Gangland Wars [Game Thread]

[Takhisis]

Sorry classical, but it hink we had a bit of a mix-up, I ended up thinking I was still loyal to the Vipers -or more accurately, to Miss Tessmacher- after CivGeneral died.

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Sorry classical, but it hink we had a bit of a mix-up, I ended up thinking I was still loyal to the Vipers -or more accurately, to Miss Tessmacher- after CivGeneral died.

No need to apologize, everything worked out in the end.

 

[Takhisis]

For you, not for me. I played the whole game thinking I was still a scummer. Which I was in a way -as a survivor- but, still…

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

For you, not for me. I played the whole game thinking I was still a scummer. Which I was in a way -as a survivor- but, still…

I wanted to end the game with as many people converted to my scum faction as possible so that more people could win. I was so upset Zack died, when he was killed by the town in their death throes.

Survivalists, neutral whatevers, convertible townies, everyone I could, I was trying to leave alone or convert. If I had any clue you were no threat to me or a possible recruit, you would be standing here with me.

 

[classical_hero]

Sorry classical, but it hink we had a bit of a mix-up, I ended up thinking I was still loyal to the Vipers -or more accurately, to Miss Tessmacher- after CivGeneral died.

Your loyalties lied with Miss Tessmacher and since she did not become the boss, it means that you had no chance of being art of the people let out. You needed her to become boss for you to be part f the victory.

 

[Takhisis]

So I was a full cop? I could have used the headsup, you know…

 

[classical_hero]

One thing I am sure that no one would ever try again is to allow people to quote PM's from the host. What I was hoping to happen is that people would be creative and make some fantastic fakes so that it would bring some craziness to the thread, but unfortunately things did not plan out like I had hoped, so things got bad right from the get go. I was willing to take a risk with that aspect and unfortunately it did not work out like I had hopped.

 

[classical_hero]

So I was a full cop? I could have used the headsup, you know…

Once Miss Tessmacher was arrested, you had no hope of being part of a mafia group, unless you got recruited or something. Since you were not directly part of the Vipers at the start meant you had to be waiting for Miss Tessmacher to take the lead of the group, which would have happened had dcmort93 used the forced lynch much sooner as I had hoped and then things would have been so much different.

 

[Zack]

I'm a little upset. The odds of completing my victory condition with the role I had were almost none, but others had it waaaaay easy.

 

[Skwink]

One thing I am sure that no one would ever try again is to allow people to quote PM's from the host. What I was hoping to happen is that people would be creative and make some fantastic fakes so that it would bring some craziness to the thread, but unfortunately things did not plan out like I had hoped, so things got bad right from the get go. I was willing to take a risk with that aspect and unfortunately it did not work out like I had hopped.

Well I sent a fake to Duke Blackstone, and as far as I was aware he thought it was real.

 

[classical_hero]

I'm a little upset. The odds of completing my victory condition with the role I had were almost none, but others had it waaaaay easy.

That is the way life is. Most people simply had the role to survive, so I was hoping that since that was there only role, that they would fight tooth and nail to survive and it was possible if they realised that working with the mafia was the quickest way of doing that, then the game would have been over so much quicker. The goal of the mafia was not to be killing, but to be control the town and with most people being in survival mode it seems they just hoped for the best rather then be active and try to get a win earlier, which is why only one "townie" won with the mafia. Also the cops did not have to be doing good all the time, they could have been doing corrupt things and getting rich off the shopkeepers, but that did not happen.

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

I would suggest that had the vigilante not targeted you, Zack, you'd have won since I had already applied pressure to you, meaning you were on the fast track to winning with me/Vipers.

It was a bad luck shot for the town to hit you instead of me or BSmith, and bad luck for you since you were basically one turn away from winning with us.

So, near impossible? Not so much. Bad outcome, yes, but you were nearly there. You had done everything right to survive up to that point, and the remaining mafia considered you an ally. Blast the vigilantes....

Also, Serial Killer went inactive after killing me. LAME.

 

[Zack]

That is the way life is.

This is mafia...

 

[Takhisis]

It was still an enjoyable game, c_h.

 

[Zack]

Spoiler :

For starters, the game must be winnable by all factions, even if the odds are against that happening.

If there is a large faction (the town/innocent team) which has two protector/doctor/defender roles, then it is entirely possible that they could simply reveal publicly and then defend each other for the rest of the game. If there is a reliable investigator, they could also both be checked out. Now it is almost impossible for these two roles to die. They won't be lynched or murdered. Add a serial killer/lone wolf role. No matter how awesome this particular role, this role will not be able to defeat the two basically bulletproof roles. And that means that the game has the potential to be broken and unwinnable for the Serial Killer role. He cannot outvote or murder the two defenders. So no matter whatever else happens, the Serial Killer will always lose to this duo in the end.

