idea pertaining to newbs and games (Mafia)

[Trokair]

It was suggested that newbs make their own "version" of mafia to play in. I think this is a good idea seeing as how alot of newbs (apparently) have tried to join the games and the usuall suspects are hesitant to allow settlers to play (ex. me get the boot :( ) . Anyway, the only problem I see with that is I know I would make a crappy gm and I am sure most newbs will. Question is, do any of the regulars have time to gm a newb game, or to teach a newb to gm???? Just a thought.

[Zopperoni]

I suggested a spin-off (equally accessible to anyone) just a minute ago.

I wouldn't mind hosting a game, if there's enough interest, but I couldn't host it until next Tuesday.
However, in the meantime, we could discuss the setup of such a spin-off.

[Anita Blake]

I like it. It will eliminate the fear that the regulars on Mafia seem to have about people not playing actively and it will give all the newb's a chance to play.

[Trokair]

The standing rules of Mafia itself are very sound (minus the piling I guess :) ), therefore making it hard to really create a true "spinoff" in terms of making it diffrent and still giving us settlers some experience. Ideas are welcome though. I do appreciate the offer to host zop and I guess if I ever grow some creativity I could try to gm for the settler games.

Edit: of course playing with the pros and haveing a quick gruesome death is always fun too. Seeing as how I am a settler, i guess all I can do is leave it up to you all.

[FlameFlash]

:b:

this would be great for all of us... not even the newbs. I know I often miss the signup and you'd certainly need more than just the newbs to fill up slots. :D

Just make sure people who are in the other Mafia game can't jump in to this one as well, eh?

[Zopperoni]

Yes, that should be an obvious rule :b:

A second game can help balance the load as well. The current 28-man game we have is quite big.

I do propose to not call it Mafia, but to go with something like "Gangsters" just to make a distinction.

[J Bytheway]

How about having one game where priority is given to those with the fewest posts, and another where the priority is reversed...

Probably too much bother.

[Trokair]

Well, if we coordinated the starting times, the ones in the "pro" game could check the settler game list so as not to have duel players. I would also like to note that I am wondering about other games like nuclear war and maybe gladiator (haven't had time to catch up on how gladiator works yet though). I 'd like to match my wits and weapons against some ususpecting cities.

Edit: load balance is a good idea too. Don't know how well mafia would work with 45 players......probably take forever and need like 8 mafioso

[Snowflake]

The problem with this idea, is that you may not have many newbies venture in this deep. Of course this can be a mini version with one mafia and something like 12 people. But it is likely this game will be shorter in average compare to the other one. And if you want to time them together that means some waiting period between the games.

[Trokair]

Good point. Question: how many people missed and/or were rejected from the current game? this could give a little more accuret reading if another game is needed. Then again there is always first come/first serve which is undoubtedly easier.

[Skanky Burns]

Maybe it could work with half the people and a more relaxed turn structure, such as 48 hours voting each round or what have you.

Regarding other games we have here (Nuclear War or Gladiator, for instance) generally we can use all the players we can get. NW should be over after another three rounds, so expect to see the signup for that shortly. IOW feel free to join. :D

[Anita Blake]

well, the whole point of this is so that newb's can get some experience in the game so that the higher level guys will let us play. It doesn't matter if it's shorter than average.

[Zopperoni]

Originally posted by HongHu
The problem with this idea, is that you may not have many newbies venture in this deep. Of course this can be a mini version with one mafia and something like 12 people. But it is likely this game will be shorter in average compare to the other one. And if you want to time them together that means some waiting period between the games.
Here's where load-balancing could come in handy. We can reduce the player pool for Mafia from 28 to 20-24 and direct those slots to "Gangsters" making them more equal and more manageable.

[Trokair]

Ok, Current ideas;

1. First come/First serve (excluding settlers)

2. First come/First serve all welcome

3. Dual games (only problem is short, will run through alot of ideas fast, you might not get to kill your favorite target)

[Skanky Burns]

There is FlameFlash, alva, Spiffor, Vlad, Vovan, Drogue, Frozzy... Reducing the current game to 20 frees up another 8 warm bodies for the 2nd game.

