ATTACH]28518[/ATTACH]

N1 - soldato planted a bomb on the constable.
N2 - soldato detonated the bomb.

Who exploded N2: constable, [s]soldato[/s], armorsmith (targetting constable), beguiler (targetting soldato).

I guess it's still a bug due to beguiler exploding..
One thing soldato role card doesn't mention though: he sees LW's of everyone who exploded.

I was wrong but still right.. I guess? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Originally Posted by Frinckles

is this a bug report

Ahh, now I had to double check.
I assumed soldato exploded because beguiller, who targeted soldato, exploded and both their roles were hidden. (graveyard death description for soldato wasn't of any help due to 2 other death descriptions)

But soldato role was hidden due to Incense Master and no alert of dying from explosion.


N1 - soldato planted a bomb on the constable.
N2 - soldato detonated the bomb.

Who exploded N2: constable, soldato, armorsmith (targetting constable), beguiler (targetting soldato).

I guess it's still a bug due to beguiler exploding..
One thing soldato role card doesn't mention though: he sees LW's of everyone who exploded.

I was wrong but still right.. I guess? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It feels bad having to explode yourself (+watching replay to make sure) before learning that detonating is suicide.
I'd like to suggest adding some indication that soldato detonating their bomb counts as visiting it.
Like add it in the role description text or place the detonation button to the target not yourself.

It feels bad having to explode yourself (+watching replay to make sure) before learning that detonating is suicide.
I'd like to suggest adding some indication that soldato detonating their bomb counts as visiting it.
Like add it in the role description text or place the detonation button to the target not yourself.

:thriller:

Assuming there's anyone left who still plays, hasn't left or been banned, and hasn't joined yet - can we please fill up that game already? :laugh:

[IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG][IMG]https://www.mafiacafe.net/core/images/smilies//fetch.gif[/IMG]

Assuming there's anyone left who still plays, hasn't left or been banned, and hasn't joined yet - can we please fill up that game already?

[QUOTE=Frinckles;967183]Also no greeks allowed?[/QUOTE]
You didn't read my post have you :(
I mentioned 4 greeks, though only 1 directly. >.<

Originally Posted by Frinckles

Also no greeks allowed?

You didn't read my post have you
I mentioned 4 greeks, though only 1 directly. >.<

[QUOTE=DoctorZeus;967158]BTW if you want more players the best way is more personal connections & quality of the ux and less game set up.

There's a reason MU is doing so well, and there's a reason certain players do better in filling games. I came here for Lag and joined games because of Lag.[/QUOTE]
Yah I myself have left SC2Mafia and Skwirl discords and not really joining any games anymore.
Similarly, I came to FM from the mod for MM, Oberon came here for Distorted, lots of older players came for SuperJack.

After years and years of pondering on this question, your comment shines the truest of them all.

Originally Posted by DoctorZeus

BTW if you want more players the best way is more personal connections & quality of the ux and less game set up.

There's a reason MU is doing so well, and there's a reason certain players do better in filling games. I came here for Lag and joined games because of Lag.

Yah I myself have left SC2Mafia and Skwirl discords and not really joining any games anymore.
Similarly, I came to FM from the mod for MM, Oberon came here for Distorted, lots of older players came for SuperJack.

After years and years of pondering on this question, your comment shines the truest of them all.

totally 100% aha what he said

totally 100% aha what he said

[QUOTE=Oberon;967092]Or conduct a survey and just ask a lot of people if they'd consider signing for a game on a different site with night-only chats.[/QUOTE]
reply's I got were ranging from wouldn't join night only to wouldn't mind joining. no reply's of preferring nights only, all in range of would mind or wouldn't mind. yah i asked only on 3 communities, but I saw none who didn't see nights only chat as just inferior across the board.

Originally Posted by Oberon

Or conduct a survey and just ask a lot of people if they'd consider signing for a game on a different site with night-only chats.

reply's I got were ranging from wouldn't join night only to wouldn't mind joining. no reply's of preferring nights only, all in range of would mind or wouldn't mind. yah i asked only on 3 communities, but I saw none who didn't see nights only chat as just inferior across the board.

[QUOTE=Oberon;967089]Why would this be the case[/QUOTE]
who knows
popular guess is that night only chat is a miserable experience for mafia by comparison

Originally Posted by Oberon

Why would this be the case

who knows
popular guess is that night only chat is a miserable experience for mafia by comparison

bye

bye

You know it's serious when you see that SB16 added mechanics

You know it's serious when you see that SB16 added mechanics

[QUOTE=DoctorZeus;967085]
- it's [B]much[/B] more fun to be scum. You build stronger relationships, you banter more, and, you get to laugh at village more[/QUOTE]
This should be the only criteria for all I care. And it's not even a subjective statement because mafiascum have made the research and concluded that statistically there's far fewer replacements in 24/7
mafia chat games. Though weren't Mafiascum games like a week per game day or something? That's different if so..

