LOLhammering

[Aeronaut]

Something I've noticed that has been happening more frequently is players who like to come in when a player is at L-1, and hammer without intent before the player even has a chance to explain, to defend themselves, etc.

It's silly in my opinion. And it should be implied that someone who does that is autolynched the next day. However, I'm seeing more and more that people tend to say "Ah well that kind of stupidity CAN'T have come from scum, so lets keep him alive". So I feel like it's almost a way to make people town read you, when it really shouldn't be.

I'm considering making a mechanic in my next game which basically says that you have to state intent before hammering. If you try to hammer without it, your vote simply won't count. It'd be simple.

That might also be a good way to make LYLO less about whether scum can get online at the same time, and more about the game. Some people like that, though.

But do you guys think that would be to inhibitive of players to force that? Is LOLhammering just a part of the game that we should all live with? I don't know.

[zMuffinMan]

"Ah well that kind of stupidity CAN'T have come from scum, so lets keep him alive".

Anyone who says this hasn't played a lot of games. You could just cite any of the plethora of examples of scum doing this.

Though looking at the context of things is probably important.

Also, I notice people allow certain players to get away with doing this. Players who do this should just be blacklisted. Or policy lynched. Until they learn to stop being awful at mafia.

[McMenno]

I'm considering making a mechanic in my next game which basically says that you have to state intent before hammering. If you try to hammer without it, your vote simply won't count. It'd be simple.

People would just go:

Intent to hammer

,

And then immediately after that post:

VOTE: Whoever

[Aeronaut]

I mean you have to do it before

[Andrius]

Mods trying to curb bad player behavior by adding rules isn't the solution in my opinion. Frustrating? Yes.
But its all part of the game. If no one holds them responsible, they will never be punished and this will continue etc.

[ZZZX]

I know it is frustrating but I have seen most people doing it hit scum.

I don't like to so it but I see that most people are more accurate early on

[Vi]

The idea that this sort of thing is possible is why L-1 is any pressure at all, especially depending on the player list.

Quickhammering as Town doesn't make you a bad player, but consistently quickhammering

Town

as Town makes you a bad player.

But then everyone's bad at this game in some way or another. The key is to identify where you screwed up (e.g. why you quickhammered given that you hit Town) and decide whether you should change your thought process.

[GuyInFreezer]

I'm considering making a mechanic in my next game which basically says that you have to state intent before hammering. If you try to hammer without it, your vote simply won't count. It'd be simple.

What if you're a town PR who wants to quickhammer a scum PR who counterclaimed you while wanting to fake that it was accidental hammer?

[SilverWolf]

I've seen scum and town do this. The person being hammered is usually town but sometimes not.

I don't think there's a way to stop it. If someone has a consistent pattern of doing this as town and hitting town and shows no desire to change-don't play with that player.

There's not much you can add into a set-up to force this not to happen. Sometimes there is a strategic reason to do it as scum and rarely as town.

[Klick]

It would be interesting to see a mechanic that stops quickhammers from happening. Something like, the day ends if someone keeps a majority of votes on them for 24 hours. It would change several aspects of the game.

Aeronaut, mind if I test this out with a normal Micro game? Or would you rather have it in your game first?

[xRECKONERx]

This trend really has picked up recently. It's like the new site culture is to worship being fucking stupid and think it's

hilarious

to do dumb shit F4R TEH LULZ LMAO in a game people devote months of time into playing.

[Aeronaut]

I'm considering making a mechanic in my next game which basically says that you have to state intent before hammering. If you try to hammer without it, your vote simply won't count. It'd be simple.

What if you're a town PR who wants to quickhammer a scum PR who counterclaimed you while wanting to fake that it was accidental hammer?

Well... I don't know

It would be interesting to see a mechanic that stops quickhammers from happening. Something like, the day ends if someone keeps a majority of votes on them for 24 hours. It would change several aspects of the game.

Aeronaut, mind if I test this out with a normal Micro game? Or would you rather have it in your game first?

Go for it!

