Gameroom policy discussion thread

I'll grant that hosting in MU is easier with modbot (as long as you don't do weird roles MB cannot handle) and the ability to close/open the thread at will.

Hosting here, with smaller postcounts, should not be too taxing even with an influx of MU folks.

Side note, maybe you should add a link to Novice’s script to the welcome to org mafia post, as even if vote counts don’t work (due to people using unvotes for some reason) it still makes it far easier to ISO someone.

Far easier…? We already have the Who's Posted? feature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

From the updated rules thread:



I've marked this for over a year, that some time after the 2015 revival hosts began universally shutting down unmonitored private communications, and typically even one or both of night chat and public participation by the dead.

I'm assuming it has to do either with off-site cultural influence or wider theoretical developments...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

It's kind of a combination of things. I'd say the heart of the change is two related events: First, a lot of the players that started here (or CFC, etc) have branched out and played mafia elsewhere, where more of an emphasis is placed on keeping the game self-contained. Secondly, most/all of our new arrivals nowadays also come from mafia sites elsewhere (as opposed to them being regular Orgahs who have gotten curious) and thus come in with their own expectations and standards, which are more in line with the changes you described.

I don't want to go so far as to say that the games will not fill if we stick to the old style, "Wild West" type of environment that we saw in the monster games from years back, but I do think it's fair to say they'll have a harder time filling. Any mafia > no mafia, so we cater the wishes of the people.

Also don't worry, when I run Pirate Ship IV next year, it'll have all of the usual outside communication and PMing backroom deals that you're used to. :yes:

---

GH definitely hits the nail on the head here, but its also just part of the people who host the games naturally evolving their preferred hosting style/games. When you allow dead players to post or people to PM it does change the balance of the game a bit, or at least some of the potential outcomes.

Out of thread communication has its own problems: Networking isn't something that is fun for a lot of people, a lot of work can end up being done outside of the thread rather than in it - often ends up being a group of people who have a clearing role or action deciding a lot of what happens. Also typically requires more attention from people to respond to PMs and conversations. Really it ends up changing how the game is played a little too much.

Dead Players Chat: Not fun for mafia, they get no use out of it, and the people they kill despite not being able to vote, can still talk, when you kill someone its for a reason typically and usually its because you dont want that player to keep talking/performing an action. Not being able to participate after death gives kills some actual weight - the thread loses a voice. We've also shifted from nightkilling the same players early game over and over so its no longer a participation thing either where people are being robbed from playing the game.

Both also provide balance issues in terms of roles and reveals, you have to keep the dead chat + private communication ability in mind when putting roles into your games. Having a cop (not that we play with cops much) that can PM his villagers with his results and get them to fakeclaim for him, etc could be horrendous for mafia.

We've also shifted from alignment reveals to alignment + role reveals which is a mixture of personal style and necessity for the setup.

Around 2015 is when a lot of Orgahs starting properly branching out from here onto other sites and ideas mingle.

I think you could get a game running with out of thread mechanics or dead chat (or both to some degree) going but in the end it provides a more streamlined, more 'fun' experience without most of the time. I have positive memories of both, but no real desire to return back to those times, I think the changes are for the better, its just part of the evolution of how mafia is played. We started with cops, realised they aren't much fun, so we don't play with them, or jesters, or what have you. Hosts and players slowly work out good and bad combinations.

EDIT: Something like Capo or Pirate Ship require private communications and that is an integral part so no complaints there, its just for a lot of regular setups private comms isnt quite as necessary.

In a vanilla game you could possibly get away with using them though, for sure.

Fair points, though a little unsatisfying.

We may not have a large enough sample to examine, but in principle I don't expect that these features in isolation would be found to skew the game toward Town victories. Not to a significant extent.

One problem is that it's been 4 years since games were held regularly that this was the norm; it's difficult to remember, especially since in general most people didn't proactively utilize these features where available. Most people didn't PM whether or not there were roles, most people didn't participate (or gave only a limp attempt) after dying, and most didn't use the thread at night (though part of it may have been connected to the overall low post volume of that era's games).

It probably isn't a monocausal relationship, but one shift I lament is the overturning of the activity distribution: in the past, activity would largely be consistent throughout the game (days), with perhaps even a increase toward the endgame - going out with a bang. Nowadays, half or more of all game activity is usually concentrated in the first 2 or 3 rounds, and as time passes one or both sides become too demoralized and exhausted to do beyond the motions.