This could probably work, methinks.

[Snowflake]

Maybe in the new game the mafia can change killing styles (only one mafia any way) but he has to leave some kind of a clue, like a card with an arrow in a heart or something as his signature.

[Anita Blake]

that would be a good way to differentiate it from mafia

[Trokair]

Ok, guess it's time to end this. How about everyone digest the options and near the end of the current game a possible decision can be made.

Edit: Alright, Cheiftan type person thing........ uhhh..... yeah.

[alva]

As I have suggested before, you can use the same story for 2 games, maybe a couple of small changes would be needed but not many.

[Snowflake]

By that time both Trokair and Anita may not be newbies any more and I wonder if we will be able find any more newbies.

[Skanky Burns]

It doesn't have to be strictly newbies, as it will be a rather dull game with only two players. The game can be used to soak up excess players from the other one, so that everyone who wants to play the games can in one or the other.

[Snowflake]

9999 posts huh? ;)

[Jamski]

Its about bloody time, eh? ;)

Well, since I will be running another Mafia game some time in the future, I will be doing my normal rules. First come, first served, and t'devil take the hindmost.

-Jam

[Anita Blake]

I think that having two games at the same time would be better for everyone. It sounds like the game is getting too crowded and people who want to play aren't getting the chance to. This will give everyone a better chance of getting into the game.

[Zopperoni]

Originally posted by HongHu
By that time both Trokair and Anita may not be newbies any more and I wonder if we will be able find any more newbies.
At the going rate, we'll have a new player everyday.

[Jamski]

Either that, or allow people who missed out on the last game to get priority for the next one.

You know, there's only two people that have played in every game of the 19 so far, because there's always been more people interested than there are places.

Next game I run, which may be Mafia XX - the next game, I will be allowing anyone to play as usual, new or old. You have to start somewhere.

My only concern is about people who sign up and then don't participate, but there are many regulars who are pretty guilty of that.

Anita, Trokair, you asked first, as did Alva and Drogue. You get the first 4 slots in the next game, I reckon, as long as you can hang around untill the current mafia are caught.

Nice to see new people, I always think. Certainly its nice to meet new people who are markedly more polite than some of the folks who've been here a few years ;)

-Jam

[Anita Blake]

Thanx Jam, or Trok, whoever you may be :)

[Ljube]

Would you be so kind to point me to mafia 12 Jamski.

[Jamski]

Its invisible.

-Jam

[Theben]

I see no reason why a settler couldn't join the main mafia game. But then again 2 games at around 16-20 each would be nice.

[Ljube]

Yes, original mafias had 16 players top.

[DrSpike]

The situation this time was a one-off, and Trokair was too late. There is no anti-noob sentiment, as long as you are willing to play the games properly it's all fine.

Please consider joining gladiator and nuclear war, especially the latter since we will finish soon. Everyone that wants to, within reason, can play.

[Theben]

We could also establish a 1 game waiting period for new posters, just to see if their interest holds.

[joncha]

If we figured out a workable scoring system, a mafia "premier league" would be a logical extension.

As it stands now, I prefer the first come, first served system.

[Trokair]

Well apparently us new people (the two i know of) have a place in the next game already. I really do appreciate it and i look forward to being docpiled first for causeing a minor disturbance on the forums :p

[joncha]

:idea: trokpiled?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by DrSpike
The situation this time was a one-off, and Trokair was too late.

Liar :p

[Skanky Burns]

My only concern is about people who sign up and then don't participate, but there are many regulars who are pretty guilty of that.
For the record, that annoys me too. :p

[Jamski]

Your annoyance is noted for the records as requested.

/me saves this webpage to his HD, and burns it to CD, making two copies and locking one in a vault in Geneva *

Done :)

-Jam

[duke o' york]

How did you get to Geneva so fast? Or have you got a DL there too? :cute:

Let me play the next game too! :)
I'm good at playing the games, but rubbish at actually getting onto the sing-up sheets in time because the games invariably end in the evening GMT or at the weekend. I realise that it's a pain your all having to wait over the weekend for the next round, but I've got a feeling that the thread won't slip down the forum in that time. :cute:
* duke coughs, making a noise that sounds suspiciously like ras

[Adagio]

I like the idea of having two games of 16-20 players... there's enough players for this I guess... And the games wont take too long... being among the first people to get killed in a 30+ players game can be very annoying...

