The Syndicate

Btw I'm playing a game in my other site which uses another type of pre-made setup from MafiaScum which I thought it pretty cool. It's called C9++

https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=C9%2B%2B

It follows the same idea of matrixes in which the setup is a puzzle but it's simpler and also harder for players to figure out.

I also had links for the <15 setups and they are all broken. Maybe I should have saved them.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:57 am

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:08 am @JaggedJimmyJay where can I find those mafia matrixes you guys use to make games?

Click the spoiler:

Spoiler: show

15 players (12 vs. 3):

I don't believe this is 100% current. As we've noticed little issues we have tweaked the matrices, and all of those tweaks probably aren't reflected here.

Hey man I went to grab this image to show it to a friend but the link is broken.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 2:05 pm That 15-player matrix was definitely adapted at some point. It's buried in the PMs between MP and I somewhere. Setup A is probably overpowered for the civilians, for example.

We could have a Matrix Thread in the Lounge storing all of those, imo. With balance discussions and whatnot.

Also JOAT is cop/doctor/vig/RB?

[mention]JaggedJimmyJay[/mention] what is a sick innocent child? An IC with a deadline to reveal?

Nice. Thanks.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:57 am

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:08 am @JaggedJimmyJay where can I find those mafia matrixes you guys use to make games?

Click the spoiler:

Spoiler: show

I don't believe this is 100% current. As we've noticed little issues we have tweaked the matrices, and all of those tweaks probably aren't reflected here.

Didn't you have one for 15 players?

[mention]JaggedJimmyJay[/mention] where can I find those mafia matrixes you guys use to make games?

It used to be in my other site that dead player replacements were so common that a viable mafia strategy would be to avoid killing good players in the first two nights to avoid letting them replace in.

Nowadays it's much less common as hosts have become more liberal with modkills. Some of them even oppose the concept of replacing inactives altogether.

I find the scenario described above to be undesirable, so I'd limit dead player replacements more. Maybe so only people who are lynched can do it.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:14 pm If I'm bringing back a dead civilian to replace in, I clear it with my mafia team(s) first.

I like this.

dunya wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:07 pm I'm not talking about lesser evil on the whole here, I'm just saying that rule is always pro-town and anti-mafia.

And if you don't do it, something that messes up balance even more may happen.

The point here is not whether the thing messes the game or not. We all know it does. The thing is that we want to pick the lesser evil in any given situation.

A modkill is traumatic since it randomly removes a role from an otherwise balanced setup.

That said, I gave my own ranking of "lesser evils" when it comes with dealing with inactives. You guys are free to disagree with it and swap the lines in it. I find this discussion to be fascinating.

dunya wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:03 pm

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:05 am

dunya wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:22 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:17 pm I disagree with the green most wholeheartedly, but I understand the rationale. When you host, what I find is that in most cases they slowly drop away anyway, but if they do stay it's generally not to plot, it's to hang out, and it keeps the morale high associated with being mafia (which is a rather thankless task). As a civilian, I don't really agree that the reason you lynched someone was to get them out of chat. It was because you caught them and they were bad. Or to get rid of their ability.

I don't mind if they stay to chat or whatever. But a dead scummer is dead and the players in the game believe him or her to be out of it and not influencing any scum decisions. He or she should have no influence on the game just like a dead townie shouldn't. Just cos they have BTSC and not a public thread doesn't make it ok.

It's like if there were two masons, and one died, does s/he go on playing the game in BTSC with the other mason, cos why not?

nah, it's bad.

Well obviously you exclude players who have info.

- Mafia
- Anyone with BTSC
- Cops/tracker/watcher with unclaimed results
- Anyone whose role was hidden when they died.

that's not what I meant. I meant the mafia team wanted a player dead, they sacrificed a NK to kill that player and were successful. Having that player, even if he/she is eligible because they didn't have any background power role info, replace an inactive or whatever, isn't fair on the mafia team. The player who was killed and is not a replacement, with his/her reads and biases that the mafia team didn't want influencing the game anymore and successfully got rid of, has returned. To haunt them a second time!

I would never allow dead players to return, personally.

Lesser evil theory applies.

Having an inactive player exist in the game is more damaging to whatever faction they are in than a dead replacement is.

dunya wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:22 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:17 pm I disagree with the green most wholeheartedly, but I understand the rationale. When you host, what I find is that in most cases they slowly drop away anyway, but if they do stay it's generally not to plot, it's to hang out, and it keeps the morale high associated with being mafia (which is a rather thankless task). As a civilian, I don't really agree that the reason you lynched someone was to get them out of chat. It was because you caught them and they were bad. Or to get rid of their ability.

I don't mind if they stay to chat or whatever. But a dead scummer is dead and the players in the game believe him or her to be out of it and not influencing any scum decisions. He or she should have no influence on the game just like a dead townie shouldn't. Just cos they have BTSC and not a public thread doesn't make it ok.

It's like if there were two masons, and one died, does s/he go on playing the game in BTSC with the other mason, cos why not?

nah, it's bad.

Well obviously you exclude players who have info.

- Mafia
- Anyone with BTSC
- Cops/tracker/watcher with unclaimed results
- Anyone whose role was hidden when they died.