Originally Posted by DoctorZeus

- it's much more fun to be scum. You build stronger relationships, you banter more, and, you get to laugh at village more

This should be the only criteria for all I care. And it's not even a subjective statement because mafiascum have made the research and concluded that statistically there's far fewer replacements in 24/7
mafia chat games. Though weren't Mafiascum games like a week per game day or something? That's different if so..

[QUOTE=DoctorZeus;967084]What is the mod being g referred to?[/QUOTE]
The [I]-Mafia-[/I] game inside SC2. The predecessor to games like ToS and ToL.

Yah idk why people call it mod tbh. In SC2 they're called arcade maps, in SC1 they're called UMS maps, in WC3 they're called custom maps. I guess "mod" refers to everything user made in every game ever?

Originally Posted by DoctorZeus

What is the mod being g referred to?

The -Mafia- game inside SC2. The predecessor to games like ToS and ToL.

Yah idk why people call it mod tbh. In SC2 they're called arcade maps, in SC1 they're called UMS maps, in WC3 they're called custom maps. I guess "mod" refers to everything user made in every game ever?

[QUOTE=aamirus;967069]it's kind of ugly but i added an iso list to the top of threads[/QUOTE]
Beautiful

Originally Posted by aamirus

it's kind of ugly but i added an iso list to the top of threads

Beautiful

Somehow I never had an open role madness setup. That's uncommon even outside SC2Mafia, right?

Somehow I never had an open role madness setup. That's uncommon even outside SC2Mafia, right?

I just want to quote a fairly good criticism about night only chat:
[QUOTE]I have been summoned
(ccing [noparse]@mansnicks[/noparse] )
on most sites that I play on, 24/7 wolfchat rather than night only wolfchat is standard. This is not true everywhere, and plenty of places do it differently.

On some level this is a balance decision -- if wolves have 24/7 chat, they can talk/coordinate/etc., whereas if they don't have that it is much harder for them to do anything resembling that. This is especially true in games with no N0 planning phase; if wolves don't get to talk until night 1, and until then basically have to improvise a plan separately with no way to coordinate with each other, this obviously makes it harder for them.

This is also on some level (I suspect the level on which this change is being pushed) a balance decision. Many players find it kind of unenjoyable to roll scum and not be able to talk to or coordinate with their team; many players see 'being in wolfchat' as one of the fun parts about being a wolf. Neither of these is universal but both of these are common.

I don't think that either '24/7 wolfchat' or 'not that' should be enforced on a site level, in my opinion those are both decisions that can be left up to the individual host. If players don't want to play a game without 24/7 wolfchat, then this will kind of solve itself -- they just won't sign up for games that don't have it.

Personally I would probably not sign up for a game with nightchat only for wolves and only run games with 24/7 wolfchat.[/QUOTE]

I agree that Night Only chat can be a miserable experience for the wolves by comparison to 24/7 chat.

Edit: let's not forget that we've Night Only chat in most setups just because mechanics were either copied directly from already approved setups or copied because our experiences are so biased in favor of Night Only chat.. since.. you know.. it's like almost every setup page for a decade..

I just want to quote a fairly good criticism about night only chat:

I have been summoned
(ccing @mansnicks )
on most sites that I play on, 24/7 wolfchat rather than night only wolfchat is standard. This is not true everywhere, and plenty of places do it differently.

On some level this is a balance decision -- if wolves have 24/7 chat, they can talk/coordinate/etc., whereas if they don't have that it is much harder for them to do anything resembling that. This is especially true in games with no N0 planning phase; if wolves don't get to talk until night 1, and until then basically have to improvise a plan separately with no way to coordinate with each other, this obviously makes it harder for them.

This is also on some level (I suspect the level on which this change is being pushed) a balance decision. Many players find it kind of unenjoyable to roll scum and not be able to talk to or coordinate with their team; many players see 'being in wolfchat' as one of the fun parts about being a wolf. Neither of these is universal but both of these are common.

I don't think that either '24/7 wolfchat' or 'not that' should be enforced on a site level, in my opinion those are both decisions that can be left up to the individual host. If players don't want to play a game without 24/7 wolfchat, then this will kind of solve itself -- they just won't sign up for games that don't have it.

Personally I would probably not sign up for a game with nightchat only for wolves and only run games with 24/7 wolfchat.

I agree that Night Only chat can be a miserable experience for the wolves by comparison to 24/7 chat.

Edit: let's not forget that we've Night Only chat in most setups just because mechanics were either copied directly from already approved setups or copied because our experiences are so biased in favor of Night Only chat.. since.. you know.. it's like almost every setup page for a decade..

[QUOTE=Mizery;966991]Ok that didn't work at all ok[/QUOTE]

[SPOILER]yeah i think you've to name the spoiler something for it to work, anything, even black space[/SPOILER]

Originally Posted by Mizery

Ok that didn't work at all ok

[SPOILER]yeah i think you've to name the spoiler something for it to work, anything, even black space[/SPOILER]

Apparently even FoL has never had problems with 24/7 chat, and they're heavy mech lovers as they go.
[COLOR="#0000FF"]Edit: in fact, day chat allowed them to be more mech heavy as mech heaviness is otherwise a town buff.[/COLOR]
I guess this means I'm mostly [I]for[/I] having most games be 24/7.
Only setups like krc and Smiths I could see it causing trouble, few setups by comparison.

