Discussion: Detectives

[Zack]

Askthepizzaguy's thread about overpowered roles, and the discussion therein, got me thinking. More specifically, it got me thinking most notably about one thing in particular:


Do detective roles actually enhance the game experience?


Now, I know what a lot of you are probably thinking. Of course they do! They're as much of a part of mafia as the mafia themselves are! Before you scream bloody murder, listen to my ramblings.

~~~~~~~~~~

To me, the entire point of mafia is to have fun. Yes, winning is nice (and, don't get me wrong, every player's goal should definitely be to win), but I would much rather have a blast losing than have a terrible time winning. I think it's safe to say that I'm in the majority of Gameroom players with this philosophy; after all, according to Romanic's fabulous statistics thread, the average player loses significantly more than they win. Or, if you want that in cold numbers, out of a sampling size of three-hundred and twenty-seven players, the average player wins only 42.1% of the time -- less than half. Clearly, players aren't coming back to play more games because they're an unstoppable winning machine. Rather, it's typically because they had a fun time.

If the players keep playing games because they're fun, then it logically follows that the duty of the host is to craft a game which is fun for its players. Here's where the detective part comes in.

Do detective roles actually make the game more fun? Or are they only part of the game because it's such a traditional role?

Detectives often spiral games into "lynch whoever the detective tells us to lynch" mode, which I personally find boring. Mafia thrives when it is a game based on inferences and conjecture, and the inclusion of a detective role completely eliminates that inference and conjecture which makes the game fun. Putting together a case to nab a mafioso is one of the most thrilling and rewarding experiences a player can have; something a detective removes from the game. Why bother making a case when Mr. Detective will swoop in with his confirmed results, when he knows with certainty that a certain player is a scumbag? Where is the thrill and reward in lynching a mafioso because the host confirmed to you that player was, in fact, scum?

I know there are false detectives, but these raise problems in themselves. First, there is the problem that the host is outright lying to the player. Do we really want that in our games? I'm not talking about the host misleading the player; I have no quarrel with that. But lying -- not a half truth, not a red herring, not misleading, but LYING -- are we really okay with that? Secondly, who wants to receive a false detective role? If a false detective receives confirmation from the host that so-and-so is scum, when he actually isn't, that's two wasted lynches right there -- one to lynch so-and-so, then another to lynch the false detective the next day phase. Again, who wants to be a false detective?

Perhaps most importantly, there is also the issue of utterly ruining the game for the mafia. Getting caught out by a detective is the worst feeling in the world as a mafioso, because you did nothing wrong; one lucky player simply received confirmation from the host that you're scum.

That last point also leads to some players rarely being able to successfully win as mafia due to metagaming. Ask Askthepizzaguy about getting scanned on night one when he's mafia, it's happened to him several times.

More personally, I came this close to leaving mafia forever after this happened to me:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...6#post10881656

In four nights of play, I was...

Scanned: 7 times!
Attacked: 3 times!

Granted, not all of those were your typical detective results (mafia/scum), but still:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpo...&postcount=898

... scans Zack for items
... role scans zack
... faction scans zack
... scans zack for religious items
... scans zack for injury
... attacks zack
... faction scans zack
... attacks zack
... attacks zack
... PG scans zack

I can't put into words how utterly frustrating discovering that was for me. I by no means played a perfect game, but no matter how perfectly I played, there is no way I could have gotten away from seven scans without getting lynched. I had no way of avoiding the onslaught of scans, and it was for no other reason than because I'm me.

I know for a fact I'm not the only player with such horror stories to tell. There are plenty of people who likely have much worse stories.

Now tell me, is a role that eliminates a person's chance of winning as mafia, simply because of their username, a role which enhances the mafia experience?

~~~~~~~~~~

There is a relatively popular sports writer named Bill Simmons, someone I'd wager most of you have never heard of. He has a method, called "The Table Test", of determining the merit of a basketball player. "The Table Test" essentially states that a valuable player brings more to the table than he takes off. If a player brings a deadly three-pointer and a wicked crossover to the table; but takes defense, passing, discipline, chemistry, and rebounding off of it; that player, even though they bring a ton to the table, fails the Table Test.

What I ask, mafia players of the Gameroom, is whether or not detective roles pass the Table Test (the enjoyment of the players being the "Table"). Does it bring more to the Table than it takes off?

Me? I'm convinced that the detective role fails the Table Test. Miserably.



Discuss.

[Captain Blackadder]

To me it is a question of balance in order for the game to function you need balance traditionally detectives are put in to allow the town to have some form of power roles and in many games they are to mind essential any high level conversion game needs detectives otherwise you get to the point once you have lynched all original scum that traditional methods of scum detecting do not work. However I broadly agree and that is why in the recent games I hosted with my Roman theme had no detectives at all and the only game I hosted with detectives recently was Departed Dethy Mafia which needed detectives for obvious reasons. However I think detectives can work and can make the game better they just need a balancing mechanic that makes there use somewhat more fraught with difficulties.

[Ishmael]

I'm afraid I didn't read through the whole thing (sorry, I have limited internet access time right now), but I personally am against simple mafia/town scanners - it's just blind luck if the mafia get scanned, and they can't do anything about it. I think complementary scanners are more balanced, where at least two people need to work together to get a proper result - it brings trust issues into it, which is as mafia should be.

