Register

User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 75

Thread: Host-ban list

  1. #1

    Host-ban list

    Many players do not outright troll, but they will force the other members of their lobby to play a troll save, when given the chance.

    I'm not talking about cult saves or slightly questionable saves.

    I'm talking about the people who force lobbies to play 14 SK 1 citizen saves, game after game. The kinds of saves that result in a lobby remake by default, before the game even starts. Obviously nobody will play the save, so it just wasted 14 people's time by having to remake.

    I am proposing that a list be introduced which prohibits players from being able to host (set up the game) if they are placed on it. Host-ban list (ie, banned from hosting).

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Re: Host-ban list

    You are exaggerating a bit though. I don't think I've ever seen someone actually manage to start a 14 SK vs something else save.

    There are those that like to host saves that aren't the traditional 8331, 933, or cult setups. However, at the end of the day, the -repick feature is there for a reason. If people don't pay attention and -repick then it is their own fault for allowing an odd setup to start.

    However, with Frinckles' mafia 2.0 update, the standard setups will be updated, so that instead of SOTD which everyone hates, there will be normal 933 and 8331 saves in those slots. It will therefore be a lot more noticable if a host chooses to use his own save rather than the standard 8331 or 933, which should make it more obvious when to repick if you don't want unusual setups.

    Writing this, I did have the idea that if the 8331 and 933 setups Frinckles puts out in his upcoming update are generally approved by the community, we could decrease the amount of votes required to repick WHEN THE HOST CHOOSES HIS OWN SETUP. Curious what others think about this topic.
    Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?

  4. #4

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    However, with Frinckles' mafia 2.0 update, the standard setups will be updated, so that instead of SOTD which everyone hates, there will be normal 933 and 8331 saves in those slots.
    Why no default cult saves? My 942 cult is most popular cult setup at the moment btw, it can be 3rd one!

  5. #5

  6. #6

  7. #7

    Re: Host-ban list

    This lever wouldnt be too hard to implement but I really dont think the reports guys want to be policing what is an acceptable setup and what isnt. Thats why the game is modular.

    If it still happens a lot after 2.0 we'll revisit it, but we're hoping like about that -default will become more appealing to people with the default variants that'll replacing the top two.
    Photobucket in 2017
    Quote Originally Posted by Brendan View Post
    if you have elixir to contend with gl hf

  8. #8

    Re: Host-ban list

    @Frinckles

    I would like to draw attention to this idea again for additional consideration. I'll give an example.

    Lately there has been a player going around hosting a save that appears normal, but in fact it is a troll save in disguise. The triad are unable to kill due to the configuration, and you can only discover this once the game is started.

    "b-b-but triad won one time last week! It's fair!"

    Idgaf. This is a troll setup and the players would not have agreed to it if they had known. 9/10 times the triad just quit when they realize the position they are in, and the game is functionally ruined. That is the point here. People don't want this save.

    Some players (triad) are inevitably destined to have a very negative experience with this setup. Is this really the kind of game experience we want for our community?

    So, to bring it back to the original topic, I believe that players who knowingly and repeatedly host these types of saves must be banned from hosting.

  9. #9

    Re: Host-ban list

    To address disguised troll saves, you could have the box that shows what the random slots can be (like you would see when hovering over rolelist in game) somewhere in the black space that is plentiful in the save select screen. Maybe even the mini rolecard icons (normally top of screen ingame) could fit in and change accordingly with the save.

    As well as alerts when shit is broken (ex: sheriff cant detect anything, triad cant kill, etc.)
    https://imgur.com/a/NqMwElZ fuck it heres all the sc2mafia pics i would have put in the sig

  10. #10

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by Grakylan View Post
    To address disguised troll saves, you could have the box that shows what the random slots can be (like you would see when hovering over rolelist in game) somewhere in the black space that is plentiful in the save select screen. Maybe even the mini rolecard icons (normally top of screen ingame) could fit in and change accordingly with the save.

    As well as alerts when shit is broken (ex: sheriff cant detect anything, triad cant kill, etc.)
    i think 1 limitation is all of that stuff gets calculated only after the save is set - calculating it in real time as the host makes changes would be difficult to do and probably lag the shit out of the game. I believe some of those calculations are occurring during that slow transition before the start of day 1.

