Open Setup Certification Group

[mith]

Approved Setups

(as of 09-June-11)

C9
One of four variations, randomly chosen:

• * 1 Cop, 1 Doc, 2 Mafia, 3 Townies;
  * 1 Cop, 2 Mafia, 4 Townies
  * 1 Doc, 2 Mafia, 4 Townies
  * 2 Mafia, 5 Townies

F11
It consists of four variations, chosen at random

• * 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 1 Sane Cop, 1 Doctor, 5 Townies.
  * 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 7 Townies.
  * 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Cop, 6 Townies.
  * 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Doctor, 6 Townies.

Pie E7

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker (for balance reasons, the Roleblocker should also be able to nightkill even if the Goon is dead)
  * 1 Sane Cop
  * 1 Doctor
  * 3 Townies

Vengeful 5P

• * 1 Godfather
  * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 3 Vengeful townies
  Nightless

Lovers Mafia

• * 2 Mafia Lovers
  * 4 Townies
  Nightless

Near-Vanilla

• * 3 Mafia
  * 1 Doctor
  * 1 Jailkeeper
  * 8 Townies

Vanilla Nightless

• * 6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
  * 9-11 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:8)
  * 12-16 players: 4 scum (4:8 to 4:12)

Bird 7P

• * 2 Mafia Goons
  * 3 Townies
  * 1 Cop
  * Doctor
  Day Start

2:2:9

• * 2 Mafia A Goons
  * 2 Mafia B Goons
  * 9 Vanilla Townies
  Day Start

Trendy and Subversive C9 V1

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker
  * 1 Cop or Nurse
  * 1 Doctor or Deputy Cop
  * 3 Townies
  Day Start

Trendy and Subversive C9 V3

• * 1 Mafia Goon
  * 1 Mafia Roleblocker
  * 1 Cop or Doctor
  * 1 Deputy Cop or Nurse
  * 3 Townies
  Day Start

Alternating 9P

• * 2 Mafia Goons
  * 1 Even Night Cop
  * 1 Odd Night Doctor
  * 5 Townies
  Day Start

Jungle Republic

• * 1 Seer
  * 3 Mafia (no NK)
  * 2 Werewolves (has an NK)
  * 6 Townies
  Day Start

Friends and Enemies (2:2:7)

• *2 Mafia
  *2 Masons
  *7 Townies
  Day Start

---

After some discussion in Site Ideas, I am starting to implement some of the suggested changes in the way we choose Open Setups to be run. The first change is a split in the discussion thread. The (renamed) Open Setup Ideas and Discussion thread remains open for posting new setup ideas. This thread will continue discussion of these setups, with the goal of "certifying" certain setups which meet some number of basic criteria.

Among these criteria are:

1. The setup must be Open or Semi-Open.
   
2. The setup must qualify as "Normal".
   
3. For the most part, approved setups should be small (5-12 players).
   
4. Setups must retain the basic premise of Mafia; the outcome of the game should depend primarily (though not necessarily entirely) on whether or not the pro-town players can determine the identities of the Mafia through their posting and behaviour. "Broken" setups (setups where the town has a strategy which maximizes their chances of winning through "Following the Cop" or similar methods should not be considered. (Note: This item probably needs clarification.)

This list should not be considered complete or final in any way; rather, it is a starting point for discussion.

I am looking for volunteers to be a part of a (smallish) group to lead this effort. Initially, our goal should be the "cerfitication" of a set of X (to be determined) setups meeting the above (or other determined) criteria which will form the "core" of the Open Games Queue. Members of the group will later be responsible for certifying other setups for possible use (whether as part of the "core" set, or the occasional setup with a more experimental leaning), producing standard role PMs and rulesets for these games, and maintaining information for these games on the wiki.

If you are intereseted in joining this group, post here. I will select the initial group based on how active you have been in discussing setups (particularly balance) in the past, especially in the Open Setup Discussion threads. This will be the first of several similar "steering groups" that will be started and/or revived over the next few days/weeks, and so if you have not been particularly active in the area of Open Setups, don't worry, there may be a group more suited to you that you can get involved in. Users who are not a part of the official group are of course still give their input here (and are encouraged to do so!). The group's primary purpose is to steer discussion and keep things organized so that the process keeps moving.

