[OLD] Open Setup Ideas and Discussion

Shamrock · Post Post #5189 (isolation #0) » Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:54 pm

In that setup the lynchers are effectively just townies with an easier win condition.

Shamrock · Post Post #5197 (isolation #1) » Mon Oct 01, 2012 1:32 am

Seems like any setup of that kind is going to be overly dependent on lucky guilties. You can never trust innocent results, so basically the whole setup's balance hinges on the investigators potentially getting guilties.

Shamrock · Post Post #5223 (isolation #2) » Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:00 am

What if the hunters needed their target goon AND the other hunter to die? In this variant they would lose if the town won before the other hunter was dead.

Shamrock · Post Post #5224 (isolation #3) » Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:00 am

What if the hunters needed their target goon AND the other hunter to die? In this variant they would lose if the town won before the other hunter was dead.

Shamrock · Post Post #5226 (isolation #4) » Tue Oct 02, 2012 5:09 pm

Yeah, you're right, that doesn't work. I've been thinking about how to make this work and I can't really come up with anything. It's a neat idea but I'm not sure it works in the context of mafia.

Shamrock · Post Post #5238 (isolation #5) » Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:30 pm

Lose the survivor, survivor is a terrible role that should never be used in anything

Shamrock · Post Post #5328 (isolation #6) » Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:29 pm

Well, in that case they're basically de facto mafia members. You might as well just call it 2 pairs of scum lovers.

Shamrock · Post Post #5350 (isolation #7) » Tue Oct 30, 2012 2:25 pm

Just let the scum give out town inventions in addition to their own inventions and that isn't a problem.

It's a neat idea, I'd play some version of it.

Shamrock · Post Post #5359 (isolation #8) » Sun Nov 04, 2012 8:21 pm

Ding Dong Ditch

2 Mafia Goons
7 Vanilla Townies

At the beginning of each Day, all living players are randomly paired into daytalking neighborhoods (with one neighborhood of three, assuming an odd number of players alive). Neighborhoods are closed at the end of the Day and the players receive new randomized neighborhoods at the beginning of the next Day.
If the game reaches 3p lylo, each player gets a 2-person neighborhood with each other player.
Mafia have daytalk.

Does this sound like fun?

Shamrock · Post Post #5361 (isolation #9) » Sun Nov 04, 2012 8:55 pm

Yeah, I was sort of waffling on whether the town needs a PR or two, but I think the ability to become confirmed makes the neighbor mechanic a lot less interesting. I guess it could potentially be run as a closed setup with one or two weak PRs.

Shamrock · Post Post #5369 (isolation #10) » Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:32 pm

Doesn't seem like that setup would be much fun to play - way too much riding on the shoulders of a single player.

Shamrock · Post Post #5375 (isolation #11) » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:16 am

The intended point would be to use the conversation in the QT to supplement your read on the other person. I mean, by that logic, aren't all neighborhoods pointless?

Shamrock · Post Post #5399 (isolation #12) » Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:01 am

This is more a mechanic/role than a setup but if I were going to run this I'd make this part of the setup public knowledge:

Cult v2.0
13 players
1 Cult Leader
1 Cult Acolyte
11 pro-town roles (VTs & various PRs)

The Cult Leader recruits on odd nights only. On Day 1 only, if the Cult Leader is lynched, the Acolyte gains an even night recruitment power. The cult wins when it has a majority. Add various town PRs to taste/balance.

The limited recruitment keeps the cult's power from spiraling out of control too quickly (the only way it reaches 4 members is if the town mislynches 3 days in a row). On the other hand, the fact that it starts with two members and that it has a fall-back plan in case the leader is lynched D1 means that D1 is significantly less retarded than it otherwise would be in a game where cult is the only scum faction.

Thoughts?

Shamrock · Post Post #5410 (isolation #13) » Fri Nov 23, 2012 6:37 pm

the problem with the concept, which I think Leafsnail was getting at, is that most PRs are much more useful for one alignment than the other, e.g. watcher is clearly more powerful for town than scum and vice versa for double voter. so there aren't really any strategic decisions to the bans besides "ban the strongest roles for the other alignment". not sure how you can get around this.

Shamrock · Post Post #5412 (isolation #14) » Fri Nov 23, 2012 6:58 pm

I guess but then you have to balance them within the pairs AND balance the pairs against each other which seems like a pretty daunting/unlikely task.

Shamrock · Post Post #6062 (isolation #15) » Sat Jul 20, 2013 8:14 am

Mark of the Beast

3 Mafia Goons
2 Cops
8 Vanilla Townies
Special: During pre-game, the mafia chooses 4 players to give the mark of the beast. These players appear guilty to investigations for the rest of the game. They are not informed that this has happened and they still flip as their original roles.

No idea whether these numbers are balanced but give me suggestions for numbers tweaks and thoughts on the concept. If people think it's townsided a mafia RB could be thrown in; if scumsided then perhaps reduce the number of marks.

Shamrock · Post Post #6064 (isolation #16) » Sat Jul 20, 2013 1:25 pm

Right, I mean obviously the point is that you can trust your innocents but not your guilties, which forces you to use the Cop role differently from normal.

Thinking about it more though, the scum are obviously going to favor killing and lynching unmarked targets. Three marks might be better.

Shamrock · Post Post #6067 (isolation #17) » Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:40 am

Well, I mean, the fact that the marks are placed by the scum is what makes the setup interesting. Without that it's just "cop investigations randomly fail sometimes."

Shamrock · Post Post #6134 (isolation #18) » Fri Aug 02, 2013 3:06 am

Why would you pick any ability other than cop to learn?

Well, I guess you could have the whole town learn doc and chain-protect to effectively make it nightless (as anyone who dies that was supposed to protected will confirm the person who was supposed to be protecting them as scum)

Shamrock · Post Post #6165 (isolation #19) » Tue Aug 06, 2013 9:59 am

As town, I would allow each player in the game to log into my account one-by-one and look at my role PM, changing the password for each player and then using the "delete cookies" function to forcibly log them out before giving a new password to the next player. (This way even if they do delete your role PM, you will know who it was that deleted it.)

If the whole town was willing to go along with this there would really be no way to stop everyone from confirming.

Edit: Testing with another browser reveals that "delete all cookies" doesn't do what I thought it did. Is there way to forcibly end other sessions of your account? Even if there isn't, you could still easily swap logins with someone you believe to be town in order to 100% confirm them.

Shamrock · Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:11 am

Another thing you could do if you didn't want to let people onto your account (actually this is probably much easier) is do a screen-sharing thing via skype. Screenshots can be easily faked but if you're doing it via a live skype call people can see you actually going to your PM box and opening your role PM for them to see - this would be sufficiently difficult to fake that most people wouldn't know how.

Yeah, this wouldn't work if the mod was willing to send a fake role PM in a separate PM, so that would get around a lot of problems like this one.