    But i do have an idea on that which seems feasible. When the host clicks start, all the settings should be calculated. The setup screen can be replaced with the settings screen that you currently get after the game has started. If people repick, then it essentially resets back to the save setup screen.

    This way, frinckles doesn't have to add new graphical elements, and can just reuse the stuff that already exists
    Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?

  11. #11

    Re: Host-ban list

    Also, i'd suggest that we rework -repick. I think a pop-up voting system with buttons like "repick, don't care, don't repick", where each choice gives +1, 0, or -1 votes to repicking might be better than the current system. And then if the number at the end is at least half of all who voted, then the save is repicked?
    Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?

  12. #12

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    To enforce this new feature we would require people to submit replays of these people constantly initiating these brave setups. I'm not sure if it will be effective enough to warrant doing it. Interesting idea
    I don't think submitting more than one replay is necessary. A troll save ruins the game for others just like gamethrowing does. If a host admits his save is troll but also thinks it's funny/doesn't give a shit, then that's all the evidence you really need to host-ban.

  13. #13

    Re: Host-ban list

    I'm not going to put someone on a host-ban list for throwing up a troll save once lol.

    And what is a troll save? Is it a save that is different to 933 in a minor way, is it a save that doesn't resemble anything like 933 but is more or less functional, is it the 14 arsonists 1 veteran save, or is it all of the above?

  14. #14

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    You are exaggerating a bit though. I don't think I've ever seen someone actually manage to start a 14 SK vs something else save.
    I played a 6 any random save pretty recently. Yes, saves like this are pretty "rare," but not when you compare it to the amount of gamethrowing you see. Obviously, with every other punishment, you need to consider other factors, like how new the player is and if he's intentionally hosting this save to troll.

    I also played a save a few times that appeared normal, but had an 80% cit chance. I'm quite certain the host was trolling since nobody wants citizen as a role and you'd need to manually set the "Citizen" slider to like 10 for this to happen in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    There are those that like to host saves that aren't the traditional 8331, 933, or cult setups. However, at the end of the day, the -repick feature is there for a reason. If people don't pay attention and -repick then it is their own fault for allowing an odd setup to start.
    I understand what you're saying, but this game doesn't reward active participation or serious play. I see heart-attacks and leavers almost every game. There are players who clearly know better that don't give a legitimate defense on trial, don't leave a lw, or lynch someone just for the fun of it. Since the mod is generally too fast-paced and short for people to scum-read based on how others talk, we tend to just follow leads (for example, "I'm sheriff and 9 is triad" or "I jailed 6 last night and there were no kills"). I've seen players in every faction win without doing anything the entire game, and this happens too often because games are usually too short to analyze who's speaking while checking role lists, who pm's the mayor/marshall, and vote patterns---not to mention that a quiet person isn't necessarily evil in the first place. I hate longer games too, but I just wanted to point that out.

  15. #15

    Re: Host-ban list

    At the same time, playing with trolls can be hilarious. People come up with the craziest shit. The mod is more casual than forum anyway.

    I swear if I just spam AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA every game I'll basically have the same win percentage with the amount of fuckery that goes on, LOL.

  16. #16

    Re: Host-ban list

    I'm very happy to see that my comment has spurred some constructive discussion on this topic. I think any of the ideas mentioned so far would be excellent additions to the game. They are all very good ideas. @Frinckles

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    I'm not going to put someone on a host-ban list for throwing up a troll save once lol.

    And what is a troll save? Is it a save that is different to 933 in a minor way, is it a save that doesn't resemble anything like 933 but is more or less functional, is it the 14 arsonists 1 veteran save, or is it all of the above?
    A troll save, as I have already explained, is a troll with blatantly invalid options leading to zero functional chance of winning for certain roles. These are options/settings where if someone gets a specific role, they are damned as far as winning goes. The game is effectively ruined for this person in their role before it even started. These types of setups do not build a positive game experience for our community.

    For example:
    Triad/mafia that can't kill.
    Sheriffs that can't detect anything useful to the setup (sheriff that can only detect triad in a cult save, for example).
    Confirmed citizens in the save (especially when they are the only town gov - this is a double whammy for the town)

    Notice that the list does not include unusual saves. Unusual saves can be fun. Saves where someone is guaranteed to be useless or have zero functional chance of winning are not.