The Group (as of 09-Mar-09):

Adel
Korts
shaft.ed
Lord Gurgi
Xylthixlm
Ether

[farside22]

I would like to nominate shaft.ed and adel as 2 people if interested I would like to see part of this. They are very good at going back and forth on idea's and thoughts in regards to set up.

[PokerFace]

You should sticky this thread

[Yosarian2]

I like it.

[*]For the most part, approved setups should be small (5-12 players).

One thought; to give a little more room for fine-tuning the balance of open games, 5-14 or something might be a better range; I don't think that near vanillia setup would have been balanced with 12 people instead of 13, for example.

This is a really good idea, though.

[Empking]

[*]For the most part, approved setups should be small (5-12 players)..

Mith = Win?

Remember Certified people, Carbon= Awesome

[Korts]

I'm willing to volunteer.

[shaft.ed]

I'd be happy to help out, though I don't feel my analytical skills are strongest on site.

Though I disagree with this if we are going to keep Open Games as a way for new mods to start out:

producing standard role PMs and rulesets for these games

Perhaps producing carefully thought out win conditions and role resolution orders would suffice?

[The Fonz]

Why always small? Some of my favourite open queue games (Big Love, New C9) were large.

[Adel]

/in.

Could someone summon Kelly Chen out of retirement for this?

[CF Riot]

I'm not learned enough to participate, but I approve of this movement.

[shaft.ed]

Could someone summon Kelly Chen out of retirement for this?

this

[forbiddanlight]

I wouldn't mind volunteering, but I never did do much in the balance discussions. I more often judge setups that I play when they are revealed, and don't share my thoughts often enough. So, I doubt I'll be selected, but I'm here if you want.

[SilverPhoenix]

Why always small? Some of my favourite open queue games (Big Love, New C9) were large.

I'd say it's nice to have the occasional larger game, but the last game with 15+ players, it took a month to fill it. So occasional is best.

[Lord Gurgi]

/in

I am also of the opinion that Xyl or JDodge should be hauled in for this. They have a different point of view than who I expect to be on this team.

[Andycyca]

Not active or smart enough, but I support this idea.

[Xylthixlm]

/in

I am also of the opinion that Xyl or JDodge should be hauled in for this. They have a different point of view than who I expect to be on this team.

I'm not wildly enthusiastic, but I'd be willing to help.

[Lord Gurgi]

/in

I am also of the opinion that Xyl or JDodge should be hauled in for this. They have a different point of view than who I expect to be on this team.

I'm not wildly enthusiastic, but I'd be willing to help.

If you're not up for it, don't do it.

[mith]

(Feel free to suggest ideas for how to proceed with this before a group is officially selected; I intended to post some more here myself before I went to bed, but my cold went from bad to my-brain-is-melting, so I'll wait and post in the morning.)

[Lord Gurgi]

Something generally unregulated. One or two at a time, one or two days each, consensus, go.

[shaft.ed]

I'd propose as long as two "certified" players have signed off on it, and no unanswered questions exist, it's good to go.

Win conditions
Role resolution
Special rules should all be spelled out

[Mr. Flay]

Awesome. I second the idea of increasing the size slightly...several 'good' setups push over the mini size bracket.

[hasdgfas]

I'm willing to help if needed as well. I like the open queue and would probably play more if we had some good, tested setups.

[Korts]

I'd propose as long as two "certified" players have signed off on it, and no unanswered questions exist, it's good to go.

Win conditions
Role resolution
Special rules should all be spelled out

This I support.

[Yosarian2]

Someone (perhaps the person who modded it?) should also re-review a setup AFTER it was played once, and suggest if they thought the setup was balanced or not, any possible problems with it, anything that was unclear, ect. That is, we should re-decide if a game is good or not after it is run when we have more info, so we can know if it should be run again in the same way or not.

[Empking]

/n (Because do any of the inned people actually bplay open set ups any more? Do they know what the open players want? Do they know the awesomeness that is carbon?)