I think I've been lynched as a civ 3 or 4 times in this site. 2 of them were because of late game replacements.

It usually goes like this. I start the game and everyone suspects me because I say scummy things. Then as it goes people get a better grasp of me and I get civ read. Replacement joins on Day 6 and has the initial DDL suspicion he should have had on day 1. He voices it. People remember their old suspicons. Tinfoiling ensues. DDL is lynched. Town lost the game both times this happened.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:53 am

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:43 am Easy.

Modkill the inactive civ.

The civilian can be active the entire game and then have an Internet outage for one night phase and end up confirmed.

I don't modkill people because of one night phase. I'm more lenient. My current criterium is two days, maybe more if you let me know about your predicament in advance.

But in this site it's common for someone to sign up for a game, and still be in it 2 months after it starts, without making a single post. It's ridiculous.

dunya wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:05 pm

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:41 pm I just remembered to add another item too:

• A rule which allows mafia members to submit actions on behalf of their teammates

I have placed this in the "moderately pro-mafia" category, though it could also probably fit in the "slightly pro-mafia" category. I think this is a significant allowance for a mafia team in that it allows them to forego any team member who is inactive -- a luxury which a civilian faction simply cannot enjoy when its members are inactive. The lack of a viable counter can be very beneficial to the bad guys.

ehhhhh. it sucks when you have a team of 3 vs 16 for example and that random scum team of 3 have 2 inactives and 1 active player and no replacements in the game. sometimes the mod makes exceptions to balance the game out. I don't fault them tbh.

I hate it when town kills a scum and a mod allows them to stay on and chat and plot. or when mafia kill a townie and then that townie replaces another inactive. THOSE should both be banned forever. We got rid of you for a reason: you shouldn't be impacting the game imo.

Nah I disagree

I have an order for undesirable things to have in a game, from least undesirable to most undesirable. it goes like this:

- Everyone is active (YAY!)
- Early-game replacement (new player)
- Early-game replacement (dead player)
- Modkill
- Late-game replacement (new player)
- Late-game replacement (dead player)
- Inactive player staying in the game for multiple days

If I'm the host, the last 3 will never happen. Because I'll modkill people to prevent it. But early-game replacements are a way to avoid modkills, which are a less desirable outcome.

For me having a late game replacement is worst thn having an early game replacement of any type. First, because they are almost never able to catch up, so they miss whatever argument and events made someone look like civ or bad, and make worse votes/decisions because of it. Second, because they make a big change on whatever was the narrative of the game at the time, without giving living players time to adapt, which may give the civs a sudden win or defeat.

An early game replacement has an effect too, but it's likely to be dampaned over time, as the game narrative is still being built and they can catch up and insert themselves into the old narrative easily. A dead player replacement is not nice, but its effects are small enough if it's early game.

A modkill is horrible because it artifically changes the setup in a random way. But it's still preferrable to allowing Mr. Lurker to make zero posts from Day 2 to Day 9, because that affects the game negatively in so many ways it's ridiculous.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:04 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:58 pmstrategic non-use of abilities.

I don't care for this either, or deliberately skipped night kills.

One of my least favorite dynamics is when a civilian is inactive and only one mafioso is still alive. The mafioso is forced to either skip the kill or kill the inactive player to prevent confirming him or her as a civilian. That should never happen -- the civilians shouldn't benefit from one of their own failing to play the game. In situations like that, a randomized kill mechanic eliminates all these problems.

Easy.

Modkill the inactive civ.

Golden wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:58 pm The philosophy to me is to counter both inactivity and also strategic non-use of abilities. Sometimes people get roles they don't like and they'd rather not lose, and although that sucks a little for that person - my philosophy is sort of 'you don't always get what you want, but you still have to use it'.

I don't have a problem with this. Some abilities are not good to use every night. A vig kill, for example. Or a redirecting ability.

And if I designed an ability that a player would rather not use, it's my fault not theirs.

Watcher is really underrated. People tend to associate it with the Tracker but it's much, much better. A watcher could possibly function like a doctor by watching a claimed PR and making mafia afraid to kill them. It can also find mafia way more easily than the Tracker, and perhaps even then the Cop. I guess its main downside is the lack of civ results, though.

In my games a Watcher has never managed to do anything useful though, but I attribute that more to players being inactive/unlucky.

A good way to balance bulletproof civilians is giving mafia easy access to strongman kills (called super kills in my other site).

Like, make them limited in some way (limited shots or cooldown), but give the mafia the way to get rid of a particularly annoying player on rare occasion.

As a rule of thumb I follow, if town finds a mafia, they deserve to kill them. If mafia finds a town PR, they deserve to kill them. A strongman rewards mafia teams who can find power roles by letting them get rid of them more easily if they aim it right.

Likewise, I very rarely make town roles with an infinite number of bulletproof, and when I do, I add a clause that surviving a kill makes them voteless in the next day.

Pretty good topic btw. I love mafia theory.

What is a mountainous setup?

How does revealing something after the game ends affect balance?

Also: "Mafia BTSC during day phase legal" appears in two different categories.