Quick Chat about FFA and close to FFA.

Espeonage · Post Post #0 (ISO) » Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:34 pm

So Free For All games are more commonly being played on other sites and being labelled as mafia despite not properly being mafia.

The main question I'm asking is, at what point is a game unrunnable as a mafia game?

If I have a 16 player game with four factions of three that know each other and a town of four players that don't know each other. Provided the game were to maintain some semblence of balance would that be runnable? It's not true FFA as there is a town, and the town is larger than any other faction in the game, but also does not make up half the playerlist.

Would that be mafia?

Does town need to make up more than 50% of the players in the game?
I'm sure that 3/3/3/8 is balanceable, swingy as hell but balanceable. However it also features a town that is less than half the playerlist.

ZZZX · Post Post #1 (ISO) » Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:37 pm

Q 3/3/3/8 can be do-able if you do not give all factions nks etc. And is a type of mafia. But as faction s incress it becomes another kind of game of faction v faction madness with 5nks per night (like a theme in po online I played called knights. 4 factions and in the first night half the pl dies. That is not mafia IMO.

Majiffy · Post Post #2 (ISO) » Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:10 pm

Check out my Oz Mafia. I've done some other setups with larger-numbers-of-factions as well.

Antihero · Post Post #3 (ISO) » Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:10 pm

In post 0, Espeonage wrote:If I have a 16 player game with four factions of three that know each other and a town of four players that don't know each other.
Provided the game were to maintain some semblence of balance
would that be runnable?

see.......that's the catch

i don't really think that's feasible. and a town of 4 with 12 scum is really.... goofy.

i think you're a lot better off running this as a mish mash.

xRECKONERx · Post Post #4 (ISO) » Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:24 am

I'm not sure the "uninformed majority" aspect means total majority or just plurality.

Untrod Tripod · Post Post #5 (ISO) » Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:26 am

isn't that game called spy hunt standing down, or something?

Gammagooey · Post Post #6 (ISO) » Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:28 am

Personally I think it's probably mafia up to the point where it's no longer beneficial to look town, wherein it becomes something similar but not reeeally a mafia game. exceptions if it happens near the very end of the game and stuff like that.

PokerFace · Post Post #7 (ISO) » Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:51 am

In post 4, xRECKONERx wrote:I'm not sure the "uninformed majority" aspect means total majority or just plurality.

I think plurality is fine as long as town still has a chance to win. As long as each side has a balanced chance at winning its doable. Plus if you want to be technical, Scum group A does not know scum group B so everyone is part of and uninformed majority to some degree. And as long as you have at least 1 informed minority vs an uninformed majority, I think you are good

Bicephalous Bob · Post Post #8 (ISO) » Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:54 am

3v3v3 nightless

everyone is a 1-shot desperado

Vi · Post Post #9 (ISO) » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:20 pm

In post 4, xRECKONERx wrote:I'm not sure the "uninformed majority" aspect means total majority or just plurality.

Games with Town as a plurality are IME very bad games for Town.

Espeonage · Post Post #10 (ISO) » Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:22 pm

What about a game where the games starts like a mafia game but the final idea is either for town to win quickly or to be recruited to the winning side.

So like two or three cult recruiters with restrictions for the sake of balance. Where if town doesn't get one early then they will be wanting to be recruited to whoever is winning.

It starts mafia, but the endgame is very likely to be not.

Cheery Dog · Post Post #11 (ISO) » Sat Jan 17, 2015 10:14 am

That's the case with any game that includes a cult.

Andrius · Post Post #12 (ISO) » Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:13 am

In post 10, Espeonage wrote:What about a game where the games starts like a mafia game but the final idea is either for town to win quickly or to be recruited to the winning side.

So like two or three cult recruiters with restrictions for the sake of balance. Where if town doesn't get one early then they will be wanting to be recruited to whoever is winning.

It starts mafia, but the endgame is very likely to be not.

The problem is that town can play to win as a pending cult recruit. There is little incentive to 'win quickly' when they can hope to join the cult, screw over whoever they want from winning, and win later on for much less investment.

All the recruiter has to do is hide/survive, unless there are mechanics in place to 'pass on' the recruitment ability in which case town is in even more trouble.

I like the occasional cult game, especially when it is well-done and the 'leftover townies' are not summarily brought into the cult for a win. That defeats the whole point of 'play-to-win'.

But I digress. I think that, if done well, a plurality town faction could work, but those are generally quirky games to begin with (the original Choose Your Side had a plurality town).