Mafia Game Intrest Scorecard Template

[Infinity 324]

+1

[Farren]

A game with an Openness of 1 probably wouldn't be fit for ranking in most of the other categories at all (with the exception of Theme); doing so would give away information about the game and thus it would no longer qualify for the 1. So that scale could probably stand some tweaking.

[Guillotina]

A game with an Openness of 1 probably wouldn't be fit for ranking in most of the other categories at all (with the exception of Theme); doing so would give away information about the game and thus it would no longer qualify for the 1. So that scale could probably stand some tweaking.

Yah?

I have a closed game in my mind. 17 very bastard roles and 2-3 custom mechanics. Tell me about them

[Farren]

Yah?

I have a closed game in my mind. 17 very bastard roles and 2-3 custom mechanics. Tell me about them

None of those 17 roles are VTs. Assuming it's a 17er, at least.

That's information I wouldn't expect to have in a game that was "fully closed."

[Guillotina]

Yah?

I have a closed game in my mind. 17 very bastard roles and 2-3 custom mechanics. Tell me about them

None of those 17 roles are VTs. Assuming it's a 17er, at least.

That's information I wouldn't expect to have in a game that was "fully closed."

And knowing that what advantage it gives you in my game over others who may not have deduced that info?

[Farren]

And knowing that what advantage it gives you in my game over others who may not have deduced that info?

If someone claims VT, I know they're lying.

[Guillotina]

And knowing that what advantage it gives you in my game over others who may not have deduced that info?

If someone claims VT, I know they're lying.

Perfect. Now, the other way around. What advantage you gain if everyone else deduced the same.

[TemporalLich]

I myself would prefer a "Normality Rating" from 0 to 10 (an 11 point scale).

From most Normal to least Normal, my scale would be like this:

10

- Core roles only, no roles more complex than in NewD3

9

- A simple Normal setup with standard alignments, "Normal Minus"

8

- A complex Normal setup that might be multiball or SK-containing, the lowest Normality rating considered Normal

7

- Normal with greylist rule (one variant of a Normal role allowed, two in Larges), "Normal Plus"

6

- BooneyToonz (with all the flavor shenanigans it entails), a tame theme game with little connection to Normality

5

- A typical Theme game with unusual roles

4

- Role Madness, uPicks, the lowest Normality rating not considered bastard

3

- Cult setups, tame bastardy, Great Idea Mafia

2

- Wild bastard dumpster fire such as a Death Miller setup

1

- Direct mod influence abyss and/or a setup as ludicrous as Grand Idea Mafia

0

- The hadal zone. Think of trying to run Worst Idea Mafia and then altering the roles to be even worse, and you'll scratch the 0 rating

[Farren]

Perfect. Now, the other way around. What advantage you gain if everyone else deduced the same.

Absolutely none. In that world, I'd call the deduction obvious.

But if that information was presented before the game began, by the mod, I wouldn't even describe it as deduction. I'd describe it as information given freely about the setup. Which is my point - if a game is fully closed, with no information about the setup available, then describing it on (say) the normalcy scale potentially gives information about it, whether it's "every role in this game is bastard" or "this game would be right at home in the Normal queue."

With the other categories, there's information about them that may not be obvious to someone reading up about the game.
Theme: yeah, it's probably obvious if the game is a 1 or a 2, but there's easily some gray area between 3-5 that could benefit from a rating.
Normalcy: definitely, unless the game is either semi- or fully-open. (And even in those cases, it might be nice for those of us who aren't intimately familiar with what constitutes Normalcy.)
Complexity: even if it is obvious, I'd still say it's a good idea, but it isn't always obvious if the game isn't open or semi-open.
Player Agency: same as Normalcy.

After all that ... maybe Openness doesn't need to be rated at all? If I look at any game in signups, I *might* not be able to figure out the other four ratings just by reading the information the mod provided about the game, depending on the game. But I should *always* be able to figure out just how Open it is. Or alternately, rating Openness might be the first step - and from there determining what else should be rated at all.

[Guillotina]

Perfect. Now, the other way around. What advantage you gain if everyone else deduced the same.

Absolutely none. In that world, I'd call the deduction obvious.

But if that information was presented before the game began, by the mod, I wouldn't even describe it as deduction. I'd describe it as information given freely about the setup. Which is my point - if a game is fully closed, with no information about the setup available, then describing it on (say) the normalcy scale potentially gives information about it, whether it's "every role in this game is bastard" or "this game would be right at home in the Normal queue."

With the other categories, there's information about them that may not be obvious to someone reading up about the game.
Theme: yeah, it's probably obvious if the game is a 1 or a 2, but there's easily some gray area between 3-5 that could benefit from a rating.
Normalcy: definitely, unless the game is either semi- or fully-open. (And even in those cases, it might be nice for those of us who aren't intimately familiar with what constitutes Normalcy.)
Complexity: even if it is obvious, I'd still say it's a good idea, but it isn't always obvious if the game isn't open or semi-open.
Player Agency: same as Normalcy.

After all that ... maybe Openness doesn't need to be rated at all? If I look at any game in signups, I *might* not be able to figure out the other four ratings just by reading the information the mod provided about the game, depending on the game. But I should *always* be able to figure out just how Open it is. Or alternately, rating Openness might be the first step - and from there determining what else should be rated at all.

I think you are being a little too extreme about it. All games gotta have some information, no game opens with no information at all.

[Farren]

I think you are being a little too extreme about it. All games gotta have some information, no game opens with no information at all.

That sounds like a design challenge - but not one I'm going to take up. It certainly doesn't sound fun to me to play a game with zero information even if it is possible.

And it occurs to me that someone that did want to make such a game - or something close to it - almost certainly wouldn't use the rating scale at all, no matter what tweaks were made.

[Cook]

I think you are being a little too extreme about it. All games gotta have some information, no game opens with no information at all.

That sounds like a design challenge - but not one I'm going to take up. It certainly doesn't sound fun to me to play a game with zero information even if it is possible.

And it occurs to me that someone that did want to make such a game - or something close to it - almost certainly wouldn't use the rating scale at all, no matter what tweaks were made.

A game where every player is sent the same generic NAI role pm and gets to submit a guess about their role each day to learn more information.

[Kerset]

Normalcy:
A score of 1 means the game is bastard.
A score of 2 means that you should expect role madness, or near role madness, with complex and custom roles for each player
A score of 3 means that you should expect a mix of normal roles and custom-built roles
A score of 4 means that almost all roles are normal, but there could be a select few fancier ones.
A score of 5 means the game would qualify to run in the normal queue.

I would prefer

A score of 1 means that you should expect that information provided by mod might be false or moderator might directly influence gamestate.
A score of 2 means the game might contain midgame alignment changes or jester mechanics.
A score of 3 means that you should expect role madness, or near role madness, with complex and custom roles for each player
A score of 4 means that you should expect a mix of normal roles and custom-built roles
A score of 5 means the game would qualify to run in the normal queue.

There is a difference between predictable bastard mechanics and complete chaos.

[Flea The Magician]

bookmarked this, because I am a BIG fan of this.


Only thing I've got at the moment is my next game seems to be hitting .5s

[Jake The Wolfie]

I myself would prefer a "Normality Rating" from 0 to 10 (an 11 point scale).

From most Normal to least Normal, my scale would be like this:

10

- Core roles only, no roles more complex than in NewD3

9

- A simple Normal setup with standard alignments, "Normal Minus"

8

- A complex Normal setup that might be multiball or SK-containing, the lowest Normality rating considered Normal

7

- Normal with greylist rule (one variant of a Normal role allowed, two in Larges), "Normal Plus"

6

- BooneyToonz (with all the flavor shenanigans it entails), a tame theme game with little connection to Normality

5

- A typical Theme game with unusual roles

4

- Role Madness, uPicks, the lowest Normality rating not considered bastard

3

- Cult setups, tame bastardy, Great Idea Mafia

2

- Wild bastard dumpster fire such as a Death Miller setup

1

- Direct mod influence abyss and/or a setup as ludicrous as Grand Idea Mafia

0

- The hadal zone. Think of trying to run Worst Idea Mafia and then altering the roles to be even worse, and you'll scratch the 0 rating

-1 is Worst Idea Mafia, but masquerading as NewD3

[GuyInFreezer]

0 - The hadal zone. Think of trying to run Worst Idea Mafia and then altering the roles to be even worse, and you'll scratch the 0 rating

This is a challenge right

[borkjerfkin]

I think this doesn't cover the one of the primary things I look for when I join a game, and that's # of scum factions

[Cabd]

Actually, would add an additional metric...


Swing.

1: Game is guaranteed to finish on a certain in game day, eliminations and night kills are assured. Only town and mafia wincons present.
2: Game is nearly guaranteed to finish on a certain in game day, assuming standard play of elims. Other wincons may exist.
3: Game has an incredibly unlikely edge case that could cause a side to claim victory early. Alternatively, multiball.
4: Game has odds greater than 25% that it could end a cycle early/late.
5: Game could potentially end extremely early or late, and sub optimal play by members of a faction may hurt that overall faction's ability to win significantly.

1 and 2 would be guaranteed NOT multiball.

[borkjerfkin]

ah, didn't read far enough. Other wincons = SK or no?

[Gamma Emerald]

An idea that cropped up in the post game of Uwnd's Yggdrasil theme...

Essentially, an at-a-glance scorecard to show you what a game brings to the table, and you can know what your own preferences are to see if a game is for you.

Each is scored one to five. Some may overlap slightly in what they mean...

NewD3

Normalcy: 5/5
Openness: 4/5
Complexity: 2/5
Thematic: 1/5
Player Agency: 2/5

Normalcy:

A score of 1 means the game is bastard.
A score of 2 means that you should expect role madness, or near role madness, with complex and custom roles for each player
A score of 3 means that you should expect a mix of normal roles and custom-built roles
A score of 4 means that almost all roles are normal, but there could be a select few fancier ones.
A score of 5 means the game would qualify to run in the normal queue.

Openness:

A score of 1 means that the game is fully closed. You should expect entire mechanics are not explained and must be discovered as you go.
A score of 2 means that the underlying custom mechanics are explained, but all roles are a mystery.
A score of 3 means that the game has at least one role that can expected to be present (typically VT)
A score of 4 means that the game is a semi-open.
A score of 5 means the game and all mechanics contained within are fully spelled out in the opening rules.

Complexity:

A score of 1 means the game is incredibly newbie friendly, players should expect to not have to read anything to understand the game or setup.
A score of 2 means at least one special clarity rule in place. (In our example of NewD3, the roleblocker vs jailkeeper rule)
A score of 3 means the game has some mechanic that will need to be studied to fully enjoy the game and play optimally.
A score of 4 means that newbies may have issues understanding the mechanics of the game, but veterans should pose few issues understanding.
A score of 5 means that underlying knowledge of the flavor may be required, and even veteran players will need to adapt their game play around the mechanics.

Thematic:

A score of 1 means there is no theme present. The game is completely mechanical in nature.
A score of 2 means there is flavor that is completely unrelated to the game writ large. Most newbie mods put their games into this bucket.
A score of 3 means that roles may share flavor names from the source material, but no knowledge of the flavor is needed to play to full capacity.
A score of 4 means that knowledge of the source material flavor may provide a slight advantage in game.
A score of 5 means that knowledge of the flavor is practically required to play optimally.

Player Agency:

A score of 1 means no players have additional game-altering abilities other than their vote and the mafia's nightkill.
A score of 2 means that there are a few power roles, but the majority of the game is vanilla town/goons.
A score of 3 means that there is around a 40%-60% shot of drawing a PR, but it is not assured.
A score of 4 means that every player has SOMETHING to do at nights. (Light role madness)
A score of 5 means that every player has multiple options to act in nearly every instance. (Heavy role madness)

My homesite kinda has this by way of the Dandee meter
I'l post it here to show what it looks like

[Gamma Emerald]

Have you ever been curious about how we rate games on the Dandee Meter? Here’s a breakdown:

0: Vanilla. Just mafia and townies.
1: Chocolate Chip. Standard power roles, no major third parties.
2: Vanilla-Choco Swirl. A twist on (1), incorporating things like antagonistic indies or more involved town/maf roles.
3: Chocolate. Adds something to the mix that livens the party, whether it’s a major third party role or faction, or a custom role/mechanic change. Still accessible to newbies.
4: Chocolate Moose Tracks. The game includes changes to the standard game that have a strong impact on gameplay, or a combination of multiple factors mentioned in (3). Only for the strong of heart.
5: Death by Chocolate. This game is either a bastard game, or is so incredibly modified that it’s a shadow of it’s former self. Players beware.

keep in mind like 95% of the games on my homesite are role madness (a 4 on the player agency scale in the OP) so this kinda strips out that metric

[Cook]

Spoiler: chain

Have you ever been curious about how we rate games on the Dandee Meter? Here’s a breakdown:

0: Vanilla. Just mafia and townies.
1: Chocolate Chip. Standard power roles, no major third parties.
2: Vanilla-Choco Swirl. A twist on (1), incorporating things like antagonistic indies or more involved town/maf roles.
3: Chocolate. Adds something to the mix that livens the party, whether it’s a major third party role or faction, or a custom role/mechanic change. Still accessible to newbies.
4: Chocolate Moose Tracks. The game includes changes to the standard game that have a strong impact on gameplay, or a combination of multiple factors mentioned in (3). Only for the strong of heart.
5: Death by Chocolate. This game is either a bastard game, or is so incredibly modified that it’s a shadow of it’s former self. Players beware.

keep in mind like 95% of the games on my homesite are role madness (a 4 on the player agency scale in the OP) so this kinda strips out that metric

[offtopic]what IS ya home site?[/offtopic]

I did the Bastardometer awhile ago, only as a draft:

• Core
  games feature
  unmodified normal roles
  with a completely normal ruleset.
  Example: NewD3, Mountainous, or any previous Newbie Setup.
  
  
• Normal
  games feature
  normal roles and mechanics
  and could be run in the Normal queue.
  Example: all Normal games.
  
  
• Semi-Normal
  games must feature at least
  one Normal element
  and
  one Open element
  from the following list of items:
  Setup
  ,
  Mechanics
  ,
  Ruleset
  . This means your setup can be non-normal so long as your mechanics are normal and ruleset is open or ruleset is normal and mechanics are open. If that doesn't make sense then ask.
  Example: Kids With Guns
  
  
• Non-Normal
  games cover everything that isn't Normal but isn't bastard. A requirement of this category is that your mechanics be Normal or Open, however – otherwise, it goes in the next category.
  
• Theme
  games have non-Normal roles or closed non-Normal mechanics.
  
• Semi-Bastard
  games have lower levels of Bastard mechanics and/or have Open Bastard mechanics. For instance, if the only thing making your game bastard is a Jester, and you tell people that the game might be Bastard, that counts as in this category. Likewise, if you
  tell
  people that your game is bastard but that cop actions and flips are guaranteed to always be correct, that makes it fall under this category.
  
• Bastard
  games tell people there are Bastard mechanics but don't say what they are, particularly if there are multiple.
  
• Bastard+
  games don't tell people that there are Bastard mechanics present, or only stick a "there might be bastard mechanics" label on the cover and don't say anything else.
  Example: Grand Idea Mafia
  
  
• Bastard++
  games are
  not
  a design challenge and running one of these leaves you liable to
  NEVER
  be trusted on your ratings, ever. This is the equivalent of an "unrated cut" game.

[TemporalLich]

grand idea qualifies as bastard plus

sure it's semi open

but you realize anything can happen in grand idea, even your role suddenly being replaced with potato salad or the mod doing something unusual or the setup being less bastard and hilarious than you expect (there are roles that do this like guaranteed 7-2)

that 1 on my Normality scale includes Grand Idea for a reason - it's not guaranteed to even be playable

And I think Bastard+ should include Grand Idea even though it's transparent about being that level of bastard to where it might not even be playable

the bastardometer and normality scale seem to diverge slightly on how low ratings are defined but Grand Idea still scores just above the hadal zone.

The Bastardometer would give a lower rating to games that are not open about bastard mechanics, while even if a game is crystal clear about its direct mod influence it's still a 1 on Normality.

[Guillotina]

I dont know if the reviewers will officialize the implementation of Cabd's metric, but i will be using it for games' OPs here.

I will call it the CABD SCORECARD and i will add longevity.