Scioly Assassination 63: The Mob Seizes Power

[starpug]

If you must, but I believe that the reason it didn't work is no fault of the way the game was set up, but in fact because no one participated

I've been meaning to say this for a while (weeks) but I also wanted to give the game the chance to run its full course:

No one participated because the game was set up badly for this forum, I don't mean to knock your idea, it certainly would've worked better if the community base was more active during the timeframe, but the fact is we don't have the time or want to do so.

I don't think going back to the same system is the best idea either, the entire point of this game is to challenge our wits and to have fun, (and the latter is certainly the more important) I doubt I'll be challenged here when I say that both of those only occurred occasionally with our usual format in the past 20 or so games (brobo, Darksabre, and otherwise sparingly).

Let me get to the point, these issues come to the front of my mind when I think of what needs to be done:
1)Set a time limit of some sort, nobody likes games that last for a month. 2 weeks maximum might be best.
2)Change the clues somehow, its not that they're "bad" or that they're more challenging than they used to be, its that we don't have the time or want to decypher them
3)You know... I expected to have at least three, but its really just the first 2.

The 1st one is simple to accomplish. But the 2nd is much more of a challenge. Clues have been talked of as too complex for a long time, but nothing serious has been done about it. I think these are the main problem with Assassination, they're very intimidating for most including myself, and so we lose interest. I don't know exactly how we can fix this, we could try the very old system in the first 10 games, but I don't have the feeling that would work either. Frankly even if we did find a good clue structure, there's no way we can make every Assassinator follow it.

What I'm suggesting is... take clues away altogether (identity clues could remain however). This game from its start was modified and influenced by the standard Mafia game, why don't we just change everything to be more like that to begin with?
(for those unfamiliar, from wiki: "Mafia (Russian: Ма́фия, also known as Werewolf, Assassin or Witch Hunt) is a party game created in USSR modeling a battle between an informed minority and an uninformed majority. Players are secretly assigned roles: either "mafia", who know each other; or "townspeople", who know only the number of mafia amongst them. In the game's "night" phase the mafia covertly 'murder' a townsperson. During the day phase, all of the surviving players debate the identities of the mafia and vote to eliminate a suspect. Play continues until all of the mafia have been eliminated, or until the mafia outnumber the townspeople. A typical game starts with seven townspeople and two mafioso.")

Even that may turn out to be a bad idea, I don't know to be honest, but I think the next game should be delayed until we all at least can debate this, some thing certainly needs to be changed.

I think we should implement penalties for:
Protecting yourself
Accusing incorrectly

By penalties I mean something like the person you accuse dies or you only get a certain number of times when you can protect yourself

The games have become very formulaic imo a lot of "I don't feel like solving this clue, so I protect myself"

[RandomPerson]

I think we should implement penalties for:
Protecting yourself
Accusing incorrectly

By penalties I mean something like the person you accuse dies or you only get a certain number of times when you can protect yourself

The games have become very formulaic imo a lot of "I don't feel like solving this clue, so I protect myself"

The more we do that the more it just annoys people, the games were more fun when there wasn't so much opposition to self protection from the sassy. With people annoyed, they stopped playing and thus the game is brought to a standstill.
Self protection is less of a problem when there is more incentive to solve the clues. This is why I think brobo and DS did well, brobo's clues always had something about them to make you want to solve them. Like the chess clues (don't know how to phrase that better).

Of course, all this would be irrelevant with my "idea", in most games of Mafia there is no protection, some add in a Nurse or Angel who can protect 1 person, but that is all.

[starpug]

I think we should implement penalties for:
Protecting yourself
Accusing incorrectly

By penalties I mean something like the person you accuse dies or you only get a certain number of times when you can protect yourself

The games have become very formulaic imo a lot of "I don't feel like solving this clue, so I protect myself"

The more we do that the more it just annoys people, the games were more fun when there wasn't so much opposition to self protection from the sassy. With people annoyed, they stopped playing and thus the game is brought to a standstill.
Self protection is less of a problem when there is more incentive to solve the clues. This is why I think brobo and DS did well, brobo's clues always had something about them to make you want to solve them. Like the chess clues (don't know how to phrase that better).

Of course, all this would be irrelevant with my "idea", in most games of Mafia there is no protection, some add in a Nurse or Angel who can protect 1 person, but that is all.

