Private Topics Discussion (Now with Mish Mash)

[Cabd]

As for hydras, we're discussing it, and will get back to you.

Wooooops, already made one. My bad. I assumed it was taking on pretty much ALL mafia QT related duties.

[zoraster]

As for hydras, we're discussing it, and will get back to you.

Wooooops, already made one. My bad. I assumed it was taking on pretty much ALL mafia QT related duties.

I can see why you might assume that, but...

Moderators, not players, should make Private Threads

It was in big bold letters for a reason.

[SleepyKrew]

Suggestion: Private Topic Rules and FAQ (so basically this thread) pinned in the PT section

[Cabd]

Also, one thing I like here is now we can't have accusations of randomness manipulation, since you can use dice tags to roll alignments in your mod thread, and a lack of edits prove it; then release it afterwards.

[zoraster]

completely agree, Cabd. I think that should be Standard Operating Procedure from now on.

[Cabd]

All you have to do is use the dice tags like:

Code: Select all

[dice]{numscuminyourgame}d{numplayersslots}[/dice]

And if it has any overlaps, re-roll until it has no overlaps.

So for a micro, with two scum, 9 slots, it's as simple as

Code: Select all

[dice]2d9[/dice]

Original Roll String: 2d9 (STATIC)

2 9-Sided Dice: (1, 1) = 2

(This is a dirty dirty edit to show that players can see if you tried to cheat it~)

[Cabd]

Hah, and there's an example of when to re-roll.

Original Roll String: 2d9

2 9-Sided Dice: (3, 5) = 8

[zoraster]

I don't know why you'd do it that way. using more dice actually just makes it more likely people will share the same roll. I'd rather just do 1d100 for each player.

[Cabd]

Yeah I guess that works too. Either way, really. Point is, it's verified NOT tampered with.

[zoraster]

yeah. you just have to make sure to post the role to number list in the same post as the dice or else you could tamper with that to suit the rolls.

[Cabd]

Right. All in one big post. I love that we can streamline that as standard practice though.

[RedCoyote]

I'll have to remember the dice rolls to determine role draws. It would be nice to just have that as a provable reference.

But that means I wouldn't get to use the Random Generators Shell anymore.

[Malakittens]

^ Same, I also use the same thing red does for my role PM's.

[Zachrulez]

I'll have to remember the dice rolls to determine role draws. It would be nice to just have that as a provable reference.

But that means I wouldn't get to use the Random Generators Shell anymore.

I use this as well. So does Sotty.

Why exactly should we make dice rolling alignment standard?

I mean... I could youtube myself using the randomizer if it's really that important. I've never manipulated a random generator for alignment draws in my life.

Also it's important to note that while you can't edit a dice roll, you can delete posts if you have mod power in a topic, so you can effectively roll until you theoretically get a roll you like... so...

[Mr. Flay]

This actually does NOTHING to guarantee unbiased role assignments. can be manipulated (in ways I won't get into).

That said, if you want to roll dice in your setup PT to arrange your game, feel free. Just don't assume it's foolproof when/if someone questions you on it.

[Axxle]

You could also just delete a post with the diceroll in it and make the post again.

[zoraster]

True but your reviewers will see that. It is my theory that most mod cheating happens because it is easy and so difficult to get caught

[xRECKONERx]

they're not green anymore?

[Nexus]

Is there really a big thing about 'mod manipulation'?

I genuinely have never considered that mods might manipulate the game to choose who is scum...

Either way, I'll continue to use random.org for my role assignments, and if people don't like it, then don't sign up...

[chamber]

This actually does NOTHING to guarantee unbiased role assignments. can be manipulated (in ways I won't get into).

That said, if you want to roll dice in your setup PT to arrange your game, feel free. Just don't assume it's foolproof when/if someone questions you on it.

The only way I know of, and feel free to tell me if there is another, is to delete the post in question. And even that doesn't actually work. We backup deleted posts.

[quadz08]

Is there really a big thing about 'mod manipulation'?

I genuinely have never considered that mods might manipulate the game to choose who is scum...

Either way, I'll continue to use random.org for my role assignments, and if people don't like it, then don't sign up...

I personally find it highly unlikely there's a lot of mod manipulation, but before the newbie queue mod was randomizing setups for the mods in question, certain setups were getting played often / not-often enough that it was statistically significant.

[zoraster]

I mean, it's nearly impossible to prove one way or the other. I think there's likely a lot of it going on. It seems pretty obvious to me. Regardless, I'll do what I can to be a transparent as possible with my selections, and now that can involve the dice roll.

[Zachrulez]

This actually does NOTHING to guarantee unbiased role assignments. can be manipulated (in ways I won't get into).

That said, if you want to roll dice in your setup PT to arrange your game, feel free. Just don't assume it's foolproof when/if someone questions you on it.

I have no problem with mods determining alignment that way. I just question the idea that it should be standard.

Is there really a big thing about 'mod manipulation'?

I genuinely have never considered that mods might manipulate the game to choose who is scum...

Either way, I'll continue to use random.org for my role assignments, and if people don't like it, then don't sign up...

I personally find it highly unlikely there's a lot of mod manipulation, but before the newbie queue mod was randomizing setups for the mods in question, certain setups were getting played often / not-often enough that it was statistically significant.

I believe the data on the setups indicated something like 5-10% of mods assigning setups in a manner other than random. I mean that's a problem when you want newbie setups selected randomly, but that also means 90-95% of the mods were assigning setups (and presumably roles.) randomly.

[zoraster]

oh, i think i can safely say the listmods aren't going to require random generation that way if that's what you're worried about. I'm speaking as a mod in general. I think it's good practice. Personally I'll take every opportunity to show my players I am giving them a fair game.

Also, the data didn't show that 90% of mods were randomly selecting. Theoretically, they could all have been selecting non-randomly, but if they did so evenly in each game type as a group, it'd be impossible to tell.

[Zachrulez]

oh, i think i can safely say the listmods aren't going to require random generation that way if that's what you're worried about. I'm speaking as a mod in general. I think it's good practice. Personally I'll take every opportunity to show my players I am giving them a fair game.

Actually when I looked at Kunk's data on newbies, the F11 setup was manipulated by likely fewer than 5% of newbie mods. The C9 setup was worse, but I think making it clear we don't really want to see that kind of thing greatly changed things for the better there.

In terms of showing players you're giving them a fair game... I don't think it's unfair to ask the players to trust that you're giving them one without reason to suspect otherwise.

I could youtube my draw, but then, I could have recorded a bunch of other videos and just aired the one that gave me a draw I liked. I could roll a dice tag in the mod private topic, but how do you know I haven't deleted posts and rerolled that, or used another more difficult to detect exploit to manipulate that?

The answer at the most basic level is that you trust me as a mod to give you a fair game. If you don't, then you probably wouldn't have signed up for my game in the first place.