Apparently even FoL has never had problems with 24/7 chat, and they're heavy mech lovers as they go.
Edit: in fact, day chat allowed them to be more mech heavy as mech heaviness is otherwise a town buff.
I guess this means I'm mostly for having most games be 24/7.
Only setups like krc and Smiths I could see it causing trouble, few setups by comparison.

[QUOTE=Frinckles;966983]Lag has done a spectacular job of bringing in people from other sites so I'm curious what they're thinking.[/QUOTE]
I'm up for this being the deciding factor.

Originally Posted by Frinckles

Lag has done a spectacular job of bringing in people from other sites so I'm curious what they're thinking.

I'm up for this being the deciding factor.

In a setup like krc I'd prefer night only, and depending on the setup some but few semi-opens also. Both because of the possibility of it enabling game breaking plays.

In a setup like Mountainous or any low PR regular setup I prefer 24/7 because I find the idea of catching some newly formed wolf agenda live. It's more enjoyable for wolves also and innocent enough for such setups that the fun aspect greatly outweighs any negatives imho.
I guess for nights only technically there's things like trying to catch someone who eagerly awaited the night chat and then came in strong after the night, or something like that, but it's meh by comparison and probably mostly NAI anyway.

I don't remember seeing any host changing even simple mechanics like that for their game. It's always been whatever the setup page already said. I don't expect that to change, but if it does and when hosts do put in this change in signups when hosting preexisting setups - then perhaps it's worth considering telling everyone to also hide their online status?

In a setup like krc I'd prefer night only, and depending on the setup some but few semi-opens also. Both because of the possibility of it enabling game breaking plays.

In a setup like Mountainous or any low PR regular setup I prefer 24/7 because I find the idea of catching some newly formed wolf agenda live. It's more enjoyable for wolves also and innocent enough for such setups that the fun aspect greatly outweighs any negatives imho.
I guess for nights only technically there's things like trying to catch someone who eagerly awaited the night chat and then came in strong after the night, or something like that, but it's meh by comparison and probably mostly NAI anyway.

I don't remember seeing any host changing even simple mechanics like that for their game. It's always been whatever the setup page already said. I don't expect that to change, but if it does and when hosts do put in this change in signups when hosting preexisting setups - then perhaps it's worth considering telling everyone to also hide their online status?

[QUOTE=oliverz144;966969]i've searched mafiascum and walrus wiki, and googled various relating terms.
i didnt find a question-solving answer, but found out that al capone fed 1.5 thousend muricans with daily lunch soup! (yummy yummy lynch very tasty! hammer the tastiest!)
w/e... my guess is that its an additional rid kill... am i right?
oh answer me ... you wise mafia veterans[/QUOTE]
I've little to no experience with it, but [I]AFAIK[/I] most of the time it's the ability for the mafia to kill someone if they guess their role correctly, and the number of guesses they can make are usually not public knowledge.
Regardless of what an individual game's soup mechanic is though, just know that it's an anti claim mechanic.

Originally Posted by oliverz144

i've searched mafiascum and walrus wiki, and googled various relating terms.
i didnt find a question-solving answer, but found out that al capone fed 1.5 thousend muricans with daily lunch soup! (yummy yummy lynch very tasty! hammer the tastiest!)
w/e... my guess is that its an additional rid kill... am i right?
oh answer me ... you wise mafia veterans

I've little to no experience with it, but AFAIK most of the time it's the ability for the mafia to kill someone if they guess their role correctly, and the number of guesses they can make are usually not public knowledge.
Regardless of what an individual game's soup mechanic is though, just know that it's an anti claim mechanic.

I have 2 thoughts on this:

1) Jordan Peterson. I'm so against him being on the list. Lots of his advice is just common sense in psychological “You get motivated by action.” Duh. But beyond that there's countless examples of him pulling shit like [URL="https://youtu.be/zmrv9NSKKYE?t=134"]this[/URL]. There's some admirable qualities of his or things he's done: like his ability in having open and honest debates or his analysis of Hitler, or him pointing out basics things like the reverse racism of saying things like "all white men are oppressors". But I fail to see him being worthy of being on such a list tbh.

2) Just like the human mind can't imagine/generate a color it has never seen, so too it can't generate anything else - every thought, reasoning, idea, shape, sound comes from a combination of previous inputs. Which is why I think it can't be understated how highly we should value and appreciate the "fathers" of things. Father's of physics, philosophy, math, science, engineering, etc., - if we could name them, they deserve to be on such a list.
I don't agree that the complexity of an idea is indicative of how difficult it was to think of. For example, I'd value - people figuring out that the earth is round thousands of years ago from just the shadows of lunar eclipses - as more difficult than todays satellites built. I'd value the pythagorean cup as more complex than a tomorrows skyscraper. For that reason I think there should be a very few names listed from the last few centuries. Newton, Tesla, Einstein - I think it's theories and discoveries like that which should be worthy on the list, when it comes to more modern names.