When all people do is protect themselves and accuse randomly, for me the game is no longer fun. For an assassin, it's infuriating when someone protects themselves by pure laziness after you put an hour into a difficult but still solvable clue to kill them.

When you remove kill clues the game becomes a question of is the assassin gonna decide that he wants me dead and there is nothing I can do about it

[RandomPerson]

When all people do is protect themselves and accuse randomly, for me the game is no longer fun. For an assassin, it's infuriating when someone protects themselves by pure laziness after you put an hour into a difficult but still solvable clue to kill them.

When you remove kill clues the game becomes a question of is the assassin gonna decide that he wants me dead and there is nothing I can do about it

That is the entire point of Mafia, killing is much easier, so is winning compared to this game, instead of the competition being based around the clues, its based on a race to kill off the mafia before they kill all the townspeople.

[zyzzyva980]

Note that on the protecting self issue, say it was three times only; I was targeted three times in this game, protected myself three times, if it gets down to the fourth I'm out of luck? Just make a reason rule. But I don't think this really matters. The aforementioned changes may be interesting rules to implement, but I think we should let the next game go back to normal. Or at least not have as many changes. Time limit rule is a good idea, but we've gotta have active members to allow the assassinator to have as much fun as they're allowed to.

[brobo]

Note that on the protecting self issue, say it was three times only; I was targeted three times in this game, protected myself three times, if it gets down to the fourth I'm out of luck? Just make a reason rule. But I don't think this really matters. The aforementioned changes may be interesting rules to implement, but I think we should let the next game go back to normal. Or at least not have as many changes. Time limit rule is a good idea, but we've gotta have active members to allow the assassinator to have as much fun as they're allowed to.

Perhaps you are allowed to protect yourself three times in a game, but when you were in fact that target it doesn't count towards your three total?

[starpug]

Note that on the protecting self issue, say it was three times only; I was targeted three times in this game, protected myself three times, if it gets down to the fourth I'm out of luck? Just make a reason rule. But I don't think this really matters. The aforementioned changes may be interesting rules to implement, but I think we should let the next game go back to normal. Or at least not have as many changes. Time limit rule is a good idea, but we've gotta have active members to allow the assassinator to have as much fun as they're allowed to.

Reason rules are always ineffective, people always come up with half-baked reasons to protect themselves.

We could impose an, "Assassin kills this many people and wins rule," then if officers insist on protecting only themselves, the assassin has another way to win

[brobo]

Paradox21, RandomPerson, and myself have drawn up some new rules and have been showing them around. fmtiger124, zyzzyva98, and EASTstroudsburg13 were shown them and have completely agreed that they are good and would work well.
Basically, protects and accusations are posted as usual. Anyone is allowed to play and everyone starts out with 0 accusations and earn one for each correct protect made by solving the clue. Once 15 incorrect accusations are made the Assassinator wins. However, each time the Assassinator kills someone, the number of wrong accusations needed to win goes down by one and caps at 8. Here are the benefits to a system like this:
-Because the assassinator needs 15 wrong accusations and accusations come from solved clues, this encourages assassinators to make solvable clues.
-Because each kill lowers the accusations needed by one, this discourages really simple
clues

There will also be a time limit of 30 days on any one game (unless of course that game is going really well in which case we will turn a blind eye to this rule.)

Thoughts?

[starpug]

Paradox21, RandomPerson, and myself have drawn up some new rules and have been showing them around. fmtiger124, zyzzyva98, and EASTstroudsburg13 were shown them and have completely agreed that they are good and would work well.
Basically, protects and accusations are posted as usual. Anyone is allowed to play and everyone starts out with 0 accusations and earn one for each correct protect made by solving the clue. Once 15 incorrect accusations are made the Assassinator wins. However, each time the Assassinator kills someone, the number of wrong accusations needed to win goes down by one and caps at 8. Here are the benefits to a system like this:
-Because the assassinator needs 15 wrong accusations and accusations come from solved clues, this encourages assassinators to make solvable clues.
-Because each kill lowers the accusations needed by one, this discourages really simple
clues

There will also be a time limit of 30 days on any one game (unless of course that game is going really well in which case we will turn a blind eye to this rule.)

Thoughts?

I reject anything with a time limit, but I would support something with the option of impeachment instead

[brobo]

we talked about impeachment but then realized that people would vote for impeachment just to end the game if the assassin is about to win or if they are mad because they died.