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Liar :p

:confused:

If you'll actually read the thread you'll see it is so. You'll also see me defend Trokair, since Duke originally gave suspicion as the reason for swapping Jonny for Trokair. Trokair ws last in nonetheless.

[Skanky Burns]

I think it was just a baseless tease.

And bless your cotton socks, Jam. :p

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
I think it was just a brainless tease.



That's a bit harsh Skanky, but I see where you are coming from. :)

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by DrSpike
That's agree completely, UR is almost as much of a bastard as that Ming is. I just hope they don't read this and ban me before I edit it. :)

Very cheeky, Spikie. :nono: :cute:

[Zopperoni]

If there's a timing problem concerning the duration of both games, then we could allow people who are already "dead" to cross over.

[Adagio]

Well... if the 24 hour vote/kill time is kept (Maybe have the same GM for both games... or at least from the same timezone), and both games has the same number of players, it should be much of a problem

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns


Very cheeky, Spikie. :nono: :cute:

That would have worked had you not posted it 2 hours after my post, which shows no edit tag. :)

[Skanky Burns]

Yours was 20 minutes after mine, also with no edit tag.
Surely you saw this reply coming? :cool:

[DrSpike]

True, but I never claimed that your post originally said what I changed it to in my quote. :p

Call it a reinterpretation. :)

[Skanky Burns]

As was mine. And your grammar sure was bad before you "edited" it away. :cute:

[DrSpike]

But my reinterpretation was a slight change in emphasis. Yours just completely made something up. :)

[duke o' york]

Enough nonsense from you two. :rolleyes:

What is the mafia etiquette governing ljcvetko's proposal in the current game? Can I declare the voting closed although he doesn't yet have a majority?

[Chaunk]

No! Let the plebs vote him off, or not as the case may be...

[duke o' york]

But! But! Damn! I'll have to rewrite about five lines of Chapter Three now. :cute:



:lol:


A query. Why does Chaunk have Columbo as an avatar, when, in the current game of Mafia, he's playing Charlie Chan, and Spaced Cowboy is playing Columbo? :confused: Is he just an admirer of Peter Falk's work?

[Snowflake]

Looks like Trokair is doing a fine job in keeping interest. I mean he even used "docpile" correctly, even if it is not a standard word. ;)

For the Mafia Premier version I think in addition to the change that the mafia can choose his killing style suitable for each victim, perhaps he could also be required to provide names for a couple people that has alibi and false alibi.

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by duke o' york
Enough nonsense from you two. :rolleyes:


The new deities are really having some fun in their new quarters I see.

[duke o' york]

They're trying to spam their way to Princess. ;)

[Zopperoni]

Originally posted by ADG
Well... if the 24 hour vote/kill time is kept (Maybe have the same GM for both games... or at least from the same timezone), and both games has the same number of players, it should be much of a problem
It can still deviate by a week or so depending on if and how quickly the Mafia is caught.
I think allowing "dead" players to cross over would still be the easiest way of keeping two independent games while still shuffling the player pool somewhat.

Originally posted by HongHu
I mean he even used "docpile" correctly, even if it is not a standard word. ;)
Now that is suspicious, isn't it? :cute:

[duke o' york]

I find it very suspicious that a settler would actually read some of the threads before commenting on them. :eek:

Why are you wasting your time at 'poly? You should be out alongside Supercitizen, fighting the good fight! :doitnow!:

[Kassiopeia]

Might as well mention it here, as Zopperoni suggested.

*tko's anti-docpiling tirade in Mafia XIX got me thinking about trying out a closed ballot in the spin-off. How do you think this would change the nature of the game? We could also allow people to post whoever they want to say they voted, but the truth could be different. That'd add a whole new cloak-and-dagger aspect to it.