I have 2 thoughts on this:

1) Jordan Peterson. I'm so against him being on the list. Lots of his advice is just common sense in psychological “You get motivated by action.� Duh. But beyond that there's countless examples of him pulling shit like this. There's some admirable qualities of his or things he's done: like his ability in having open and honest debates or his analysis of Hitler, or him pointing out basics things like the reverse racism of saying things like "all white men are oppressors". But I fail to see him being worthy of being on such a list tbh.

2) Just like the human mind can't imagine/generate a color it has never seen, so too it can't generate anything else - every thought, reasoning, idea, shape, sound comes from a combination of previous inputs. Which is why I think it can't be understated how highly we should value and appreciate the "fathers" of things. Father's of physics, philosophy, math, science, engineering, etc., - if we could name them, they deserve to be on such a list.
I don't agree that the complexity of an idea is indicative of how difficult it was to think of. For example, I'd value - people figuring out that the earth is round thousands of years ago from just the shadows of lunar eclipses - as more difficult than todays satellites built. I'd value the pythagorean cup as more complex than a tomorrows skyscraper. For that reason I think there should be a very few names listed from the last few centuries. Newton, Tesla, Einstein - I think it's theories and discoveries like that which should be worthy on the list, when it comes to more modern names.

[QUOTE=aamirus;966746][MENTION=30663]OzyWho[/MENTION]

from ozy: "Auto expand, reverse ISO, multi ISO, vote ISO, reply, +multi quote button, hide forum thread info, distinguish posts, ISO shortcut from thread directly."

ozy i did one of your requests are you proud of me[/QUOTE]
This is awesome, thx!
Also, I myself idk what most of those request thingies are supposed to be anymore :laugh:

Originally Posted by aamirus

@OzyWho

from ozy: "Auto expand, reverse ISO, multi ISO, vote ISO, reply, +multi quote button, hide forum thread info, distinguish posts, ISO shortcut from thread directly."

ozy i did one of your requests are you proud of me

This is awesome, thx!
Also, I myself idk what most of those request thingies are supposed to be anymore

I think American Flag was the first setup that had day kills end the days. Feature is nice to have, just I expect most to have forgotten about it before the next time arises that it'll be needed - that remembering will be a fun moment. :laugh:

I think American Flag was the first setup that had day kills end the days. Feature is nice to have, just I expect most to have forgotten about it before the next time arises that it'll be needed - that remembering will be a fun moment.

[QUOTE=Lag;965943]So I had actually read the setup incorrectly, I read it as

"Put a bounty on a player at night.
The bounty will be publicly announced at the start of the day.
If the player is lynched during the ensuing day,
you gain one charge of a night kill."

Rather than

"Put a bounty on a player at night.
The bounty will be publicly announced at the start of the day.
If the player is not lynched during the ensuing day,
you gain one charge of a night kill."
[/QUOTE]
Wait, what? Has that always been the case? [MENTION=45595]Oberon[/MENTION] :laugh:

Btw, Lag, why is it that the statistics numbers only change every +2 townies? Town can't skip, i feel like +1 townie should change something :S

Originally Posted by Lag

So I had actually read the setup incorrectly, I read it as

"Put a bounty on a player at night.
The bounty will be publicly announced at the start of the day.
If the player is lynched during the ensuing day,
you gain one charge of a night kill."

Rather than

"Put a bounty on a player at night.
The bounty will be publicly announced at the start of the day.
If the player is not lynched during the ensuing day,
you gain one charge of a night kill."

Wait, what? Has that always been the case? @Oberon

Btw, Lag, why is it that the statistics numbers only change every +2 townies? Town can't skip, i feel like +1 townie should change something

“Yes” and “No.”
[MENTION=29585]aamirus[/MENTION] how did you get them not-vertical quotation marks?

“Yes� and “No.�
@aamirus how did you get them not-vertical quotation marks?

[QUOTE=Lag;965370]Red flag isn't even really mountainous, mafia should theoretically kill their own teammates at certain points to make it harder for town to gain points in a red flag setup. When you have mafia killing other mafia as an optimal play in a game, that really doesn't qualify as a mountainous game anymore.

Also, I used to agree with you months ago, so I looked up all the champs games from the last time champs was a mountainous game, and I saw that despite having a 24.5% EV winrate, town was winning around 36% of the time. While the sample size was relatively small (14 games), it was significant enough of a difference to make me call my priors into question.

Season 4 of Champs was a 12v3 mountainous, town won 5 of the 14 games. The probability of town winning 5 or more games assuming they should win 24.5% of the time is 10%

That's not quite enough to be considered statistically significant, but it [I]is[/I] enough to at least call into question the assumption as well as discredit claims that say that the data supports EV project projections.

