The Syndicate

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:10 pm**

The only reason I think a "no double targeting" rule has any value is to prevent protective roles from completely dictating mafia kill decisions (to permanently protect a single player, for example). I think that problem persists in a lesser form if the mafia team cannot double target between members.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:15 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:10 pm The only reason I think a "no double targeting" rule has any value is to prevent protective roles from completely dictating mafia kill decisions (to permanently protect a single player, for example). I think that problem persists in a lesser form if the mafia team cannot double target between members.

This was always my logic as well.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:22 pm**

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:07 pm
Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:04 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:01 pm Additionally, if the mafia kill was a team ability rather than an individual player's nightly action, the watcher would be a pointless role.
Not if the team can't double target, but they still pick a killer.
I suppose so. I've always preferred to designate a specific player each night to perform the kill, because I usually find this to be more of a risk/challenge for the mafia team. They have to pick the right person to perform the kill without being caught in any traps/IDs each night. But there are situations like this, or when a certain team member might be an obvious target, where it can give them an advantage.

I totally agree, I just think it should go alongside a no double targeting rule for the kill.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:33 pm**

It occurs to me that we haven't posted the actions, though they may be known now.

Day 1

DrWilgy lynched

Night 1

dunya watches Spacedaisy
Spacedaisy protects Long Con
SpankGangsta kills Long Con (failed)

Day 2

MovingPictures07 lynched

Night 2

dunya watches speedchuck
Spacedaisy protects kylemii
speedchuck kills Long Con

Day 3

Quin lynched

Night 3

dunya watches sig
Spacedaisy protects Kylemii
speedchuck kills dunya

Day 4

No lynch

Night 4

speedchuck kills Spacedaisy

Day 5

colonialbob lynched

Night 5

sig killed

End game

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:37 pm**

I kind of agree with LongCon fwiw. Giving mafia team the ability to rotate so they can outsmart the no double target rule, but speedchuck placed the kill three or four successive times anyway seems a little imbalanced. I like LongCon's logic where both teams have the rule. It makes it a bit more challenging.

p.s. Daisy, that's ok! I was trying to watch you *but I thought I was tracking you hence my confusion first night*. Also, I fucked up by not watching longcon.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:39 pm**

Numerous town players really deserve some accolades for their performances this game, IMO, despite the loss. There was some seriously incredible town play on D1 especially -- LC, Daisy, dunya, and Kyle in particular, though there were many of you all giving a genuine effort. I can say it was really tough for me personally to fabricate content amid all of that, especially being rusty (somehow I haven't been mafia-aligned in forever) and lower on time than I would have liked. I thought we were likely screwed after how much attention (some of it rightfully so) I received on D1 leading to my lynch and having an inactive on our team.

Don't let the game slipping away from you all keep you from seeing what you did right as well, because town looked good at the start of this game.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:40 pm**

Still I think I made a lot of mistakes that could have resulted in a better result for town, and some other townies felt the same way, so I'm not hating the result cos mafia team deserved the win.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:41 pm**

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:39 pm Numerous town players really deserve some accolades for their performances this game, IMO, despite the loss. There was some seriously incredible town play on D1 especially -- LC, Daisy, dunya, and Kyle in particular, though there were many of you all giving a genuine effort. I can say it was really tough for me personally to fabricate content amid all of that, especially being rusty (somehow I haven't been mafia-aligned in forever) and lower on time than I would have liked. I thought we were likely screwed after how much attention (some of it rightfully so) I received on D1 leading to my lynch and having an inactive on our team.

Don't let the game slipping away from you all keep you from seeing what you did right as well, because town looked good at the start of this game.

hell even after the kyle and speedchuck and colonialbob no lynch, there was a point the next day where I saw everyone possibly directed to speedchuck and I thought shit this could still work.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:42 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:03 pm Nobody singlehandedly lost this game. There were numerous factors which contributed to the end result:

~ The total civilian effort was fantastic through 90% of Day 1 and then it fell off of a cliff. The DrWilgy lynch was really bad from my perspective, and it was an unfortunate way to end one of the most active Day 1s we've ever had in a heist game here. It seemed like a great deal of hard work was forgotten at the last minute and the easiest lynch available (the guy being weird) was selected instead of one informed by the discussion.

To be fair to the town as well, part of this was because speedchuck and I made a concerted effort to make the Wilgy mislynch happen. I really didn't want to get lynched on D1. Wilgy put us in a tough spot and in retrospect we both handled him horribly. Our treatment of him was suspicious as fuck and we should have received more beef for it than we did even.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:44 pm**

dunya wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:40 pm Still I think I made a lot of mistakes that could have resulted in a better result for town, and some other townies felt the same way, so I'm not hating the result cos mafia team deserved the win.

Oh yeah, unfortunately I stopped following this game with the revolving door of company Daisy and I had the past week and a half, but speedchuck and Jack clearly put in a ton of effort and dug us out of a pretty bad spot. They deserve recognition for that as well. I really appreciate them carrying us through to the win. You guys were obviously the best teammates I could have asked for, and sorry I couldn't do more myself.