This trend really has picked up recently. It's like the new site culture is to worship being fucking stupid and think it's

hilarious

to do dumb shit F4R TEH LULZ LMAO in a game people devote months of time into playing.

Preach

[Untrod Tripod]

lolhammering on D1 is awesome

past that it's obnoxious as fuck

[SilverWolf]

This trend really has picked up recently. It's like the new site culture is to worship being fucking stupid and think it's

hilarious

to do dumb shit F4R TEH LULZ LMAO in a game people devote months of time into playing.

Exactly, it's fucking frustrating, especially when you aren't ready to end the day yet, and someone thinks it's funny or a thing to do for the lulz-it's shit play, period.

[Vampirate]

It'd be funny if someone made 2 types of roles, one being the role to have the day phase last 4 days or the person dies. The other being the role that must have the lynch last till the last day or he dies.

It would be funny to see play out maybe.

[Zachrulez]

Who needs to try to get more info out of the game? What is that ever good for? LOLQUICKHAMMER!

[Magua]

It would be interesting to see a mechanic that stops quickhammers from happening. Something like, the day ends if someone keeps a majority of votes on them for 24 hours. It would change several aspects of the game.

This has come up before; I know GreyICE had a 24-hour grace period after a hammer for people to unvote in one of his Mini Themes, though the intention was to keep the scum from quickhammering in lylo if I recall correctly.

My take is that against scum quickhammering, it just slows down the game without changing anything.

For town quickhammering, if someone is impulsive and doing things for the lulz, no amount of rules are going to be able to change that.

[choof]

This trend really has picked up recently. It's like the new site culture is to worship being fucking stupid and think it's

hilarious

to do dumb shit F4R TEH LULZ LMAO in a game people devote months of time into playing.

mafia seems to be on the rise (i've played mafia on like 4 different sites now, including mafiascum), but the particular flavor of mafia that i've seen doesn't mesh at all with the mafiascum culture

lolhammers are great

just not on mafiascum

[saulres]

I mean you have to do it before

Intent to hammer Aeronaut.

[saulres]

VOTE: Aeronaut

[T S O]

oh my god saulres we've been through this before

[GreyICE]

It would be interesting to see a mechanic that stops quickhammers from happening. Something like, the day ends if someone keeps a majority of votes on them for 24 hours. It would change several aspects of the game.

This has come up before; I know GreyICE had a 24-hour grace period after a hammer for people to unvote in one of his Mini Themes, though the intention was to keep the scum from quickhammering in lylo if I recall correctly.

I wanted to see how players would use it. In practice it worked miserably.

It turns out the nice thing about hammers is that the debate ends. With a 24 hour grace period someone on the wagon ALWAYS gets cold feet for the first few days, so it just stretches to deadline.

[Muffin]

This trend really has picked up recently. It's like the new site culture is to worship being fucking stupid and think it's

hilarious

to do dumb shit F4R TEH LULZ LMAO in a game people devote months of time into playing.

I've noticed this hand-in-hand with a "cases are scummy" attitude that discourages lucid thought processes in favour of giving towncred to people who just post shit like "#202 is p town" or "[playername] is scum, VOTE: playername".

Sadly I haven't rolled scum recently, because I feel like I could get away with murder (literally) under this meta.

[Psyche]

It would be interesting to see a mechanic that stops quickhammers from happening. Something like, the day ends if someone keeps a majority of votes on them for 24 hours. It would change several aspects of the game.

This has come up before; I know GreyICE had a 24-hour grace period after a hammer for people to unvote in one of his Mini Themes, though the intention was to keep the scum from quickhammering in lylo if I recall correctly.

I wanted to see how players would use it. In practice it worked miserably.

It turns out the nice thing about hammers is that the debate ends. With a 24 hour grace period someone on the wagon ALWAYS gets cold feet for the first few days, so it just stretches to deadline.

maybe it's better to have just around an hour?

[GreyICE]

That would just encourage people to stalk the thread and spam more.

I like the decisiveness of a hammer. It happened. The game moves on. Too many games hit deadline anyway. If people idiot cast the hammer vote, that's on them.