The New Set-Up Review Thread

[callforjudgement]

mcqueen: when you /in to the Mini Normal queue, ask Papa Zito to put you in touch with the Normal Review Group and ask for a balance review.

[callforjudgement]

If it has a unique mechanic, it's a Theme, not a Normal. (If it's open as well, you can alternatively do it in the Open queue, if you can persuade Hoopla it's a good idea; if it's open, there's no reason to be secretive about the review, so you can do it in the appropriate Mafia Discussion thread.)

[callforjudgement]

Looking for someone to review a (potentially somewhat swingy) 9p closed normal (for the Micro queue).

[callforjudgement]

Hi awesome generous people (see, I took the effort to flatter, now you owe me one!).

I'm somewhere near the top of the mini-theme queue and have a back up set up to run if the one I'm working on right now doesn't work out. The setup is a bastard agendas game (will probably be themed around

The Simpsons

). I would love it if some people would can take a look at it. I would love you forever!

I'll take a look if you like.

[callforjudgement]

I have a Mini Normal setup prepared, but would appreciate it if someone could check it for balance.

Ask Papa Zito to put you in touch with the Normal Review Group. (He typically does it immediately when you /in to mod; if you want to mod a Mini Normal, it's faster to get the review done while you're in the queue, rather than not /in until it's ready.)

[callforjudgement]

I have a Mini Normal setup prepared, but would appreciate it if someone could check it for balance.

Ask Papa Zito to put you in touch with the Normal Review Group. (He typically does it immediately when you /in to mod; if you want to mod a Mini Normal, it's faster to get the review done while you're in the queue, rather than not /in until it's ready.)

I already /inned in the Queue. Should I just wait until he contacts me?

Yep, he's likely to (unless he's completely changed his rules in the last few weeks, which seems unlikely).

[callforjudgement]

I've got an idea for a (possibly disastrous) Micro Theme. Looking for someone to help me work out the details, and perhaps talk me out of it.

[callforjudgement]

I have a setup I'd like reviewed, who wants to see the idiocy I think would be fun for the players?

You're more likely to get reviewers if you specify how large it is (player count), and how normal/unusual it is. Different reviewers specialize in different sorts of setups.

[callforjudgement]

Not sure if I need to play a few games on here first, but I have a large general-themed game I want reviewed and would like to host.

Werewolf themed.
18+ players

I have 5+ years of IRL mafia party game experience (live, face-to-face), and 1+ year of online forum mafia experience (about 10 games).

You'll need to play at least one game here and wait three months before you can moderate (the playing at least one game is to get acquainted with how we do things here, because it can be different from other forums). You'd also need more moderator experience before you could run a Large Normal (and your game might or might not count as Normal by our definitions; it'd depend on the details).

[callforjudgement]

The reviews in this thread are all on a voluntary basis. So feel free to say "I probably won't run it for a while, but I'd like someone to review this game I'm thinking about", and see if anyone's interested.

[callforjudgement]

I could use a reviewer for a Mini Normal. It's my first modded game/first time designing a setup, so don't be too mad at me if it's freakishly unbalanced.

When you /in to the queue, Tierce will assign you three reviewers from the Normal Review Group, who'll have a look at your setup for you.

[callforjudgement]

If you're spoiling information about the setup in advance, it isn't a Mini Normal (due to not being fully closed). Likewise, if it has no VTs, it also isn't a Mini Normal.

Also, for Normals, you'll be assigned a panel of three reviewers when you /in to the queue. The Normal queue's long enough that most mods will have their review allocated and completed before they reach the front of the queue, if they're responsive to the reviewers and willing to correct problems. (And looks longer than it is because of all the mods who never bother to respond to review, or to fix issues.)

