The Syndicate

*sigh* You can tell I've been away for too long.

So I see that the Roger Rabbit speed game started with a Day 0. The Day Poll looks like it is not a lynch poll and I was confused and couldn't find an explanation of what Day 0 is and why people may choose to include them.

Can someone explain to me what the purpose of a Day 0 is and how frequently they are used nowadays?

Back in my day, we didn't have these newfangled things.

Most hosts include a day zero for people to check in and get oriented. The polls can do anything from providing meaningless flavor, serving as a jumping off point for discussion, granting certain teams/players benefits, or determining the entire course of the game. Including a day 0 is optional, but most hosts around here seem to like them.

thellama73 wrote:Most hosts include a day zero for people to check in and get oriented. The polls can do anything from providing meaningless flavor, serving as a jumping off point for discussion, granting certain teams/players benefits, or determining the entire course of the game. Including a day 0 is optional, but most hosts around here seem to like them.

Does the game go right into a Day 1 then or is there also a Night 0?

G-Man wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Most hosts include a day zero for people to check in and get oriented. The polls can do anything from providing meaningless flavor, serving as a jumping off point for discussion, granting certain teams/players benefits, or determining the entire course of the game. Including a day 0 is optional, but most hosts around here seem to like them.

Does the game go right into a Day 1 then or is there also a Night 0?

Usually it goes into Day 1, but I have seen a Night 0 on occasion. Again, it's up to the host.

Thanks. Back when I played I think hosts would give 24 hours between the sending of roles and the start of the game. Basically a Day 0 is that same thing but also provides a chance for players to begin interacting with each other. It makes sense.

Often when there is a Night 0, Hosts add it so that players may go ahead and use any night action they have before the first lynch gets going, excluding nightkills.

G-Man wrote:Thanks. Back when I played I think hosts would give 24 hours between the sending of roles and the start of the game. Basically a Day 0 is that same thing but also provides a chance for players to begin interacting with each other. It makes sense.

Were you not around for Recruitment 1? Day 0 was used way back then. I have been using Day 0 as a jumping off point to add intrigue into Day 1.

Black Rock wrote:Were you not around for Recruitment 1? Day 0 was used way back then. I have been using Day 0 as a jumping off point to add intrigue into Day 1.

I remember it being advertised but I didn't play, nor did I follow the game. My loss really.

Considering it is remembered so fondly, it must have been legendary. I remember Long Con talking to me a recruitment mechanism way back in the day. He and I must have both been working on the concept simultaneously. My game, Spectrala, got stuck in development hell and his/yours went on to live in infamy. That's okay, Secret Mafia did alright for me.

G-Man wrote:

Black Rock wrote:Were you not around for Recruitment 1? Day 0 was used way back then. I have been using Day 0 as a jumping off point to add intrigue into Day 1.

I remember it being advertised but I didn't play, nor did I follow the game. My loss really.

Considering it is remembered so fondly, it must have been legendary. I remember Long Con talking to me a recruitment mechanism way back in the day. He and I must have both been working on the concept simultaneously. My game, Spectrala, got stuck in development hell and his/yours went on to live in infamy. That's okay, Secret Mafia did alright for me.

You have Secret, we have Recruitment. Can never belong to anyone else.

I like a spicy Day 0. I like to put a poll in that will give a real reason to generate discussion on Day 1. Like telling certain players, baddie and Civvie, what their most desired outcome should be, and then revealing after the poll is done that some players had that knowledge.

G-Man-- were you not around for Trev's star wars game? I believe he started the trend in that game.

Meh, Day 0's in that way typically favor town over mafia, gives them time to read tone without risking anything to do so.

Screw giving people time to check in. Start the game, day 1. If you dont check in on day one you get to deal with looking bad for it.

I'm not a fan of pre-game meta as it has almost gotten me disqualified on multiple occasions.

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:Screw giving people time to check in. Start the game, day 1. If you dont check in on day one you get to deal with looking bad for it.

I'm not a fan of pre-game meta as it has almost gotten me disqualified on multiple occasions.

If that were true, 75% of the Syndicate would be considered bad.

DharmaHelper wrote:

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:Screw giving people time to check in. Start the game, day 1. If you dont check in on day one you get to deal with looking bad for it.

I'm not a fan of pre-game meta as it has almost gotten me disqualified on multiple occasions.

If that were true, 75% of the Syndicate would be considered bad.

Potentially. I normally keep track of when people check in, and then compare it against whether or not they are wallflowering. Wallflowers are detrimental to the game especially when they are actully a mafia. I can't stand it.

Gotten pretty good at catchign them though.

