September 3rd, 2017, 02:36 PM
[QUOTE=Gyrlander;692810]Fuck you. And stop plagiarizing Firebringer.[/QUOTE]
Must be the ponies man. They control everything, they are everywhere.
[I]Last edited by [COLOR="#FFFFFF"][b]Cryptonic[/b][/COLOR]; September 3rd, 2017 at 03:36 PM. [B]Reason:[/b] conspiracy[/I]
Originally Posted by
Gyrlander
Fuck you. And stop plagiarizing Firebringer.
Must be the ponies man. They control everything, they are everywhere.
Last edited by Cryptonic; September 3rd, 2017 at 03:36 PM. Reason: conspiracy
September 3rd, 2017, 02:16 PM
[QUOTE=deathworlds;692807][B][COLOR="#FFFFFF"]Nice meme, just leave my signups out of it please <3[/COLOR][/B][/QUOTE]
Nope, I will not drink the Kool aide. I am going to ask every person from now on what they mean by random. If I don't get a answer to my liking, I am not signing up.
What you want is to give hosts the power when they already have all the power and one of their simple tasks that they need to do unbiased is assigning and getting the actual player list determined by whatever signs are available. Then obviously manage the games. It is not the same thing happening as when someone picks the player list as when they use a rng system. RNG is unbiased, Selection is.
Someone in skype was telling me when they play FMs that whenever a certain player hosted they always managed to work in a certain player list, which wasn't already defined in signup but was shown in possibilities, so there is this other game where players now have to predict what the host is doing which isn't fair to someone who doesn't know the host. You not see the problem with this?
Also I tried to disprove santas existence when I was a child, I was quite happy when I found out he didn't exist.
Also to your weighting system did you not see you can add limitations on players as defined? Or categories? You have one category and no player limits. Yep, couldn't just put two different categories or do player limits. Nope going to go with an illustration to make my idea look ridiculous.
Here ill help you.
Lets do two player categories. Good and Bad. Same number of roles.
Bad
Bad
Bad
Good
Good
Bad=SuperJack and Grylander, Good = Iced_Monopoly
OF COURSE IT ISNT BALANCED
Originally Posted by
deathworlds
Nice meme, just leave my signups out of it please <3
Nope, I will not drink the Kool aide. I am going to ask every person from now on what they mean by random. If I don't get a answer to my liking, I am not signing up.
What you want is to give hosts the power when they already have all the power and one of their simple tasks that they need to do unbiased is assigning and getting the actual player list determined by whatever signs are available. Then obviously manage the games. It is not the same thing happening as when someone picks the player list as when they use a rng system. RNG is unbiased, Selection is.
Someone in skype was telling me when they play FMs that whenever a certain player hosted they always managed to work in a certain player list, which wasn't already defined in signup but was shown in possibilities, so there is this other game where players now have to predict what the host is doing which isn't fair to someone who doesn't know the host. You not see the problem with this?
Also I tried to disprove santas existence when I was a child, I was quite happy when I found out he didn't exist.
Also to your weighting system did you not see you can add limitations on players as defined? Or categories? You have one category and no player limits. Yep, couldn't just put two different categories or do player limits. Nope going to go with an illustration to make my idea look ridiculous.
Here ill help you.
Lets do two player categories. Good and Bad. Same number of roles.
Bad
Bad
Bad
Good
Good
Bad=SuperJack and Grylander, Good = Iced_Monopoly
OF COURSE IT ISNT BALANCED
September 3rd, 2017, 11:14 AM
[QUOTE=Stealthbomber16;692797][URL="https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/31951-Don-t-Call-Your-Roles-quot-Random-quot-Unless-you-actuall-you-mean-Random"]for those of you who dont get the meme[/URL][/QUOTE]
Pls Stealth, this is a serious discussion about ethics. This has nothing to do with a meme.
Originally Posted by
Stealthbomber16
Pls Stealth, this is a serious discussion about ethics. This has nothing to do with a meme.
September 3rd, 2017, 09:48 AM
I felt we were getting way off topic on that signup thread discussing this, but I really think this should be done by all hosts future and present. I have no problem with you guys selecting the actual player list that is in the game, but could you be more transparent than saying "Random" when you don't mean it?
A more apt description for what you are doing might be "Selected" or "Picked" or "Chosen". When I was talking to this with SuperJack he thought hosts should call it hidden, but I don't think that really describes what you are doing. Although even that would be better than using "Random".
Random doesn't mean you picked it, that isn't random and no, it isn't semantics. Look up semantics if you don't understand what semantics mean.
I have no problem with hosts doing what they want with their player list for not having a shit game as long as you tell us about it. For instance Cryptonic mentioned in that thread that he doesn't want 7 Rachyl in a game because of the RNG system. Well here is a few ways to fix that:
1) A weighted system that makes Rachyl harder to get. Of course this is disclosed somewhere in signup.
2) Limitations on number of players possible. You can define that anywhere in the signup probably preferred in player cards.
3) Categories to limit how many of any "type" of player you define in the setup. Obviously shown in the signup.
The reason for this is for anyone who wants to come and play forum mafia who hasn't experienced it before. When a random player who has played arcade mafia comes on here obviously they are going to have a different experience from regular mafia. The thing is that when you aren't telling them things such as That you already decided on exact players in the game, it looks like the list is stacked even if you did it to balance it.
Like if you were a neutral poker dealer, you wouldn't stack the deck so that the players would get the cards you chosen, would you? Even if it was for balanced someone feels cheated.
I felt we were getting way off topic on that signup thread discussing this, but I really think this should be done by all hosts future and present. I have no problem with you guys selecting the actual player list that is in the game, but could you be more transparent than saying "Random" when you don't mean it?
A more apt description for what you are doing might be "Selected" or "Picked" or "Chosen". When I was talking to this with SuperJack he thought hosts should call it hidden, but I don't think that really describes what you are doing. Although even that would be better than using "Random".
Random doesn't mean you picked it, that isn't random and no, it isn't semantics. Look up semantics if you don't understand what semantics mean.
I have no problem with hosts doing what they want with their player list for not having a shit game as long as you tell us about it. For instance Cryptonic mentioned in that thread that he doesn't want 7 Rachyl in a game because of the RNG system. Well here is a few ways to fix that:
1) A weighted system that makes Rachyl harder to get. Of course this is disclosed somewhere in signup.
2) Limitations on number of players possible. You can define that anywhere in the signup probably preferred in player cards.
3) Categories to limit how many of any "type" of player you define in the setup. Obviously shown in the signup.
The reason for this is for anyone who wants to come and play forum mafia who hasn't experienced it before. When a random player who has played arcade mafia comes on here obviously they are going to have a different experience from regular mafia. The thing is that when you aren't telling them things such as That you already decided on exact players in the game, it looks like the list is stacked even if you did it to balance it.
Like if you were a neutral poker dealer, you wouldn't stack the deck so that the players would get the cards you chosen, would you? Even if it was for balanced someone feels cheated.
Reply With Quote