[callforjudgement]

It's a bit of a historical nightmare. Originally, Opens were classified as Normals, and then a separate queue was made for them. All the guidance about Normals therefore only applies to Closed games; there are no hard and fast rules for Open Normals (as can be seen by the variety of setups used in the Open queue, many of which do not fit the rules for closed normals), and although apparently someone was intending to write them at some point, they never did.

It's unclear whether the rules have evolved to the point of "Open Normals must be in the Open queue, the Mini Normal queue is for Closed Normals", or whether they're "Any Open can be held in the Closed Normal queue or the Open queue, even if it doesn't fit the rules for Closed Normals", or whether they're "if an Open is held in the Closed Normal queue, it must follow all the rules that a Closed Normal must follow in addition to being Open".

I'm inclined towards the first interpretation, though. This is partly because running a setup of your choice in the Open queue has higher experience requirements than running a setup of your choice in the Mini Normal queue does; it would be weird if you could design a custom Open as your first setup but have to run it through a queue which normally doesn't play Opens, rather than a queue that's better suited to it. It's also partly because game in the Mini Normal queue have mandatory normal review, but there

are

no rules for normality reviews on Open games, thus it's unclear how the review would be possible to pass.

[callforjudgement]

Also I still need a reviewer for my large normal.

When you /in to the Normal queue, Tierce will assign you a review panel. That's by far the easiest way to get a Normal (be it Large or Mini) reviewed.

[callforjudgement]

Hey all , I have created my first set-up for a game and I am looking for some reviewers to review the setup and tell me what they think. I am a new mod.

If you want to run it here on mafiascum.net, it'll need to be a Mini Normal game, and so you'll be allocated a review panel when you join the queue, so there's not much point in having it reviewed separately.

If this is just for offsite and you want someone from here to take a look at it, this is the right place, but you should give some details (number of players, approximate complexity of the setup, etc.) in order to get appropriate reviewers. (See GuyInFreezer's post for a good example.)

[callforjudgement]

The amount of players are around 15(+-2)

The actual roles will not be known ahead of time.

Right. Because some of information is secret, this is probably best taken to PM (in case one of your players stumbles across this thread in a search engine; it isn't totally unheard of). I would help, but I'm not particularly good at balancing setups larger than 13 players (I nearly always do Mini or Micro reviews). Perhaps someone else will help out. If nobody else does within a couple of days, PM me and I'll take a look at it then, although I can't guarantee I'll get a mid-sized setup like that balanced.

[callforjudgement]

Let's see. The only balance implications here are how often and when scum recruit.

Lylo comes earlier than normal; if there's

n

scum,

n

+3 townies, then if one townie is lynched and one is recruited overnight, we have

n

+1 town,

n

+1 scum, = scum win. So when comparing this to other setups, we have to take the early lylo into account. This is a pretty major balance consideration, on the order of giving scum a daykill (which has a similar effect on lylo timing). There's also the usual cult benefits (you get to recruit the good players). The Polygamist drawback is pretty noticeable, though.

Luckily, there are only a few possible scum strategies, all of which can be reviewed separately (the strategy descriptions assume that scum will always recruit if they win the game as a result, regardless of what the strategy would dictate):

• Never recruit:
  This is basically 8:1 Nightless with town limited to 4 mislynches. Slightly worrying as a strategy, in that that has a EV of 44% for town, which is much lower than it should be for a scum strategy we want to be suboptimal. I fear that best scum play here is to simply not recruit until it wins the game, which would lead to a very boring game.
  
• Recruit once, on N1:
  This is reminiscent of Black Flag Nightless after one correct lynch (which is even a 7:2 setup, so the numbers match exactly). That setup is townsided (because Black Flag Nightless is theoretically balanced, and in practice seems reasonably balanced, maybe a little townsided because scum can't eliminate strong townies). However, in that setup, town can go down to 4 members and still remain with a chance of winning; in this setup, they have one mislynch less (two mislynches total), which is pretty much the only balance-affecting difference (there's a marginal difference if the D1 lynch is the player that scum were planning to recruit N1, forcing them to change their mind, but how often does that happen?). I was initially inclined to say that with the missing mislynch, this becomes quite strongly scumsided. However, I think I was wrong; the EV is 52% to town, meaning that either town can win over half the time via scumhunting, or if they feel that they can't, just randomize and still win that way.
  