I just know how it is to be on a losing town team despite an initial good effort and how demoralizing that can be, so I wanted to go out of my way to make sure you all know that there was some seriously good performances in this game. Don't let the end result get you down.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:47 pm**

we'll get you next time speedchuch/jack

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:51 pm**

If there aren't protective/blocking roles then I don't think there's even a reason to implement a rule against double-targeting. I think that's something that has just become typical or standard here over the years. There are sites that never have that rule. RYM rarely had it.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:06 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:33 pm Spacedaisy protects kylemii
Spacedaisy protects Kylemii

Awww thanks

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:11 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:51 pm If there aren't protective/blocking roles then I don't think there's even a reason to implement a rule against double-targeting. I think that's something that has just become typical or standard here over the years. There are sites that never have that rule. RYM rarely had it.

It could make a watcher/tracker, or a roleblocker overpowered. They could all just plant themselves on a particular player and reap the results of whatever occurs.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:13 pm**

But it is true that RYM rarely had an issue with double targeting. It was a pretty foreign concept to me when I first came here, so my ideas on it are not as fully former as others.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:18 pm**

Kylemii wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:06 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:33 pm Spacedaisy protects kylemii
Spacedaisy protects Kylemii
Awww thanks

Yeah that's an error. I one of those should be someone else. I can't remember.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:19 pm**

I agree with LC's thoughts on the double targetting thing, mainly cus that's how it's always been in communities I've been a part of.

The wifom will-they-won't-they shit is the most important part of the doctor role and it's also why the doctor is so important as a role, and honestly the most interesting part of choosing a kill as mafia. With double targeting kill rules the mafia has to consider whether their target might be protected. Without it that stress is still there but worst case scenario, second times a charm right? It give you incentive to find and kill the doctor that you wouldn't have had before as mafia.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:22 pm**

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:39 pm Don't let the game slipping away from you all keep you from seeing what you did right as well, because town looked good at the start of this game.

Well lesson #1 is that I'm never going to shy away from forcing ties on day 1

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:18 pm Yeah that's an error. I one of those should be someone else. I can't remember.

Hurtful, and also rude.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:33 pm**

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:11 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:51 pm If there aren't protective/blocking roles then I don't think there's even a reason to implement a rule against double-targeting. I think that's something that has just become typical or standard here over the years. There are sites that never have that rule. RYM rarely had it.
It could make a watcher/tracker, or a roleblocker overpowered. They could all just plant themselves on a particular player and reap the results of whatever occurs.

Roleblocker agreed. Watcher/tracker meh. They have no unique insight about the value of targeting any single player, and if they do catch someone red-handed once by repeat targeting then they guarantee that their max utility is getting one catch -- something they're supposed to aspire to anyway with those roles. I think that'd be a silly strategic decision for any investigative role.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:38 pm**

I think anything that significantly hampers the civilian control over the lynch is a problem. I think anything that significantly hampers the mafia control over their night kills is a problem. Those are the fundamental means by which each faction progresses toward their win conditions, and screwing with them more than a little bit is not something I'm ever keen on as a host. Others differ, that's fine, it's a free planet.

Posted: **Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:53 pm**

I mean as long as the physics are outlined from the beginning anything goes.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:36 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:51 pm If there aren't protective/blocking roles then I don't think there's even a reason to implement a rule against double-targeting. I think that's something that has just become typical or standard here over the years. There are sites that never have that rule. RYM rarely had it.

I think that silencing roles (which are objectively bad but whatever) shouldn't be allowed to double target.

Being silenced once isn't fun. Being silenced four days in a row kills 100% of the enjoyment of a game and I say this from personal experience.

If stopping a doc from parking on one player is the other goal of the double targeting rule, I say scum should be allowed to double target with the kill and doctors can double target after a successful save.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:18 pm**

Yes I can agree with silencing being a no-double-target role.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:19 pm**

In fact I prefer to disallow silencers from targeting any player twice period.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:54 pm**

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:36 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:51 pm If there aren't protective/blocking roles then I don't think there's even a reason to implement a rule against double-targeting. I think that's something that has just become typical or standard here over the years. There are sites that never have that rule. RYM rarely had it.
I think that silencing roles (which are objectively bad but whatever)

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:09 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:19 pm In fact I prefer to disallow silencers from targeting any player twice period.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:24 pm**

well I guess I better put the "Oops! All Silencers!" themed mafia game I was planning in the fucking trash :/

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:27 pm**

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:24 pm well I guess I better put the "Oops! All Silencers!" themed mafia game I was planning in the fucking trash :/

The regular trash will be fine.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:29 pm**

I'm not a huge fan of silencers either, but I don't fault hosts for throwing them in there once in a while. If the game is meant to be classically constructed, there are only a handful of other standard mafia-aligned power roles commonly employed (i.e. roleblocker, role cop, godfather, strongman). A silencer just adds a little spice and diversity.

I do agree though that it's not great to prevent someone from talking in a game designed around talking.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:41 pm**

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:24 pm well I guess I better put the "Oops! All Silencers!" themed mafia game I was planning in the fucking trash :/

I'm hanging my 'All insanifiers!' themed mafia game on the fridge for everyone to see.

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:42 pm**

Link please

Posted: **Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:28 pm**

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:42 pmLink please

idk i havent made it yet

The Syndicate

Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]

Re: Pirate Mafia [END GAME]