It would certainly reduce docpiling since people won't be so afraid of being singled out. On the other hand, it gives the villagers quite an advantage when the mafia won't have a clue as to who might be a danger. When I was mafia, a large part of my strategy was following how the villagers voted and planning my kills based on that. So we'd need some sort of a stabilizing agent added with the closed ballot, lest we'll be seeing even fewer and fewer Mafia victories.

In fact, there are so few already that we should think about some sort of advantage for the mafia. How about three mafias in a game of > 20 people instead of two? Or should we get our hands dirty with the actual game mechanics?

[Snowflake]

Or mafias could know each other and they can win together in the end.

And the secret ballot is a good idea, as long as people still can discuss and share their thought so that the secret votes are not entirely random.

[Trokair]

Originally posted by duke o' york
I find it very suspicious that a settler would actually read some of the threads before commenting on them. :eek:

Why are you wasting your time at 'poly? You should be out alongside Supercitizen, fighting the good fight! :doitnow!:

Well, how stupid would i look if i went back to the OTF and asked what a docpile was??And it's not hard to figure it out when someone goes "ok docpile me now, everyone vote for [insert speaker's name]". I waste my time here because......... frankly i have no life.

[Theben]

How long did you lurk?

[Ljube]

That is exactly what I said in mafia 3. Were you lurking that long? :eek:

[joncha]

:idea: He's ljcvetko's DL!

[Ljube]

You got me !!! :D

[Japher]

Uhm, I don't know the rules of MAFIA, can some one direct me to them... thanks.

To me, your threads look like a bunch of dribble followed by someone whinning about being killed.

I don't get it.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Zopperoni
It can still deviate by a week or so depending on if and how quickly the Mafia is caught.
I think allowing "dead" players to cross over would still be the easiest way of keeping two independent games while still shuffling the player pool somewhat.


Sure, but at least there wont be much time between them, in case if game1 ends early (fastest after 4 rounds) and game2 ends with the mafia wins (16-20 rounds)... (Taken if there's 2 mafia)... but the chances of getting both mafias in two votings is very little...

When the first game ends, the signup thread for both games could start, when the last game ends, the signed up players will then be randomly divided between those two games (This way it's not always the same people fighting the same people)

[Jamski]

Uhm, I don't know the rules of MAFIA, can some one direct me to them... thanks.

To me, your threads look like a bunch of dribble followed by someone whinning about being killed.

I don't get it.

Look in the "History of Mafia" thread.

-Jam

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Japher
Uhm, I don't know the rules of MAFIA, can some one direct me to them... thanks.

To me, your threads look like a bunch of dribble followed by someone whinning about being killed.

I don't get it.

:lol: :b:

[Spaced Cowboy]

Perhaps we should get the "current rules" of all the other games ruls and put them in on post and have Rah top it. The person (without a life) that posts it would be responsible for editing as the rules mature. My vote goes to Jamski.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Kassiopeia
Might as well mention it here, as Zopperoni suggested.

*tko's anti-docpiling tirade in Mafia XIX got me thinking about trying out a closed ballot in the spin-off. How do you think this would change the nature of the game? We could also allow people to post whoever they want to say they voted, but the truth could be different. That'd add a whole new cloak-and-dagger aspect to it.


I have advocated this a few times.

I think HH has a good idea to help out the Mafia, by letting them know each other so at the very least there is no chance of killing themselves off... at least, by accident.

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Spaced Cowboy
Perhaps we should get the "current rules" of all the other games ruls and put them in on post and have Rah top it. The person (without a life) that posts it would be responsible for editing as the rules mature. My vote goes to Jamski.

If Jam doesn't want to do it, I'll volunteer.

[joncha]

You could always just post the rules at the beginning of each game, like we do for hangman.

[:) Smiley]

We ought to have crossovers between the games, such as Nucular Mafia.

[joncha]

We do! In the last mafia game, the villagers hung the mafia suspects. :D

[Tassadar500]

So are we going to make two mafia games or not?

[Skanky Burns]

I suppose a new one could start now if enough people are free to join it. Otherwise we will have to wait until the current one is over before there are enough players.

[Jamski]

Wait untill there's a good few dead people form the current game, and then start a new one. Its not so bad to be killed early then.