So when the data didn't support the conclusion (the EV winrate is not what you see in mountainous games in practice) and when intuition didn't support the conclusion (A 42 v 3 game sounds absurd), I had no choice but to reject the conclusion and modify my beliefs[/QUOTE]
Yah, that season 4 anomaly was really interesting. I think they did better than other seasons with same Town vs Mafia ratio but with Power Roles, and usually in Champs in qualifiers Mafia are overperforming while Town is overperforming in semis (finals feel even though? 0.o) so that makes the anomaly even more strange. :laugh:

I'm curious how it will go this year! :>

But anyhow, I looked at all MU mountainous games, not just the Champs, for my conclusion back then.
Champs so weird. Almost always Mafia are overperforming, with all that different playstyle clash in the qualis, yet the one statistically mafia favored setup it's the opposite 0.o

Edit: ohh yah the statistics results were fun :laugh:
[INDENT][I]Town has won 9 times, Scum have won 24 times.
Town has 27.27% win rate overall.
However, 5 of those wins are from Championship Season 4 games.[/I][/INDENT]

Originally Posted by Lag

Red flag isn't even really mountainous, mafia should theoretically kill their own teammates at certain points to make it harder for town to gain points in a red flag setup. When you have mafia killing other mafia as an optimal play in a game, that really doesn't qualify as a mountainous game anymore.

Also, I used to agree with you months ago, so I looked up all the champs games from the last time champs was a mountainous game, and I saw that despite having a 24.5% EV winrate, town was winning around 36% of the time. While the sample size was relatively small (14 games), it was significant enough of a difference to make me call my priors into question.

Season 4 of Champs was a 12v3 mountainous, town won 5 of the 14 games. The probability of town winning 5 or more games assuming they should win 24.5% of the time is 10%

That's not quite enough to be considered statistically significant, but it is enough to at least call into question the assumption as well as discredit claims that say that the data supports EV project projections.

So when the data didn't support the conclusion (the EV winrate is not what you see in mountainous games in practice) and when intuition didn't support the conclusion (A 42 v 3 game sounds absurd), I had no choice but to reject the conclusion and modify my beliefs

Yah, that season 4 anomaly was really interesting. I think they did better than other seasons with same Town vs Mafia ratio but with Power Roles, and usually in Champs in qualifiers Mafia are overperforming while Town is overperforming in semis (finals feel even though? ) so that makes the anomaly even more strange.

I'm curious how it will go this year!

But anyhow, I looked at all MU mountainous games, not just the Champs, for my conclusion back then.
Champs so weird. Almost always Mafia are overperforming, with all that different playstyle clash in the qualis, yet the one statistically mafia favored setup it's the opposite

Edit: ohh yah the statistics results were fun

Town has won 9 times, Scum have won 24 times.
Town has 27.27% win rate overall.
However, 5 of those wins are from Championship Season 4 games.

2vs19 sounds fun actually tbh
Mafia can kill 8-9 best players and have to be townier than 9-10 scummiest townies? Like I feel like it's a cool game ngl

2vs19 sounds fun actually tbh
Mafia can kill 8-9 best players and have to be townier than 9-10 scummiest townies? Like I feel like it's a cool game ngl

If I wanted a mountainous 50%, I'd suggest red flag 15er, not 2vs19 regular mountainous btw. But regardless of how even those 2 vs 19 numbers look to you, as far as at least win chances go, I do think it'd average on that 50% with a large enough sample size, my own looking up the statistics of mountainous games doesn't give me a reason to doubt that. There's even that funny story of Thingyman winning 1vs20+ :laugh:
But as I said before; we differ on how strongly we value each teams influence and the impact of scumhunting vs misleading. For me it all evens out, for you town influence is stronger especially in the long run.

Like there's nothing more to it. You want to add slight favor to Mafia because you value Town strength higher than Mafia's; I don't.

If I wanted a mountainous 50%, I'd suggest red flag 15er, not 2vs19 regular mountainous btw. But regardless of how even those 2 vs 19 numbers look to you, as far as at least win chances go, I do think it'd average on that 50% with a large enough sample size, my own looking up the statistics of mountainous games doesn't give me a reason to doubt that. There's even that funny story of Thingyman winning 1vs20+
But as I said before; we differ on how strongly we value each teams influence and the impact of scumhunting vs misleading. For me it all evens out, for you town influence is stronger especially in the long run.

Like there's nothing more to it. You want to add slight favor to Mafia because you value Town strength higher than Mafia's; I don't.

[QUOTE=Lag;965361]if town can win half the time while literally not even reading the game, then that's indicative of a town-sided setup.[/QUOTE]
As opposed to Wolf sided setup? What's the problem here? In either case, players get to play the game.

I fee like you're undervaluing the Wolf influence on the game tbh. In a 50%, I reckon the best team wins most of the time more than in any other EV setup.

Originally Posted by Lag

if town can win half the time while literally not even reading the game, then that's indicative of a town-sided setup.

As opposed to Wolf sided setup? What's the problem here? In either case, players get to play the game.

I fee like you're undervaluing the Wolf influence on the game tbh. In a 50%, I reckon the best team wins most of the time more than in any other EV setup.