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:Screw giving people time to check in. Start the game, day 1. If you dont check in on day one you get to deal with looking bad for it.

I'm not a fan of pre-game meta as it has almost gotten me disqualified on multiple occasions.

If that were true, 75% of the Syndicate would be considered bad.

Potentially. I normally keep track of when people check in, and then compare it against whether or not they are wallflowering. Wallflowers are detrimental to the game especially when they are actully a mafia. I can't stand it.

Gotten pretty good at catchign them though.

For full games I host, I plan to make the participation score guidelines a lot stricter and less forgiving.

I'm telling you Epi. Missing Person's rule of getting DQ'd when you miss two votes? It does wonders for participation. Of course it doesnt count when you arent allowed to vote such as when you get silenced. You get a pardon for that.

In your bible mafia game for instance, at least a fourth of your players wouldve gotten kicked out.

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:I'm telling you Epi. Missing Person's rule of getting DQ'd when you miss two votes? It does wonders for participation. Of course it doesnt count when you arent allowed to vote such as when you get silenced. You get a pardon for that.

In your bible mafia game for instance, at least a fourth of your players wouldve gotten kicked out.

There's a reason I don't modkill. I don't do the job of the Mafia as a Host. Modkilling players who don't participate does NOTHING because they aren't participating anyway, so why do they care if they get disqualified? All that does is hurt the civilians when you could replace the non-participant. I've been hosting a while. I think the P-score will (ultimately) fix the problem without modkilling.

Epignosis wrote:

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:I'm telling you Epi. Missing Person's rule of getting DQ'd when you miss two votes? It does wonders for participation. Of course it doesnt count when you arent allowed to vote such as when you get silenced. You get a pardon for that.

In your bible mafia game for instance, at least a fourth of your players wouldve gotten kicked out.

There's a reason I don't modkill. I don't do the job of the Mafia as a Host. Modkilling players who don't participate does NOTHING because they aren't participating anyway, so why do they care if they get disqualified? All that does is hurt the civilians when you could replace the non-participant. I've been hosting a while. I think the P-score will (ultimately) fix the problem without modkilling.

It's not mafia friendly. Mafia players who miss votes get the boot too, and it isnt an uncommon occurrence.

Anyway though peopel who miss votes are detrimental because
1. It keeps all players from getting a read on them at all
2. A mafia could wallflower and appear inactive entirely, and win the game by not participating which has happened in the past. Hence my disdain and bloodlust for hunting down wallflowers.
3. Desperate civs often look to wallflowers when they have nowhere else to turn, essentialyl wasting a day phase if they hit a civ like that
4. Yes you should try to replace somebody first, but what happens when you have no replacements? You just have a fucking dead body in the middle of the game distracting everybody involved. Civs lynch them out of desperation, mafia blow a night kill on them thinking they are hiding as role.

We take the liberal stance of "If you arent gonna play, dont sign up.". We also issue x amount of game bans for being disqualified, on top of a significant loss in points on our leaderboard on JTM. So if somebody DQ's they have to sit out the next 1 or 2 games.

If a player sends a message to the Host beforehand though that they cannot continue playing, a punishment normally isnt given out, but that will only work so many times. People who miss votes and dont play waste the time of everyone involved, including the host. As such severe punishments should be handed out to those who do so.

Once you've had enough of people abusing the system, you wont be so nice about it lol.

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:I'm telling you Epi. Missing Person's rule of getting DQ'd when you miss two votes? It does wonders for participation. Of course it doesnt count when you arent allowed to vote such as when you get silenced. You get a pardon for that.

In your bible mafia game for instance, at least a fourth of your players wouldve gotten kicked out.

There's a reason I don't modkill. I don't do the job of the Mafia as a Host. Modkilling players who don't participate does NOTHING because they aren't participating anyway, so why do they care if they get disqualified? All that does is hurt the civilians when you could replace the non-participant. I've been hosting a while. I think the P-score will (ultimately) fix the problem without modkilling.

It's not mafia friendly. Mafia players who miss votes get the boot too, and it isnt an uncommon occurrence.

Anyway though peopel who miss votes are detrimental because
1. It keeps all players from getting a read on them at all
2. A mafia could wallflower and appear inactive entirely, and win the game by not participating which has happened in the past. Hence my disdain and bloodlust for hunting down wallflowers.
3. Desperate civs often look to wallflowers when they have nowhere else to turn, essentialyl wasting a day phase if they hit a civ like that
4. Yes you should try to replace somebody first, but what happens when you have no replacements? You just have a fucking dead body in the middle of the game distracting everybody involved. Civs lynch them out of desperation, mafia blow a night kill on them thinking they are hiding as role.