-Jam

[Theben]

Originally posted by :) Smiley
We ought to have crossovers between the games, such as Nucular Mafia.

Or Nuclear Gladiator; everyone starts out with 1000 points to spread, but can only put max 1/3 in defense.

[joncha]

Originally posted by Jamski
Wait untill there's a good few dead people form the current game, and then start a new one. Its not so bad to be killed early then.

-Jam

If we go with two mafia games, maybe we should have a rule that the second one can't start until the first one reaches round 5 or 6. That way there should be plenty of people to fill each game, and the poor sods who get piled on in the early rounds have somewhere to go.

[Tassadar500]

Well, I am willing to GM the next Mafia game :)

[Anita Blake]

Originally posted by joncha


If we go with two mafia games, maybe we should have a rule that the second one can't start until the first one reaches round 5 or 6. That way there should be plenty of people to fill each game, and the poor sods who get piled on in the early rounds have somewhere to go.

Do you guys really think it's going to be that hard to find people to play? I mean, especailly since someone suggested that the amount of people that play each game be lowered.

[Ljube]

Originally posted by joncha


If we go with two mafia games, maybe we should have a rule that the second one can't start until the first one reaches round 5 or 6. That way there should be plenty of people to fill each game, and the poor sods who get piled on in the early rounds have somewhere to go.

To be piled in the early rounds there too.

I may even be able to play every mafia game that way.

[joncha]

:lol: poor -tko.

It's a valid point, though. I'm in favour of rule experimentations in the second-tier game.

[:) Smiley]

Actually, if space filling is a problem,I'm sure there are some people who'd be up for two games simultaneously.

[Guynemer]

I think rule experimentations are essential to the second-tier game.

That is often how rule changes are explored in major league sports, for example.

[Kassiopeia]

I wholeheartedly agree. IMHO trying out the closed ballot system would be perfect for the second tier game.

[DarkCloud]

At the going rate, we'll have a new player everyday.
actually, I'm sort of interested too ;)

[DarkCloud]

Or mafias could know each other and they can win together in the end.

And the secret ballot is a good idea, as long as people still can discuss and share their thought so that the secret votes are not entirely random.


good ideas. As noted, it would allow a cloak-and-dagger aspect to the game ;) In addition, however, the GM could also drop hints as to how people might have voted (since the GM could act sort of like the detective-god [or so I have inferred]).

Therefore, people's own accounts... the accounts they PM to others... and the GM's could be different- and all could be lies! ;)

--
Also, why wouldn't the mafia's know each other, it would only make sense? (At least in some cases) then they could work in concert... or secretly backstab each other ;)

[Adagio]

I like those ideas also :b:

[Chaunk]

If the mafia do know each other, then backstabbing each other would be stupid...

2 Mafia, A & B. A kills B in the night. B finds out, and posts "I was the mafia, and A that little schemeing ***** is the other mafia. I suggest you pile him now then you can win."

[Skanky Burns]

If you know who the mafia is, you are forbidden from posting in the thread. And if someone decided to break that rule by naming the other mafia, what do you reckon the chances of them being allowed to play again are? :cool:

[DrSpike]

Under the table PM'ing would still be a problem though. The mafias should not be aware of one another. :)

[Adagio]

... or they should just not be able to kill each other...

[Skanky Burns]

But that still leaves the under-table PMing where they could reveal the other mafia. One counter would be mafia surviving gets n points, but if both mafia survive they get n+ points so it is in their best interest to keep each other alive. Or we could just keep them not knowing who the other is.

[Trokair]

The "secret ballot" thing sounds like fun but I don't think the mafia should be able to know each other. Perhaps try that in one game but I think it is interesting to have one mafia "accidentally" kill off the other. That way the mafioso could try to follow the clues that the rest of the people are trying to compile to win thereselves more points (if there is going to be a point system).

[DarkCloud]

2 Mafia, A & B. A kills B in the night. B finds out, and posts "I was the mafia, and A that little schemeing ***** is the other mafia. I suggest you pile him now then you can win." Well, they shouldn't be allowed to post that since they're dead.