  It's worth trying to quantify the ability for scum to control the lynch, too. There's no real data for D1 of a 2:6 (a cult setup is like having all days as D1s because you don't know who had their alignment changed), but we have plenty of data for 2:5 (Original Newbie) and 2:7 (more recent Newbie setups) For day 1 of a 2:7, town's chance of lynching finding one of 2 scum ranged from 20% to 27% depending on the setup (the theoretical value is 22%); for a 2:5 (Original Newbie), it's around 23% (disregarding day 1 no-lynch) compared to the theoretical 28% (and noting that scum are very likely to claim a PR if run up for lynch that day in that setup, which skews the statistics).
  
  So I think there's no reason to worry about this strategy much. It's somewhere between "balanced" and "somewhat townsided", depending on just how much of a impact the cult mechanic makes, and the scum should probably not choose it.
  
• Recruit twice, on N1 and N2
  : This is similar to the above, but scum expose themselves quite strongly on day 3 in exchange for more control over the lynch. The EV is around 62% to town, so this is incredibly risky from the scum point of view, but town end up needing every townie to vote for the same scum at 7p, which is a tall order. I don't have much experience in balancing this setup, although what evidence we do have (mostly from Themes) anecdotally suggests that town doesn't have as much of a problem as it might seem. I have no issues with this tactic existing in the setup; I wouldn't use it as scum, but I can imagine scumteams who might. And I expect them to get horrifically screwed over by it :-)
  
• Recruit once, on N3
  : This has the start from the first strategy, and the endgame from the previous one. Basically, you get another vote to help you out in 5p lylo, in exchange for giving the town another target they can hit to win the game. I doubt it's worth the tradeoff. EV is 55% to town.
  
• Recruit once, on N2
  : This is probably the best strategy for scum, unless they feel (based on D1 play) that they're seriously likely to get lynched D2 instead, in which case they could recruit a player to help defuse the lynch. EV is 44% to town, the same as with the never-recruit strategy; it's better than the previous strategy in pretty much every way, except that scum have less lylo control (at 5:2 rather than 3:2). I think a town might be hard-pressed to win this; when lylo comes on day 3, one of the players has
  only just been recruited
  , thus no associative tells apart from those happening in lylo itself, and PoE can't be used either for the same reason; not to mention that scum can recruit strong scumhunters in order to deprive town of their benefit. This strategy seems rather scumsided, probably unbalancing the setup as a result; 44% to town is viable as a reasonable EV for a "standard" sort of nightless game (where town normally play above their EV), but not in cult setups, which are even worse than mountainous setups in terms of the difference between the EV and the predicted town win rate.

Based on these numbers, 9p does seem to be around the right size, but with optimal strategy, it spends most of its time not being Mafia. If scum play correctly, there probably won't be two scum until lylo, and possibly not even then. Adding VTs doesn't really help; I think scum's optimal play with any number of VTs is to lie low until the setup reaches 6:1 overnight, then move into a 5:2 lylo (because they can recruit to win at 3:3 the next night after a mislynch).

I'm not sure if this issue is at all easy to fix; I can't see a way to do it using town power, for instance, and if you limit the ability to recruit close to lylo, or start with multiple scum, there are few reasonable choices for the scum at all, defeating the point of the setup. One crazy idea I considered is to increase the number of VTs, but to give the cult a kill they can use instead of their recruit (making kill-or-recruit compulsive, so that the town always know how many scum there are), but I can't come up with a reasonable argument that that helps either. At least this setup is very easy to calculate EVs for (that's usually the case when all scum are lovers with each other), which makes potential ideas easy to test, so if anyone has ideas for fixing the setup, let this thread know and I'll take a look.