[QUOTE=Lag;965359]I think 30-40 is ideal
25-50 is playable
15-70 is passable but far from ideal
and outside of that range is just blatantly town/wolf sided[/QUOTE]
I'd never play a 15% tbh, I could see myself playing a 70% if I'd expect the game to be fun otherwise.

You don't think 50% is ideal? I guess only I value the social deduction and deception effect on the game as low as I do.
If champs setup decision had a public discussion this year, I'd suggest Red Flag 15er instead of Mountainous.

Originally Posted by Lag

I think 30-40 is ideal
25-50 is playable
15-70 is passable but far from ideal
and outside of that range is just blatantly town/wolf sided

I'd never play a 15% tbh, I could see myself playing a 70% if I'd expect the game to be fun otherwise.

You don't think 50% is ideal? I guess only I value the social deduction and deception effect on the game as low as I do.
If champs setup decision had a public discussion this year, I'd suggest Red Flag 15er instead of Mountainous.

[QUOTE=Oberon;965355]I've never seen a random lynch in a game xD[/QUOTE]
last year i checked, a sample size of 30+ mountainous games shows that the town win rate is nearly identical to EV, so it's sort of important imho.

But like, D6 has 50+%, quite town sided, but many have named it their favorite setup at some point (though now its out of favor seems)
i'd say 20-80 is playable 30-70 is fine 40-60 is nearly perfect 50 is perfect, though i'd prefer 40 over 60 any day of the weel

Originally Posted by Oberon

I've never seen a random lynch in a game xD

last year i checked, a sample size of 30+ mountainous games shows that the town win rate is nearly identical to EV, so it's sort of important imho.

But like, D6 has 50+%, quite town sided, but many have named it their favorite setup at some point (though now its out of favor seems)
i'd say 20-80 is playable 30-70 is fine 40-60 is nearly perfect 50 is perfect, though i'd prefer 40 over 60 any day of the weel

By the way, this thread taught me that I struggle with abstract thinking. It's so alien to my brain, you guys may as well talk Korean as far as my brain is concerned :laugh:

By the way, this thread taught me that I struggle with abstract thinking. It's so alien to my brain, you guys may as well talk Korean as far as my brain is concerned

[QUOTE=Oberon;964214]I am discussing whether the mind can be reduced to a Turing machine or not. Nothing to do with determinism[/QUOTE]
Look, a small post! I can read and comment on this!
Well, no, our minds can't act as turing machines because we lack the capacity, like we often can't even do math without calculator even though it's a linear process. But like:
a) I don't know what you mean by "reduced to";
b) If someone studied physics they'd could tell you what would happen in certain scenarios, if someone studied psychology + a specific person then they could tell you what the person is likely to do in a specific scenario, if someone studied economy then they could tell you what happens in specific scenarios;
c) If you're thinking about why people come to different conclusions - we aren't that simple beings, we each have different perspectives and different biases. But in a scenario where you "reduced" us to a turing machines where we each had infinite knowledge and infinite processing power, then yeah - we would each come to same conclusion from the same information, but we would all sort of be the same anyways with only position and circumstances different.

Originally Posted by Oberon

I am discussing whether the mind can be reduced to a Turing machine or not. Nothing to do with determinism

Look, a small post! I can read and comment on this!
Well, no, our minds can't act as turing machines because we lack the capacity, like we often can't even do math without calculator even though it's a linear process. But like:
a) I don't know what you mean by "reduced to";
b) If someone studied physics they'd could tell you what would happen in certain scenarios, if someone studied psychology + a specific person then they could tell you what the person is likely to do in a specific scenario, if someone studied economy then they could tell you what happens in specific scenarios;
c) If you're thinking about why people come to different conclusions - we aren't that simple beings, we each have different perspectives and different biases. But in a scenario where you "reduced" us to a turing machines where we each had infinite knowledge and infinite processing power, then yeah - we would each come to same conclusion from the same information, but we would all sort of be the same anyways with only position and circumstances different.

I'd change the Mafia wincon to "3 townies lynched or parity reached". That'd be fair enough for me, and less of a drag on.

Usually, for me, any EV in range like 20-70% is playable. It's a game. And usually max D4 wouldn't be thought as too much.
But in 6 player game, where you can probably not realistically hope for 100 posts per day, both those things change for me.
And for me, both those things would be in perfectly playable parameters with that wincon. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(Ftr I don't know the % change but it just feels better, how many townies does the 1 wolf have to outplay and how many lynches to survive)

I can't imagine a game with 1 wolf being anything but pure random tbh. When I say random I mean lynches completely independent of players actual alignment in the game.

I'd change the Mafia wincon to "3 townies lynched or parity reached". That'd be fair enough for me, and less of a drag on.

Usually, for me, any EV in range like 20-70% is playable. It's a game. And usually max D4 wouldn't be thought as too much.
But in 6 player game, where you can probably not realistically hope for 100 posts per day, both those things change for me.
And for me, both those things would be in perfectly playable parameters with that wincon. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(Ftr I don't know the % change but it just feels better, how many townies does the 1 wolf have to outplay and how many lynches to survive)

I can't imagine a game with 1 wolf being anything but pure random tbh. When I say random I mean lynches completely independent of players actual alignment in the game.