    In these setups I've listed, someone is bound to have a very negative game experience. These situations can be prevented by punishing troll hosts, or implementing new features/verification/repicks to make sure the game doesn't start under those circumstances. I think all of the suggestions brought up so far are very good for helping solve this.

  17. #17

  18. #18
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Host-ban list

    whats the definition of a troll save? we don't punish people for playing poorly - are we going to start punishing them for hosting shit setups? maybe they genuinely think their setups are good

  19. #19
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Host-ban list

    I had a really unusual clue setup back when I played sc2, some people took it seriously and played it to the best of their ability - others didn't. would that make me a troll host? my save was really, really different from the usual 9/3/3

    btw triad couldn't kill (they had one nightkill in the form of a disguiser/kidnapper)

  20. #20
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Host-ban list

    I agree with aamirus that a rework of the repack system seems like the best solution. you get the best of both worlds that way, though at the same time it may discourage experimentation.

  21. #21
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Host-ban list

    with regards to troll hosts, you could, hypothetically, institute a separate rule where if a host provably hosted a troll setup just for the heck of it (and I mean provably, idk how, he has to specifically say something in this regard or do something suggestive of that), you could e.g. watchlist them/host ban them after too many violations.

  22. #22

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    with regards to troll hosts, you could, hypothetically, institute a separate rule where if a host provably hosted a troll setup just for the heck of it (and I mean provably, idk how, he has to specifically say something in this regard or do something suggestive of that), you could e.g. watchlist them/host ban them after too many violations.
    This. owU. Uwo

  23. #23

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    though at the same time it may discourage experimentation.
    as if its not already discouraged enough.

    Have a playlist for 933s and 8331s, make people submit their 933s and 8331s there, disallowing hosting them for the time being: so if you have a save, it has to be something new, otherwise just use the playlist and play a random 933/8331 variant.
    https://imgur.com/a/NqMwElZ fuck it heres all the sc2mafia pics i would have put in the sig

  24. #24

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    I'm not going to put someone on a host-ban list for throwing up a troll save once lol.

    And what is a troll save? Is it a save that is different to 933 in a minor way, is it a save that doesn't resemble anything like 933 but is more or less functional, is it the 14 arsonists 1 veteran save, or is it all of the above?
    I like this question for its direction. On a basic level I feel like discussions always jump from potential problem to potential solution while verification of the problem gets skipped. We always throw around "This can be a fix" without stopping to ask "Is a fix really needed"
    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    if we could just stop catering to the toxic attitude and apathy that has become the culture of this site.
    Its easy to tear something down. Building something real takes a level of conviction and dedication that is not cool or fun.

  25. #25

    Re: Host-ban list

    Yeah and while I do see a purpose for a host ban-listing for the blatant troll setups working fine (stump/scumbag, consistently initiating high percent failure setups, etc), it starts to get murky towards the brave setups where it then becomes a subjective dilemma which is my issue with host-ban listing. It's hard to enforce something subjective as you will always have different opinions on all sides of the spectrum for both staff and players.

    Ideally it would be great to somehow get more information to the players before the host's setup is initiated. Troll setups are known to be hidden behind vague UI elements that only the host knows the values of. However as mentioned elsewhere, a dynamic system would be either a lot of work for Frinckles, or unobtainable due to limitations. For example the percent failure prompt only appears after the save is initiated. To get the map to iterate over the setup and produce an unstable warning before a setup is loaded.. yeah I'm not sure. And that would be a lot more basic than a fully fledged dynamic system to present all the setups features to other players before the setup is initiated.

  26. #26

    Re: Host-ban list

    The only way I can see more information being presented is if the entire setup process is overhauled where ALL information is presented on the screen for the players to look over, not hidden behind UI elements. This would look disgusting and be an overload of information tho.

    Could also let players click through the elements as they currently are (without being able to change), however this would probably not achieve much as it would take due diligence on majority of players to scrutinise and agree to disagree with the setup and -repick. And that's assuming they even have enough time to find any hidden mechanics they disagree with.