[callforjudgement]

Make a anti-cult doctor would be my suggestion (can block the recruit essentially) this gets rid of most of the problems with the setup in my opinion (can't bring LYLO a day ahead as easily, can't just recruit the towniest of the town.)

That role's called Alarmist, and I guess it would help (scum would be more inclined to recruit earlier than later if they knew their recruitment wouldn't be guaranteed, meaning choices would become more meaningful). However, the problem still remains that scum's best strategy is to recruit on N2 or not at all (with both having the same EV). If scum attempts to recruit on N2, then if it works, fine, if it doesn't work (say you hit an alarmed player), still fine, you just don't recruit and go for the solo win. And you still don't have a groupscum team until D3. The only real change adding an Alarmist does, then, is to increase town win rate slightly due to the chance that scum miss with their recruit when it's 1:3 or 2:4 overnight, a 33% or 25% chance respectively (recruiting successfully wins scum the game in those settings, so they have no reason to do anything but randomize their target, or aim for a claimed Alarmist if there is one).

[callforjudgement]

Alarmist also means more trust in the townies at all times (your not about to start distrusting the towniest guy because night just went by.)

OK, I agree with this, in so much as it would help make the town slightly less paranoid. I don't think it'd end the paranoia, though, due to the risk that the Alarmist was converted or picked the wrong player.

[callforjudgement]

Looking for someone to provide an external perspective on a Large (16p) Normal setup I've prepared - not only regarding balance but also 'normalcy' issues.

Thank you!

When you /in to the queue, you'll be assigned a review team from the Normal Review Group who'll look at that for you (always normalcy, also balance on request, and most people do make the request).

[callforjudgement]

For anyone wondering about the Normal review process, tl;dr is: you have your setup ready but not reviewed when you /in to the queue, you /in to the queue, Tierce asks you for the setup, you PM it to her, then she sends you a QuickTopic with a bunch of reviewers you can talk to. The game won't be allowed to reach the front of the queue until the review is finished.

[callforjudgement]

need someone to help me review my first mini normal game (with an interesting setup)

For Normals, you'll be assigned a review team when you /in to the queue.

[callforjudgement]

For all the people asking for Normal reviews: you'll be assigned a review team once you /in to the Normal queue, so there isn't normally a separate reason to ask here. (That said, if you're

really

doubtful about your setup, getting a second opinion beforehand is not that unreasonable.)

[callforjudgement]

As long as you've got the details ready, just /in to mod and we'll have a look at it, suggest balance changes, etc. for you. The review can happen while you're in the queue (and the setup won't be run until after it's finished), so it makes more sense than having it reviewed beforehand and then having to go through the review process again one you're in the queue.

[callforjudgement]

For Normal reviews, the list mod will assign you a review team when you /in to the queue. You don't need to get a review done in advance.

[callforjudgement]

Looking for reviewers for a Mini Normal. Thanks :D

Once you /in to mod in the Normal Queue, N will assign you a review team. As such, there's not much point in having a separate review beforehand.

[callforjudgement]

The difference in the threads is that this thread discusses details of a setup that need to be secret from the game's players, so we do the reviews with one or two people via PM/Private Topic, whereas "would you enjoy this theme?" is a question you want to ask to many more than one or two people and there's no reason it needs to be secret, so it's done in the open in a different thread.

So if you want feedback on the details of a setup, you post a request here with some minimal details (type of game, player count, etc.); "would you play this" questions that don't contain spoilers go elsewhere.

[callforjudgement]

Ooh, not only have I been quoted, but I've been sneakily updated to the new listmod. Pretty well done there.

[callforjudgement]

I need a balance review for a 9-player micro, closed setup, fantasy flavour, mostly normal roles. PM please!

I can take a look. Set up a PT/QT for it and invite me.