Frankly, I don't see why people are allowed to announce if they are the mafia and they die- in reality, no one would know... I would suggest taht if indeed the 2nd mafia were killed, that the first one gets the power to kill more people to make up for the 2nd's absence ;)

[Zopperoni]

He does.

The kills are alternated. One mafioso kills in the odd rounds, the other in the even rounds.
If A is killed R4, then B gets to kill in all the remaining rounds until he is caught.

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by DarkCloud I would suggest taht if indeed the 2nd mafia were killed, that the first one gets the power to kill more people to make up for the 2nd's absence ;)

You are not saying that he could kill 2 people per night are you?

And I agree that there is secruity risks of information leaks if mafias know about each other.

[DarkCloud]

Actually, now that I know the game better- I would say that the remaining mafia would kill every night rather than just on the odd/even ones ;) so that no one would know that anything is awry ;)

Thus, three people could be left, and 2 could be the mafia ;) (It hurts your mind just thinking of it!)

[:) Smiley]

is MAD possible in Mafia?

[Rasputin]

as long as no DLs allowed in the game, !!!!!!


and umm did someone mention spam in a certain thread, nahh wouldnt be jamski !!!!!

[:) Smiley]

SPMA?

[Zopperoni]

OK, here's a recapitulation of the main ideas posted. If anyone thinks that I missed something vital, please mention it.

Main Idea
To support the growth of the Mafia game and to relieve the original Mafia game, a spin-off will be introduced. For convenience and distinction, this spin-off will be named "Gangsters".

Gameplay
Gangsters will use the basic formula of Mafia, but will also be an experimental ground for the original Mafia game.

ISSUE 1) Player admission:
A) Separate games for veterans and new players
B) Free-for-all
C) Other

ISSUE 2) Storyline:
A) Same/similar to Mafia
B) Different
C) Flexible (GM's call)

ISSUE 3) Coordination with the Mafia game:
A) Run Gangsters "simultaneously" with Mafia
B) Allow different run-times by having "dead" players cross over

ISSUE 4) Gangsters' identities:
A) Appointed gangsters know of each other that they are the gangsters
B) Appointed gangsters DO NOT know of each other that they are the gangsters


Rules
- A player may not simultaneously play Mafia and Gangsters.

ISSUE 5) Turn structure:
A) Mafia-style (24 hours; flexible weekend)
B) 48 hours
C) Other

ISSUE 6) Killing style:
A) If there is only one Gangster, then s/he must leave some kind of clue as a signature
B) No/Other

ISSUE 7) Voting procedure:
A) Same as Mafia
B) Closed ballot


Discussion
OK, if this are all the issues that we need to discuss, then we can discuss/vote for them now.

Personally, these are my preferences:
1) B: a free-for-all structure will give the player pools a nice shuffle.
2) C: I believe that a GM must do what s/he feels comfortable with, so should not be forced to (not) follow a certain storyline.
3) B: again this is to keep the player pool different, and keep the games continuous.
4) B: the accidental killing is part of the fun-factor IMO, and others have given good arguments against it in this thread.
5) A: 24H should be enough, there won't be any punitive measures if you miss a round (now and then) anyway.
6) B: I think this should be consideration the GM and the Gangster can make together.
7) B: yes, this is the perfect opportunity to test this.

[I added an elaboration for my choices.]

[joncha]

:b: Thanks Zopperoni.

Now that I'm dead in the other game, I vote we start now. :D

1) B (but people who could not get into the A game get first dibs)
2) C
3) B
4) A (but we need some way to prevent/limit betrayal)
5) A
6) B
7) B (I like open ballots, but let's give secret balloting a try)

edit: I changed my vote on #2 because of the new option.

[Jamski]

1) B
2) B
3) B
4) B
5) A
6) A
7) A

-Jam

[Japher]

Definitly different storylines, but with room for crossovers!!!:p

[Zopperoni]

I added a C-option to ISSUE 2) and elaborated on my choices.