  27. #27

  28. #28
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Host-ban list

    Just write a theorem prover. If it proves the setup is gay, BAN THE HOST

  29. #29

  30. #30

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    What was the reasoning for repick not being enough?

    1 -- People can host troll saves in disguise. Saves where everything appears normal, but settings make it awful (triad/mafia that cant kill, sheriffs that cant detect anything useful, etc). Please see my other post about the player currently going around doing this. You can't repick this when you don't know.

    2 -- Having to repick saves like this just doesn't work well in practice. Most players are afk or just not attentive during the setup period. The game places the burden of solving this problem on the players and it allows for mistakes to be made, while still not punishing the players who consistently do this.

  31. #31

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by Etheopian View Post
    1 -- People can host troll saves in disguise. Saves where everything appears normal, but settings make it awful (triad/mafia that cant kill, sheriffs that cant detect anything useful, etc). Please see my other post about the player currently going around doing this. You can't repick this when you don't know.

    2 -- Having to repick saves like this just doesn't work well in practice. Most players are afk or just not attentive during the setup period. The game places the burden of solving this problem on the players and it allows for mistakes to be made, while still not punishing the players who consistently do this.
    If I saw someone hosting a troll game I would remember their name for next time.

    And if players are afk and not attentive doesn't that also negatively impact the game?

    How about an alternative, rather than a blacklist for people to setup? What about a whitelist? If people want to be able to host setups they have to apply for it first?
    Cryptonic made this sig

  32. #32

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    If I saw someone hosting a troll game I would remember their name for next time.

    And if players are afk and not attentive doesn't that also negatively impact the game?

    How about an alternative, rather than a blacklist for people to setup? What about a whitelist? If people want to be able to host setups they have to apply for it first?
    A white list for hosting would be ridiculous. I don't think we want to be flooded with whitelist requests.

    Etheo does make some good points. Even with my 4-repick votes, I find it very hard to repick, and afking during just the setup phase is a completely normal thing.

    Just like we handle Pointbans, we could handle something similar. A staff will review a replay, and determine if the replay is a troll save. First offense, is a watchlist. Second offense is a Host-banlist. Something like that.

    That being said, I don't think a lone Administrator that can't turn to DH is a troll save. My logic is similar to an unlucky Witch doctor, who couldn't convert town. Since we don't hold most neutrals accountable for some crimes(survivor role quitting/gamethrowing), it's completely OK to treat this lone triad as a neutral.
    I have no use for these bloodless minnows. Bring me a prey that will sate my bloodlust. I hunger.

  33. #33

    Re: Host-ban list

    Blatant troll saves already fall under griefing and are punished accordingly, and “brave” setups as rumox calls them should not be punished - you not liking a save is not the same thing as the save being unfair or otherwise intentionally shitty.

    If you don’t like yodaddy’s save then host your own lobbies. A much simpler solution than asking the limited staff to process countless host blacklist or whitelist requests. I support improving the repick system and displaying more information on the setup screen, but those ideas can have their own thread
    Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?

  34. #34

    Re: Host-ban list

    Etheopian calls me a “troll” because he doesn’t like my 8331 save. He is the only one who complains day and night about it. He leave trains and rolequits when he is a town or mafia role because he doesn’t like the fact that there’s an any random possible triad with a 0.1%-2% chance. That’s super low I might add. My save has no confirmed citizen, sheriff can detect everything, and lone mafia can kill. This player ruins games and kicks me in lobbies because he doesn’t like my save. Nobody likes this player and I wish this guy wasn’t unreportable. He needs to stop before I get blizzard involved.
    Last edited by Yodaddy2; May 1st, 2020 at 03:04 PM.

  35. #35

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    How about an alternative, rather than a blacklist for people to setup? What about a whitelist? If people want to be able to host setups they have to apply for it first?
    If I was going to implement a change this is what I would have done. Although I would still question if a change is needed. Repick is great and its weighted to give priority to players who have donated and have lots of points.
    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    if we could just stop catering to the toxic attitude and apathy that has become the culture of this site.
    Its easy to tear something down. Building something real takes a level of conviction and dedication that is not cool or fun.