[QUOTE=ChannelMiner;965347]Kinda weird that only US has 2.0, EU and KR are still on Mafia 1.0, but I guess thats mostly coz the community in the other regions haven't shown an interest in Mafia 2.0?[/QUOTE]
KR have made their own version in their own language, and AFAIK the devs don't have access to the EU map anymore because reasons? It's not a loss since nobody plays Mafia on server EU anyways.

I'm sort of curious what year was EU map last moderated. Has it even ever? :laugh:

Originally Posted by ChannelMiner

Kinda weird that only US has 2.0, EU and KR are still on Mafia 1.0, but I guess thats mostly coz the community in the other regions haven't shown an interest in Mafia 2.0?

KR have made their own version in their own language, and AFAIK the devs don't have access to the EU map anymore because reasons? It's not a loss since nobody plays Mafia on server EU anyways.

I'm sort of curious what year was EU map last moderated. Has it even ever?

[QUOTE=Oberon;965333]I'd rather set my balls on fire than play in a Mafia "championship"[/QUOTE]
You already did :laugh:

Originally Posted by Oberon

I'd rather set my balls on fire than play in a Mafia "championship"

You already did

So here's this video, right?
[url]https://youtu.be/FTgGZBGUjTk[/url]
Dude is "editor in chief of theduran.com" - a confirmed fake news website for Russian propaganda.
[url]https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-duran/[/url]
(it also used to be on [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites[/url] but is no more, go figure)

Ok, we got a confirmed fake news dude posting a video. Cool.
But the facts he says are real, namely Putin did make a decree that starting April 1st Russia's natural gas and oil has to be purchased by Ruble and pretty much nobody got a choice but to do it.
Same story for Russia's agricultural export - if they switch to ruble only as well - I'd say it's very believable that there are middle eastern countries, and perhaps European as well, that'd have to buy the food they need.

But then there's his, and the comment sections (who btw predict that Putin might be remembered as one of the greatest leaders ever lived), opinions and predictions:
-That once Ruble become such a internationally important currency, every country using it would benefit, which will or might spiral out of control; a snowball effect.

I realize not everyone's gonna watch a 13min video, go fact check everything, of a confirmed fake news source. But if someone here does, I'd like to know how much you agree or disagree with their opinions and predictions?

Someone else whom I asked said it's shortsighted by Putin and desperate.
The guys in that comment section say his a genius who thinks far ahead economically; restoring rubles value was just the beginning, now makes it internationally important.
I say I lack the education to make any assessment of my own on the matter.

So here's this video, right?
https://youtu.be/FTgGZBGUjTk
Dude is "editor in chief of theduran.com" - a confirmed fake news website for Russian propaganda.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-duran/
(it also used to be on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._news_websites but is no more, go figure)

Ok, we got a confirmed fake news dude posting a video. Cool.
But the facts he says are real, namely Putin did make a decree that starting April 1st Russia's natural gas and oil has to be purchased by Ruble and pretty much nobody got a choice but to do it.
Same story for Russia's agricultural export - if they switch to ruble only as well - I'd say it's very believable that there are middle eastern countries, and perhaps European as well, that'd have to buy the food they need.

But then there's his, and the comment sections (who btw predict that Putin might be remembered as one of the greatest leaders ever lived), opinions and predictions:
-That once Ruble become such a internationally important currency, every country using it would benefit, which will or might spiral out of control; a snowball effect.

I realize not everyone's gonna watch a 13min video, go fact check everything, of a confirmed fake news source. But if someone here does, I'd like to know how much you agree or disagree with their opinions and predictions?

Someone else whom I asked said it's shortsighted by Putin and desperate.
The guys in that comment section say his a genius who thinks far ahead economically; restoring rubles value was just the beginning, now makes it internationally important.
I say I lack the education to make any assessment of my own on the matter.

[QUOTE=rumox;965323]I'm not an economist either, but it just sounds like Putin is creating a house of cards to hold up his economy.[/QUOTE]

I mean, it works it works.
Now that sanctions have failed, a lot of countries are making plans to become less dependant in short amount of time as possible to Russia's oil and natural gas. I guess they suspect this conflict to keep on for years perhaps?
Ukrainian president started offering concessions for peace, like never joining NATO and leaving Donbass and Crimea to Russia.

Ofc there's stuff like Belarus battalions joining Ukraine, Russian soldiers joining Ukraine and calling it The Legion "Freedom of Russia", and Ukrainian soldiers regaining territory. But due to US and British intelligence saying that the Russian troops are just repositioning (they've been right on everything thus far), not retreating, and that the Ukrainian president started offering concessions, I feel like Russia will in the end count as winner of this [s]war[/s][I]special military operation[/I], though less than they were hoping for.

On a personal note, idk why people still expect Putin to stop ever. He has made it very clear that he thinks the fall of Soviet Union is the biggest tragedy of the previous century and that he wants it back. He's consistent.

Originally Posted by rumox

I'm not an economist either, but it just sounds like Putin is creating a house of cards to hold up his economy.