[White_eyes:D]

Some of the best (and most hilarious) games I have played had absolute detective scans, if we are going by fun factor here. I recall many times a detective tried to make a case on someone and it ended up backfiring. The most notable case off the top of my head was when CDF tried to get Pizzaguy lynched and Pizzaguy actually managed to convince town that he was the detective and CDF was the Mafia!

Every time I have been a absolute scan detective, it has ended in a absolute bloodbath for town or my faction. The problem that I see here is that if players think your scummy, you can't really do anything other then die or fool them. Most players can't be fooled that easily and as a result they scan you to be sure. When that happens I know you are tempted to think "THAT IS A DUMB ROLE" but doesn't the fault of not being able to fool the detective role rest with you? I know I blame myself even more then the detective role anyway.(or try to anyway)

In a game where mafia can recruit, a detective is a must but in other games I am not so sure if it is that useful anymore. Something to ponder on or make note of at least.

[Erebus]

From what I've seen, the power of the detective role is directly proportional to the amount of out of thread communication in a game.

I play on Realms Beyond Net, and we allow no out of thread communication (except masons and mafia). So it's typical for "seers" aka detectives to sit on several days worth of data lest they reveal too early and get killed off.

But even there we've started to debate the power of the Seer roles. Towns seem to win games with true seers and lose games with no seers or limited seers.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Some of the best (and most hilarious) games I have played had absolute detective scans, if we are going by fun factor here. I recall many times a detective tried to make a case on someone and it ended up backfiring. The most notable case off the top of my head was when CDF tried to get Pizzaguy lynched and Pizzaguy actually managed to convince town that he was the detective and CDF was the Mafia!

People still believe the things I say sometimes.

The ol' counterclaim had it's day in the sun, but that particular game was notable because I figured out who the detective was by assuming the guy voting for me without a real reason had scanned me guilty, and I accused him of being mafia before he accused me of being mafia.

You don't expect stuff like that, and being scanned and accused by a detective leaves you with few options. That was one of them.

Usually the person who counterclaims dies first, and then the first claimant dies just to be sure. It's the expected outcome for conflicting detective claims... one of them has to be mafia or really confused, neither are helpful for the town.




As for detectives making the game fun, I found them useful in Dethy-style games and I can appreciate their limited powers in Capo where role penetration and scan confusion was possible, but not always the case. Therefore, ambiguity.

Ambiguity saves detective roles from being broken. Certainty makes them broken.

[Askthepizzaguy]

From what I've seen, the power of the detective role is directly proportional to the amount of out of thread communication in a game.

I play on Realms Beyond Net, and we allow no out of thread communication (except masons and mafia). So it's typical for "seers" aka detectives to sit on several days worth of data lest they reveal too early and get killed off.

But even there we've started to debate the power of the Seer roles. Towns seem to win games with true seers and lose games with no seers or limited seers.

Detective roles shouldn't be allowed to PM under most circumstances, I'd agree that's usually a necessary balancing component. But again, balance is an equation based on the total of a game, not just a part of it. Power is easy to understand but balance depends on everything else in the game. You can have Detectives who can PM and still have a balanced game, but what has to be there against them is a stacked deck it would seem.

[Renata]

From what I've seen, the power of the detective role is directly proportional to the amount of out of thread communication in a game.

I play on Realms Beyond Net, and we allow no out of thread communication (except masons and mafia). So it's typical for "seers" aka detectives to sit on several days worth of data lest they reveal too early and get killed off.

But even there we've started to debate the power of the Seer roles. Towns seem to win games with true seers and lose games with no seers or limited seers.

This. They're much more dangerous, and hence much more annoying, in a game where out of thread communication is enabled. I'd go so far as to say that with out of thread communication, generic alignment detectives should by default not be present (and other sorts should be carefully considered) -- only include them if you can strongly justify the necessity. When detectives have to expose their role in public without the benefit of person-to-person contact (much less role reveal) to build trust, it's a whole different ball game and I have no issue with them as such, especially in mafia-playing cultures that also hide information in other ways (for example, you don't know which player killed who, or whether or not a roleblock or protection was effective; and a godfather is expected). Even there I prefer the occasional break from them, though.

I also dislike roles that return outright false results (with a few exceptions if expected in the culture, like a godfather).

[Askthepizzaguy]

I generally will not include a paranoid, naive, or insane detective in a game without a sane detective.

A handicapping role without being a balance against a powerful role, I just avoid. Nobody likes playing a handicapped role, especially if there's no other role on their team which at least makes up for it.

Vanilla townies are bad enough, getting outright false results without there being any hint that it's a bad role, is bad. At least if another detective revealed and said it is possible this is a game with multiple detectives, not all of them sane, then it's not totally broken. But a sole detective who gets bad results.... bleck. None for me.

[Jarema]

What if there was only a naive cop?
At first, he would have hard time, but eventualy, after learning what his scans means, he would be useful

[Askthepizzaguy]

I do not see how a naive cop all alone would be useful. All his scans will turn up innocent regardless, providing zero real information.

The only use a naive cop has is through luck, actually scanning only townies, and therefore returning correct results on all of them. Then, he would unwittingly act as a detective who has cleared townies but found no mafia.

That is not a reliable form of usefulness, however. A single scan of a mafioso by a naive detective can ruin your whole day.



If you meant to say insane detective then I agree.

[Jarema]

If you meant to say insane detective then I agree.

Yes, I want to say insane...