  36. #36

    Re: Host-ban list

    Instead of arguing the merits of what is a proper save, why not expand the system that prevents a save from starting because a role has an invalid setting. For example, a save will not start if Marshall is set to 1 group execution and no value checked for the number of people to execute. If you attempt to start a save like this, you will get a message saying "Marshall action limit is invalid"

    Why don't we expand this to some other roles or outright remove settings, such as triad requiring an enforcer to kill or sheriff that can't detect anything because all the boxes for alignments are unchecked. Moreover, there are also settings for GF/DH, MM, SK,Arso,Exec to make them detectable and not night immune that people really hate when its messed with. There is also a setting for disguiser/informant that shows the role and last will of the person you targeted instead of ???. Theres settings for mayor to be healed by doctor, investigator to detect exact roles, and marshall can get 2 group executions with 4 people each.

    We should think about why we have some of these settings to begin with if they can be abused and turned into the types of troll saves like Etheopian is talking about.

  37. #37

    Re: Host-ban list

    It's not abuse. While Yodaddy's setup can piss people off, it's well within his and other players right to tinker and tailor the settings to their desired needs. The issue is that the settings are more-or-less hidden so the only way players would be aware of a save with non-meta options is if they have played it before.

    Hopefully when the meta variants get added to the game to replace the old ones, this issue may solve itself ("this guy isnt using the pre-built variant... repick!"). But the issue of hidden settings which players would evidently like to know still persists. Ideally we would want players to be more receptive to off-meta setups but if they can't blindly trust the host then they will more often than not just be re-picked, role-quitted or leave-trained. There needs to be a way to properly convey the setup information before it is accepted to the other players. If that can be achieved I think we will be in a good place.

    As for the repick function, I agree it should be looked at being reworked. A save acceptance phase where people have to vote yay or nay before the game progresses is interesting. A timed event where once it finishes, the game determines whether to proceed or not based on votes (and possibly considers people not voting) but this would probably be best left to someone who is versed in statistics to conjure up a fair system. The people that are afk/do not vote could make this a moot option.

  38. #38

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    As for the repick function, I agree it should be looked at being reworked. A save acceptance phase where people have to vote yay or nay before the game progresses is interesting. A timed event where once it finishes, the game determines whether to proceed or not based on votes (and possibly considers people not voting) but this would probably be best left to someone who is versed in statistics to conjure up a fair system. The people that are afk/do not vote could make this a moot option.
    as of now we dont have enough time to -repick, but this is going to the opposite extreme to add a phase that adds more waiting to an already long wait for each game.

    extend save start time from 15 to 30 sec, but only after you add changes to let non-host players see every detail about the save. If there's a way to let non-host players click through the save stuff on the right as if theyre host, but not have access to the checkboxs, add/remove buttons, reorder buttons, and Start button.
    https://imgur.com/a/NqMwElZ fuck it heres all the sc2mafia pics i would have put in the sig

  39. #39

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by Grakylan View Post
    as of now we dont have enough time to -repick, but this is going to the opposite extreme to add a phase that adds more waiting to an already long wait for each game.

    extend save start time from 15 to 30 sec, but only after you add changes to let non-host players see every detail about the save. If there's a way to let non-host players click through the save stuff on the right as if theyre host, but not have access to the checkboxs, add/remove buttons, reorder buttons, and Start button.
    No, I think a system of a pop-up window after hitting start, where the window asks to repick or not, and makes a decision based on only those who actually voted, would be best.
    Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?

  40. #40

  41. #41

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    has anybody else played runling run? I am suggesting a similar vote box as that game has for deciding the difficulty level at the start
    That should be a pretty similar UI trick, I can't imagine it's impossible to implement, or even that difficult considering stuff like that is in WOL and the other campaigns
    Quote Originally Posted by MattZed View Post
    deathworld's and RLVG's suicides made me lul. I take a lot of pleasure in knowing that I gave you an night action, and that you used it to kill yourself.
    Quote Originally Posted by yzb25 View Post
    At least Mesk has lewdy lefty and raunchy righty. You're not even Canadian.
    Quote Originally Posted by Unknown1234 View Post
    BRO HUUUUUUMP!! That's so Mesk.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stealthbomber16 View Post
    fucketh me in the ass

  42. #42

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    It's not abuse. While Yodaddy's setup can piss people off, it's well within his and other players right to tinker and tailor the settings to their desired needs. The issue is that the settings are more-or-less hidden so the only way players would be aware of a save with non-meta options is if they have played it before.