[callforjudgement]

Based on what I've been seeing recently in Mafia Discussion and elsewhere, it's time to resurrect an old Closed setup I've been working on.

It's named Every Vote Counts; it's a vanillaless (in this version) 9p setup in which votes determine the probability a player is lynched (with the actual lynched player being selected at random, with probabilities proportional to the number of votes on that player). Additionally, the day deadline is also determined secretly at random.

I think I've managed to get it within acceptable swing and balance bounds (just about; this sort of setup is inherently hard to balance!), but would appreciate someone else checking to make sure I haven't massively screwed up. Send me a PM if you're interested in reviewing or comodding. (Note that as it's a Closed setup, you shouldn't offer to review if you're interested in playing it.)

[callforjudgement]

I decided to dust off and finalize a setup idea I've had for a while, Roles That Don't Work Mafia, which I'm planning to run as a Micro. As the name suggests, the game is full of roles which, for whatever reason, don't function correctly or are otherwise broken (in the sense of not working). It's a Closed Theme, so needs to be reviewed in private.

I'm now at the stage where I could use a reviewer (ideally one familiar with smaller games) to check that the setup makes sense. (I'll also be looking for a backup moderator, but this doesn't necessarily have to be the same person as the reviewer.)

[callforjudgement]

Can I have help with my first mini Normal?

When you /in to mod in the Normal queue, you'll be assigned a review team who can help you with the setup. As such, there's rarely a need to have the setup reviewed separately first.

(A good guideline for a 10:3, though, is to pit 4-5 mid-strength Town power roles against a vanilla or near-vanilla scumteam.)

[callforjudgement]

Looking for a Large Theme-qualified reviewer to look at a (currently 14p Closed) setup in which roles are assigned during the game rather than as part of a player's role PM. Although I already have one reviewer, I need a reviewer with moderation (and ideally Large Theme, although this probably balances more like a Mini) experience to comply with Large Theme rules.

[callforjudgement]

Looking for a Large Theme-qualified reviewer to look at a (currently 14p Closed) setup in which roles are assigned during the game rather than as part of a player's role PM. Although I already have one reviewer, I need a reviewer with moderation (and ideally Large Theme, although this probably balances more like a Mini) experience to comply with Large Theme rules.

I still need this. (I can cross-review; although I'm not confident in assessing balance in setups that are too large, I can still look for obvious problems.)

EDIT: Thank you to Something_Smart!

[callforjudgement]

Also if I've been analysing right games are either 8/3 or 10/3 for 3 scum?

Some numbers are easier to balance than others. For a Mini, 10:3 is very popular because it's probably the easiest numbers to balance without having to add a lot of town power, 9:3 being next easiest in that respect. Other player counts are typically seen as the result of mechanics (e.g. Double Day) that give a huge advantage to town and thus change the usual balance points; 8:3, 9:4, 7:3, etc. have all been seen when the mechanics are nonstandard.

[callforjudgement]

Vengeful and We Need A Fifth have mechanics allowing town to recover from a D1 mislynch for a reason. As it is, scum's optimal strategy is probably to forget what they know and pretend to be town. In particular, the traitors shouldn't even try to locate each other; rather, they should just look for anyone (other than the goon) who might potentially look like a goon to anyone else, and favour them instead, to make town think that that's the goon. The result is that there basically isn't enough information for town to catch the scum, except via chance,

D1 also won't play out remotely like a normal Mafia game because any incorrect vote runs the risk of a quickhammer for a scum win. With scum's communication difficulties, that's unlikely to happen from just 1 vote, but could easily happen from 2. The result is that voting at all D1 is probably a bad idea until the lynch choice has been agreed by some other method, which isn't how people will want to play it.

At any rate, you're in the wrong thread; that setup's an Open. If you're still interested in having it reviewed to run it, try Open Setup Reviews. If you're just interested in the thought experiment, you can post a thread for the setup in the forum for discussing Open setups.