One thing to note about dead player chat was that it could be useful for Mafia in those non-reveal vanilla-ish setups, commonly associated with 2-3 Mafia even in rather large games. Why did that feature go by the wayside, no reveals and small teams? I often cursed it, but it's odd to see it eliminated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Fair points, though a little unsatisfying.

We may not have a large enough sample to examine, but in principle I don't expect that these features in isolation would be found to skew the game toward Town victories. Not to a significant extent.

One problem is that it's been 4 years since games were held regularly that this was the norm; it's difficult to remember, especially since in general most people didn't proactively utilize these features where available. Most people didn't PM whether or not there were roles, most people didn't participate (or gave only a limp attempt) after dying, and most didn't use the thread at night (though part of it may have been connected to the overall low post volume of that era's games).

It probably isn't a monocausal relationship, but one shift I lament is the overturning of the activity distribution: in the past, activity would largely be consistent throughout the game (days), with perhaps even a increase toward the endgame - going out with a bang. Nowadays, half or more of all game activity is usually concentrated in the first 2 or 3 rounds, and as time passes one or both sides become too demoralized and exhausted to do beyond the motions.

One thing to note about dead player chat was that it could be useful for Mafia in those non-reveal vanilla-ish setups, commonly associated with 2-3 Mafia even in rather large games. Why did that feature go by the wayside, no reveals and small teams? I often cursed it, but it's odd to see it eliminated.

---

You're right about games in the past and how they were handled, but times and players have changed - it may very well get more use.

You've got a good point about the change of pacing in the games. In the earlier days people treated D1 as random and the first couple of days were mostly random votes or one liners until someone said enough is enough and the game really kicked into gear. Now the philosophy has changed and people kick into gear in the early game (and exhaust themself for the late game as you say). There is a higher focus on posting and interactions now compared to before and the 'old style' doesn't really work. I'm not sure on the best course of action here besides getting players to limit themself a little d1/d2 in order to have a more healthy endgame but players can play how they like.

No reveals has tended to go the way of the dodo mostly because it doesn't provide any sense of progression for town + leads to player exhaustion as you don't have anything to really grasp onto. There is room for perhaps old style Mafia X games once in a while but I think in general people prefer having results and reveals and knowing what they're up against to some degree.

Game has changed to where volume and posting is expected over just accepting the baseline of a number of players of 2-3 posting at best per phase.

Also now we have a few people who highpost a lot (and at higher numbers than before) so volume is up in general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nl.

No reveals has tended to go the way of the dodo mostly because it doesn't provide any sense of progression for town + leads to player exhaustion as you don't have anything to really grasp onto. There is room for perhaps old style Mafia X games once in a while but I think in general people prefer having results and reveals and knowing what they're up against to some degree.

---

Acutally I was thinking of hosting an old-style mafia game with no reveals (or only partial ones), no hammer, just your (half-)wits and the truth. Maybe with a day vigilante or so. I'm not sure how to balance it, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Barto

Acutally I was thinking of hosting an old-style mafia game with no reveals (or only partial ones), no hammer, just your (half-)wits and the truth. Maybe with a day vigilante or so. I'm not sure how to balance it, though.

---

@El Barto

I actually have a scum role in an upcoming mafia game on the Playground that can hold the role reveal of a single player indefinitely. If this scum dies, or picks a new target, the player's hidden role is revealed at the start of the next applicable phase.

Just something you might want to consider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Logic

@El Barto

I actually have a scum role in an upcoming mafia game on the Playground that can hold the role reveal of a single player indefinitely. If this scum dies, or picks a new target, the player's hidden role is revealed at the start of the next applicable phase.

Just something you might want to consider.

---

I was thinking of having the old ‘forensic’ rôle, actually. Once a certain player is killed there's no more reveals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Barto

I was thinking of having the old ‘forensic’ rôle, actually. Once a certain player is killed there's no more reveals.

---

That sounds pretty brutal. I could see that being very difficult for town.

Out of curiosity, why do you leave the accent over the "O" in "rôle?" I've seen you do that twice in quick succession now.

I posted about that in the Chess game. It's the French spelling and pizzaman has decided to speak French so I humour that garçon.