[gjramsey]

1) B
2) C
3) B
4) A (The accidental killing of the other is fun, but knowing the other will give the gangster's a better chance of winning)
5) A
6) B
7) B (open ballot is fun, trying to save yourself if there is a pile in progress, but a closed ballot will make an interesting change to the process)
7)

[Anita Blake]

1)B
2)C - I agree with the idea that this game would be a good way to try out different things. If it doesn't work, then it won't mess up anything with the original game.
3)B
4)B
5)A
6)A
7)B

[Skanky Burns]

1) B
2) C
3) B
4) B
5) A
6) A
7) B (May as well try different rules)

[Ljube]

1) B
2) C
3) B
4) B
5) A
6) A
7) I prefer A, but maybe we should try B just to see how it goes.

[Theben]

1. B
2. C
3. A
4. B
5. A
6. B
7. B

[Tassadar500]

1. B
2. C
3. B
4. B
5. A
6. A
7. B

[Trokair]

1.B
2.C
3.B
4.B
5.A
6.A
7.B

[Theben]

B minus? :cute:

[Kassiopeia]

1. B
2. C
3. B
4. B
5. A
6. B - Leave it to the GM and the Gangster to decide.
7. B

[Zopperoni]

Current vote tally

ISSUE 1) Player admission:
A) Separate games for veterans and new players - [0]
B) Free-for-all - [11]
C) Other - [0]

ISSUE 2) Storyline:
A) Same/similar to Mafia - [0]
B) Different - [2]
C) Flexible (GM's call) - [10]

ISSUE 3) Coordination with the Mafia game:
A) Run Gangsters "simultaneously" with Mafia - [1]
B) Allow different run-times by having "dead" players cross over - [11]

ISSUE 4) Gangsters' identities:
A) Appointed gangsters know of each other that they are the gangsters - [2]
B) Appointed gangsters DO NOT know of each other that they are the gangsters - [9]

ISSUE 5) Turn structure:
A) Mafia-style (24 hours; flexible weekend) - [11]
B) 48 hours - [0]
C) Other - [0]

ISSUE 6) Killing style:
A) If there is only one Gangster, then s/he must leave some kind of clue as a signature - [6]
B) No/Other - [5]

ISSUE 7) Voting procedure:
A) Same as Mafia - [1]
B) Closed ballot - [10]



So far, the direction is clear for all issues except ISSUE 6)

[Snowflake]

Well I finally got to read this thread and I must say I agree with the majority. For issue 6) I realize it is one of my suggestion. Consequently I must vote for A). Actually I feel what the duke is doing right now for the current mafia game is a perfect example for clues.

[Chaunk]

Hmm for option 6, I say B. There should be clues all the way through not just when there's only one mafia. If there is only one mafia left, then the clues should become more difficult not easier IMHO.

[Adagio]

ISSUE 1) Player admission:
B) Free-for-all

ISSUE 2) Storyline:
C) Flexible (GM's call)

ISSUE 3) Coordination with the Mafia game:
A) Run Gangsters "simultaneously" with Mafia

ISSUE 4) Gangsters' identities:
ABSTAIN

ISSUE 5) Turn structure:
A) Mafia-style (24 hours; flexible weekend)

ISSUE 6) Killing style:
ABSTAIN

ISSUE 7) Voting procedure:
C) Other - People may decide if they want to vote public or in private (If voting both places, the private vote counts

[:) Smiley]

Mafia works great, no need to change too much. The closed ballot test is good though.

[duke o' york]

Originally posted by HongHu
Actually I feel what the duke is doing right now for the current mafia game is a perfect example for clues.

:love: :D

What? Making them too hard, so the villagers resort to guessing again? :blush:

One of the major clues has been picked up so far, and (I'm not saying which one) was ignored for the purposes of voting. However, there are minor clues dotted around, of which some will be far more obvious than others. As with Jamski's games, it really is a case of just going back and reading all of the posts I've made. Well, all right, I'll lety you off reading the <strike>spammy</strike> posts that try to encourage voting or clue-seeking. ;)

[Snowflake]

Got to ask you, are all the clues relevant or are some of them red herrings like when Jamski did the game?