In theory you could give the Serial Killer extra voting power or the ability to somehow murder through protection, and it could possibly be balanced that way. But at the same time, the game is still fairly unbalanced because until those two roles are dead, everyone else in the game is much more suspect and liable to be voted en masse and slain at the request of the two nigh-unstoppable innocents.

Even if you made it balanced, what happens if the game events unfold in such a way that the balance is disturbed? Suppose one of the two defenders is killed right away.... in your zeal to balance the game, you've made this incredibly powerful Serial Killer who has abilities tailor-made to match your potentially unstoppable innocent duo. But that duo no longer exists.... the game has become very unbalanced because an intended element to stand up to the uber-powerful serial killer no longer exists, and the see-saw is tilted too far in the other direction for the game to be balanced. It could just end up being a one-sided slaughter, all because the game host didn't make proper preparations for the eventuality of an early power role loss.


So far:

1) Make sure the game is winnable by all sides at the start of the game.
2) If one of the balancing elements is removed early on, make sure the game is still winnable for all sides. Otherwise one wrong lynch or murder ends the game and all the suspense is sucked out of it.
​

Some game hosts loathe to make basic roles, so they start passing out abilities and personal goals to everyone. But after crafting some awesome abilities and personal goals for over half the players, they start running low on ideas and just throw something together at the last minute. So now you have:

LAME ROLES.

Example:

Your objective is to locate character A using your scanning power. Your scanning power is useless for anything else. Your personal goal is to make sure such and such a character doesn't die. You have the ability to protect said character one time. But since you don't know when they will be attacked, your personal goal is nigh-impossible. And it is far more likely they will die before you even find them. If you do find them, when do you protect them?

I understand personal goals where you want so-and-so to survive, or wish to outlive so-and-so. That's fine as a stand-alone, throwaway, bonus points kind of goal, but when that is all that person is focused on, and they barely have the skills to accomplish that at all, then the role is pretty weak.

It is just taking a basic standard innocent role and giving it what amounts to a bogus, unwinnable mission. As if that player's character is given busywork.... sure, lynch some scumbags, but also do my taxes. It's not very interesting, and the whole concept is forgettable.

Given the near impossibility of accomplishing that goal, it's not even worth focusing on. Meanwhile, someone else might have the inclination to kill a certain person, and have the ability to murder them outright. It's a far easier goal to accomplish. Which of the two personal goals do you think will be fulfilled by the game's end?

3) Every player in your game is important. Make sure they have realistic goals and a realistic shot at accomplishing said goals, even if it is difficult. If you give them an ultra-weak role and a lame goal and nearly no chance of accomplishing it, that person's enjoyment of the game could be affected. Meanwhile, Johnny with the powerful role and the easy goal accomplishes his task, simply because he was lucky enough to be granted the easy role.​

TBH I would have rather been a vanilla innocent. I had no abilities, no concept AT ALL of game concepts, and my only VC was to survive. Because of this, I couldn't really try to go after scumbags, for fear of getting nightkilled, so the only possible way for me to accomplish my victory was to do absolutely nothing and try to win the dirty way, which isn't fun. At all. Just changing my VC to a standard town VC would have made the game much more enjoyable for me. Not to mention how much it angered me to see players like Camikaze, who not only started out with Viper protection, but didn't have to survive nearly as long as I did to win the game.

Just keep that in mind for future games. Ask yourself, "How would I feel if I received this role?"

 

[Earthling]

Nah, Zack, I'm going to continue to make that single role that's worse than a vanilla Innocent in every game just for the chance of it going randomly to you. Random.org likes being that way you know, it has its own little secrets for all of us.

Spoiler :

Though yeah, I agree with how some of the "you should just survive" shopkeepers had it here, as a spectator. Kinda glad I wasn't part of this one though, man it took a while to wrap up and lost a lot of steam, bad luck.

 

[Camikaze]

Not to mention how much it angered me to see players like Camikaze, who not only started out with Viper protection, but didn't have to survive nearly as long as I did to win the game.

Eh, I didn't mind.

 

[classical_hero]

@Zach. You were so close to winning, that you were very much unlucky in not winning. The beauty of most shopkeepers is that they could have won if they sided with the mafia or if they had sided with the upper echelon of the cops. The odds were quite good of winning if people were more active behind the scenes, where I was expecting lots of backstabbing to happen and people changing who they though would be on the winning side and thus try and play both sides. Perhaps I was asking too much. Also Camikaze and Choxorn could have failed there goals if those who had their primary goal of surviving had made pats with the mafia to be working with them, since that was quickest way of getting a victory.

 

[BSmith1068]

As a simple shopkeeper that only had a goal of survival, I was fine with the role. I was able to work behind the scenes to try to influence things (which I think I did fairly well) and that ultimately got me recruited and secured my win.