We take the liberal stance of "If you arent gonna play, dont sign up.". We also issue x amount of game bans for being disqualified, on top of a significant loss in points on our leaderboard on JTM. So if somebody DQ's they have to sit out the next 1 or 2 games.

If a player sends a message to the Host beforehand though that they cannot continue playing, a punishment normally isnt given out, but that will only work so many times. People who miss votes and dont play waste the time of everyone involved, including the host. As such severe punishments should be handed out to those who do so.

Once you've had enough of people abusing the system, you wont be so nice about it lol.

Abusing the system? We've only just started a system. One I have confidence in when it's fully in play.

I'm just saying. It doesnt take people long to go "oh I can just do this and avoid any consequences while having an easier game. Like I dont even have to try!". And then the people who dont abuse the system will get tired of it and complain.

It's the entire reason we have the system we do now. Practically no room moving room at all when it comes to not playing. We dont enforce anything with post counts, or quality of posts. But when people are just saying random bullshit and still voting, they put themselves into a bad position. They have to play good to stay in the game.

But your system could work here. I'm not saying it wont. My preferences are just a tad bit more relentless.

Some games should be wrapping up soon that will no doubt have an impact on whether or not the participation scores are viable.

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:I'm telling you Epi. Missing Person's rule of getting DQ'd when you miss two votes? It does wonders for participation. Of course it doesnt count when you arent allowed to vote such as when you get silenced. You get a pardon for that.

In your bible mafia game for instance, at least a fourth of your players wouldve gotten kicked out.

I think the point of the Participation System is to penalize players over the long term course over their mafia careers, rather than forcing hosts to throw their game's balance out of order via the modkill (or DQ as you call it).

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:I'm telling you Epi. Missing Person's rule of getting DQ'd when you miss two votes? It does wonders for participation. Of course it doesnt count when you arent allowed to vote such as when you get silenced. You get a pardon for that.

In your bible mafia game for instance, at least a fourth of your players wouldve gotten kicked out.

I think the point of the Participation System is to penalize players over the long term course over their mafia careers, rather than forcing hosts to throw their game's balance out of order via the modkill (or DQ as you call it).

Precisely.

Eventually, only players of a certain caliber will be permitted into certain games.

Most of my speed games will be open to anyone, however, so that anyone can increase their participation scores.

Gamerguy doesn't even have a participation score. Maybe that's why he doesn't know what he's missing out on.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Gamerguy doesn't even have a participation score. Maybe that's why he doesn't know what he's missing out on.

He hasn't played a game yet.

I use Night Zero~ or I have in the past and plan to do so in future. Non kill night powers go through, with a set up poll.

And I am not much for labeling folks. My peeve, the one thing I WOULD penalize people for as a host, is people who would like to be replaced, but don't have the balls to tell the host. I did that myself in a recent game, and it made me feel like shit. It made me realize how lame that was. For me, that would affect a P-Score~ so long as someone indicates to the host that they are seeking replacement, no harm no foul, imo. But leaving the host hanging is not cool.

I think P-Score will prove to be an effective tool to incentivize participation and cause players to only sign up for games they want to actually sign up for and play.

Modkilling en masse is one way to get the baddies to win quickly.

Dom wrote:I think P-Score will prove to be an effective tool to incentivize participation and cause players to only sign up for games they want to actually sign up for and play.

Modkilling en masse is one way to get the baddies to win quickly.

This.

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:I think P-Score will prove to be an effective tool to incentivize participation and cause players to only sign up for games they want to actually sign up for and play.

Modkilling en masse is one way to get the baddies to win quickly.

This.

Thirded.

thellama73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:I think P-Score will prove to be an effective tool to incentivize participation and cause players to only sign up for games they want to actually sign up for and play.

Modkilling en masse is one way to get the baddies to win quickly.

This.

Thirded.

Fourthed.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:I think P-Score will prove to be an effective tool to incentivize participation and cause players to only sign up for games they want to actually sign up for and play.

Modkilling en masse is one way to get the baddies to win quickly.

This.

Thirded.

Fourthed.

I plead the fifth.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:I think P-Score will prove to be an effective tool to incentivize participation and cause players to only sign up for games they want to actually sign up for and play.

Modkilling en masse is one way to get the baddies to win quickly.

This.

Thirded.

Fourthed.

I plead the fifth.

Sixthed.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:I think P-Score will prove to be an effective tool to incentivize participation and cause players to only sign up for games they want to actually sign up for and play.

Modkilling en masse is one way to get the baddies to win quickly.

This.

Thirded.

Fourthed.

I plead the fifth.

Sixthed.

C-C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!