I mean, it works it works.
Now that sanctions have failed, a lot of countries are making plans to become less dependant in short amount of time as possible to Russia's oil and natural gas. I guess they suspect this conflict to keep on for years perhaps?
Ukrainian president started offering concessions for peace, like never joining NATO and leaving Donbass and Crimea to Russia.

Ofc there's stuff like Belarus battalions joining Ukraine, Russian soldiers joining Ukraine and calling it The Legion "Freedom of Russia", and Ukrainian soldiers regaining territory. But due to US and British intelligence saying that the Russian troops are just repositioning (they've been right on everything thus far), not retreating, and that the Ukrainian president started offering concessions, I feel like Russia will in the end count as winner of this warspecial military operation, though less than they were hoping for.

On a personal note, idk why people still expect Putin to stop ever. He has made it very clear that he thinks the fall of Soviet Union is the biggest tragedy of the previous century and that he wants it back. He's consistent.

[URL="https://mishtalk.com/economics/the-ruble-regains-100-of-its-loss-after-russia-invaded-ukraine-why"]The ruble regained 100% of its losses and sanctions don't work[/URL]

I'm very very VERY much not a economy person. Can someone tell me if I understood this correctly? Russia's economy is back on track? Can we "check it for ourselves" somehow?

According to that article, everything I thought about Russia's economy is wrong.
What are the myths and what are the facts? I hope someone who understands this better than me can tell me what is what! :wondering:

The ruble regained 100% of its losses and sanctions don't work

I'm very very VERY much not a economy person. Can someone tell me if I understood this correctly? Russia's economy is back on track? Can we "check it for ourselves" somehow?

According to that article, everything I thought about Russia's economy is wrong.
What are the myths and what are the facts? I hope someone who understands this better than me can tell me what is what!

At the very least I know that you couldn't go too heavy on the hyperventilation because in order to deliver the oxygen you need some CO2 - which is why if you were hyperventilating while sitting you'd soon become tingly then dizzy eventually black out due to lack of oxygen in the cells. (The pH level in human blood is so narrow range because that CO2 to Oxygen proportion in blood is so crucial for survival)
But I'm just thinking that a bit more breathing should help, right? Just how much breathing and how much help.

Arguably, it helped this guy:
[url]https://youtu.be/5h_3NVI20T4[/url]
Though he did other stuff that helped..

At the very least I know that you couldn't go too heavy on the hyperventilation because in order to deliver the oxygen you need some CO2 - which is why if you were hyperventilating while sitting you'd soon become tingly then dizzy eventually black out due to lack of oxygen in the cells. (The pH level in human blood is so narrow range because that CO2 to Oxygen proportion in blood is so crucial for survival)
But I'm just thinking that a bit more breathing should help, right? Just how much breathing and how much help.

Arguably, it helped this guy:
https://youtu.be/5h_3NVI20T4
Though he did other stuff that helped..

Ohh it's 1v5 not 2v6

One of these days I'll not misread a setup lol

Ahh, this is chill. Potential to go to D4, while with 6 players from start I imagine it's difficult to get to even 100 posts per game day. If that's how a game would go, that'd be boring, but anything can happen. I feel like something is missing here :/

Ohh it's 1v5 not 2v6

One of these days I'll not misread a setup lol

Ahh, this is chill. Potential to go to D4, while with 6 players from start I imagine it's difficult to get to even 100 posts per game day. If that's how a game would go, that'd be boring, but anything can happen. I feel like something is missing here :/

Ftr, I think it's unusual wincon ratio: Town needs 1 correct lynch while Mafia can need 4 or 5 mislynches; 3 or 4 if lucky I guess.
Meanwhile the special game mechanic really only benefits Town imho, Mafia can just hope to not fuck up and seem random. (I am one of the players who believe every info is pro town)

This setup being mostly Killess forces the Gunslinger to be Townier than almost every Towny in the game.

Atm, neither team benefits from lynching the Bandit, the slot is irrelevant in that regard. Mafia can bus him and so gain a kill of their choice; but busing has its own information risks while eliminations are 1 for 1 and they lose that 1 vote power, so not even that might be worth it, though sometimes perhaps.


Just random thoughts I'm having about the setup; make of em what you want or nothing at all it's ok :blink1:

Ftr, I think it's unusual wincon ratio: Town needs 1 correct lynch while Mafia can need 4 or 5 mislynches; 3 or 4 if lucky I guess.
Meanwhile the special game mechanic really only benefits Town imho, Mafia can just hope to not fuck up and seem random. (I am one of the players who believe every info is pro town)

This setup being mostly Killess forces the Gunslinger to be Townier than almost every Towny in the game.

Atm, neither team benefits from lynching the Bandit, the slot is irrelevant in that regard. Mafia can bus him and so gain a kill of their choice; but busing has its own information risks while eliminations are 1 for 1 and they lose that 1 vote power, so not even that might be worth it, though sometimes perhaps.


Just random thoughts I'm having about the setup; make of em what you want or nothing at all it's ok