    Hopefully when the meta variants get added to the game to replace the old ones, this issue may solve itself ("this guy isnt using the pre-built variant... repick!"). But the issue of hidden settings which players would evidently like to know still persists. Ideally we would want players to be more receptive to off-meta setups but if they can't blindly trust the host then they will more often than not just be re-picked, role-quitted or leave-trained. There needs to be a way to properly convey the setup information before it is accepted to the other players. If that can be achieved I think we will be in a good place.

    As for the repick function, I agree it should be looked at being reworked. A save acceptance phase where people have to vote yay or nay before the game progresses is interesting. A timed event where once it finishes, the game determines whether to proceed or not based on votes (and possibly considers people not voting) but this would probably be best left to someone who is versed in statistics to conjure up a fair system. The people that are afk/do not vote could make this a moot option.

    My setup pisses off 1-2 people and Etheopian is one of them. JohnEveryman has a 933 setup with 40% Janitor and Coroner is excluded from the save. In my mind I believe this is an unbalanced troll save. Town has no chance to figure out who janitor has cleaned 3 times. Plus, Coroner can determine who’s lying through their lw about visiting someone or for example do an autopsy on dead Mayor to figure out if he was executed by Jailor or Kidnapper. Noobs hate Coroner because 1. they don’t know how to play it or it doesn’t find the mafia right away. It’s an advanced role in my opinion. What frustrates me is that I leave that kind of save because town has a low chance of winning and I get reported for rolequitting or leave train. My 8331 which has 8 town roles, 3 mafia, 3 Neutrals, 1 Any Random that can be any role in the game (except mafia, 4 mafia is op). That is a true 8331 and when Etheopian rolequits as Framer or Lookout or even starts a leave train he doesn’t get punished, but I do. I’m not sure if he’s a donor and donors are unreportable, but Etheopian, Airdawg, and JoeyDX are the 3 trolls that constantly troll me and the game and it doesn’t make the game fun.

  43. #43

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by Yodaddy2 View Post
    My setup pisses off 1-2 people and Etheopian is one of them. JohnEveryman has a 933 setup with 40% Janitor and Coroner is excluded from the save. In my mind I believe this is an unbalanced troll save. Town has no chance to figure out who janitor has cleaned 3 times. Plus, Coroner can determine who’s lying through their lw about visiting someone or for example do an autopsy on dead Mayor to figure out if he was executed by Jailor or Kidnapper. Noobs hate Coroner because 1. they don’t know how to play it or it doesn’t find the mafia right away. It’s an advanced role in my opinion. What frustrates me is that I leave that kind of save because town has a low chance of winning and I get reported for rolequitting or leave train. My 8331 which has 8 town roles, 3 mafia, 3 Neutrals, 1 Any Random that can be any role in the game (except mafia, 4 mafia is op). That is a true 8331 and when Etheopian rolequits as Framer or Lookout or even starts a leave train he doesn’t get punished, but I do. I’m not sure if he’s a donor and donors are unreportable, but Etheopian, Airdawg, and JoeyDX are the 3 trolls that constantly troll me and the game and it doesn’t make the game fun.
    That sound just like my save that I used to run. Love that any random.
    Cryptonic made this sig

  44. #44

  45. #45

  46. #46

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    That sound just like my save that I used to run. Love that any random.
    Exactly, I love rolling the dice and letting any random be any role in the game. It adds deception to the game. Majority of people enjoy my save and I don’t see the big issue. Maybe my save is too advanced for Etheopian and his crew.

  47. #47

    Re: Host-ban list

    Quote Originally Posted by Yodaddy2 View Post
    Exactly, I love rolling the dice and letting any random be any role in the game. It adds deception to the game. Majority of people enjoy my save and I don’t see the big issue. Maybe my save is too advanced for Etheopian and his crew.
    You play games without pm enabled? It's a personal preference of mine.
    Cryptonic made this sig

  48. #48

  49. #49

  50. #50

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •