yet, please do so. They're important, breaking them often ruins games, and nearly every game here includes all the site rules, including this one.
If you've played here before, you'll have a good idea of how games here normally work, and this one is much the same. If you want a refresher, or want to know the full details of all the rules I use, see
for a big long list of all the rules (site rules, Mafia mechanics, and my own rules) with explanations of the reasoning behind them.
And a quick reminder of the four most commonly broken rules, just so that there's no excuse for not being aware of them:
A1.
Players are expected to be active within the game.
A2.
Do not discuss Mafia games outside their game threads until they have finished.
A3.
Do not discuss the spelling, timestamps, etc. of any non-public communication.
A4.
Stay civil to the other players.
Special rules for this game
Factions
: 5 Town versus 2 Mafia
Phase Sequence
: Day Start
Deadlines
: initially 48 hours, but every player has a 1-shot deadline extension (see below)
Prod timers
: 24+60, 24+48, 24+36, 24+24, 24+0
Voting method
: Majority
Daytalk
: Not available, the Mafia private threads is locked during Day phases
Action limits
: Irrelevant in this setup
Unusual rules
:
This game is trying out an experimental prodding mechanic. I'll be giving out prods much more often than usual (after just 24 hours + however long it takes me to get online), but players shouldn't feel that they necessarily have to completely avoid being prodded; I've reduced the consequences for prods considerably (with very lenient response times if a player hasn't been prodded much already, and not replacing players until their fifth prod). Sometimes people get busy, or can't post at a weekend, or whatever, and that's OK as long as it doesn't happen too much.
This game is also trying out an experimental deadline mechanic. The deadline for each phase starts at just 48 hours. However, each player has a 1-shot deadline extension. When used, this will increase the Day deadline by 84 hours, minus 12 hours for each time the person using the deadline extension has been prodded. To use this, boldpost
Extend deadline
(or similar) in the main game thread; each
player
can only do this once, but if a player is replaced, the replacement will always have an extension available. Because of this mechanic, there will be no automatic extensions when a player replaces in (contrary to my normal rules).
Tiebreak rules for screwy endgame situations: 2:2 with both town power roles alive = play on; 1:1 = Mafia win.
When a game ends, I need to update several locations (the PTs themselves, the first post, the endgame post, etc.). So it can take a few minutes to make PTs public.
Post
Post #381 (isolation #35) » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:16 pm
Postby callforjudgement »
Thoughts about the setup:
After watching it played, I'm still not sure it's balanced (I'd guess at it being a little scumsided, but am far from certain).
It's definitely swingy, which is pretty much inevitable when you have a vigilante in a small game (and makes the balance hard to determine).
If I ran this setup again, I'd probably make the scum kill compulsive (in order to make the BP a little more powerful); that might help adjust the balance into a slightly better place. However, I probably won't run this specific setup again unless there's a lot of demand; there's too much of a risk of things getting out of hand very quickly, in either the town or scum direction.
Post
Post #393 (isolation #36) » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:40 pm
Postby callforjudgement »
In terms of play, I think Archwing's main mistake towards the end was excessive use of AtE (i.e. trying to manipulate someone into making emotional decisions rather than thinking logically).
AtE is actually a
really
effective persuasion technique against people who aren't used to it, so I'm not surprised that it's frequently tried. However, I think a majority of Mafia players are aware of it by now and are capable of realising that they're being manipulated, so imostt has a tendency to backfire.
Post
Post #395 (isolation #37) » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:41 pm
Postby callforjudgement »
Also, chesskid3 was scarily accurate this game. (Suspecting Flubber, although incorrect, was reasonable too, given how long he went without posting anything substantive.)
Post
Post #405 (isolation #38) » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:05 pm
Postby callforjudgement »
Flubber actually became replaceable around an hour before the hammer, but the hammer had already happened by the time I saw it, meaning that there wasn't much of a point in actually doing the replacement.
What do people think of the deadline/activity rules, incidentally? I'm fairly happy with them – they seem to have been the most effective at encouraging a 7p to keep moving of any I've tried – but if they're unfair on the players or otherwise problematic, I'd like to know about that so that I can fix the problem. (One change I'm planning to make to them in future is to add a few extra hours on the prod timer so that if you make one post per day, it doesn't have to be at exactly the same time each day.)
Post
Post #410 (isolation #39) » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:40 pm
Postby callforjudgement »
Hmm, I guess it's unanimous that it's slightly too fast (given that I think that too!).
Next time I run a 7p I'll use the same technique but make the prod timers a bit slower (probably 32 hours).