[duke o' york]

They're all relevant, but you have to interpret them in the right way. :)

While we're on about Mafia, how's about a snazzy little badge for players of the game? Like the Civ 2 Succession Games badge (see left). :D

[DarkCloud]

1 B
2 C
3 B
4 A
5 A
6 B
7 B

[DarkCloud]

It would be amusing if these games/ or just the mafia games got their own subforum ;) but I somehow don't think it'll happen ;)

[Snowflake]

The Community Games Forum :b:

[DarkCloud]

Well, that might be more likely to happen ;) Then a civgroup would certainly be justifable... but I worry that less people will join if we 'subforum' the section... since less people will see the games ;)

but you do have to admit that they currently clutter the Other Games section quite a bit!

[joncha]

Originally posted by HongHu
The Community Games Forum :b:

[Imran Siddiqui]

1. B
2. C
3. A
4. A
5. A
6. A
7. A

[DrSpike]

Think of what would happen to poor Other Games. :)

[Jamski]

Grumbold would throw a party ;)

-Jam

[FlameFlash]

Originally posted by Zopperoni

Main Idea
"Gangsters".

:lol: Great!


Gameplay
Gangsters will use the basic formula of Mafia, but will also be an experimental ground for the original Mafia game.

Also sounds good.


ISSUE 1) Player admission:
B) Free-for-all

If some newbie actually proves they're not as interested somebody could always replace them mid-game via the GM.

ISSUE 2) Storyline:
C) Flexible (GM's call)

ISSUE 3) Coordination with the Mafia game:
A) Run Gangsters "simultaneously" with Mafia

Though each game should start once it fills... so it may not be pure simultaneous...

ISSUE 4) Gangsters' identities:
B) Appointed gangsters DO NOT know of each other that they are the gangsters

Why change something like that for gangsters that isn't in Mafia? I've never been the mafia yet, but isn't part of the fun about being the mafia trying to also figure out who the other one is and killing them off?

Rules
- A player may not simultaneously play Mafia and Gangsters.

Agreed.

ISSUE 5) Turn structure:
A) Mafia-style (24 hours; flexible weekend)

Yes. If this is a sister/brother game to mafia we can't very well have new players get used to another system.

ISSUE 6) Killing style:
A) If there is only one Gangster, then s/he must leave some kind of clue as a signature

Ummm.... how about having the GM provide clues? Maybe the gangsters offering suggestions, but the GM would know how to better submit a clue in the context of the story.

ISSUE 7) Voting procedure:
A) Same as Mafia

Same as some other above reasons: stray too far from Mafia-style and when players migrate back and forth they have to remember too much change.

And thanks to Zopp for making the list.

[Zopperoni]

Current vote tally

ISSUE 1) Player admission:
A) Separate games for veterans and new players - [0]
B) Free-for-all - [16]
C) Other - [0]

ISSUE 2) Storyline:
A) Same/similar to Mafia - [0]
B) Different - [2]
C) Flexible (GM's call) - [15]

ISSUE 3) Coordination with the Mafia game:
A) Run Gangsters "simultaneously" with Mafia - [4]
B) Allow different run-times by having "dead" players cross over - [13]

ISSUE 4) Gangsters' identities:
A) Appointed gangsters know of each other that they are the gangsters - [4]
B) Appointed gangsters DO NOT know of each other that they are the gangsters - [11]

ISSUE 5) Turn structure:
A) Mafia-style (24 hours; flexible weekend) - [16]
B) 48 hours - [0]
C) Other - [0]

ISSUE 6) Killing style:
A) If there is only one Gangster, then s/he must leave some kind of clue as a signature - [10]
B) No/Other - [6]

ISSUE 7) Voting procedure:
A) Same as Mafia - [3]
B) Closed ballot - [12]
C) Other (both options are valid, but private vote is eventually the one that counts; proposed by ADG) - 1



OK, I think the picture is clearer now on ISSUE 6) All the others seem decided as well now.

This results in the following set of rules for "Gangsters":

Main Idea
To support the growth of the Mafia game and to relieve the original Mafia game, a spin-off will be introduced. For convenience and distinction, this spin-off will be named "Gangsters".


Gameplay
Gangsters will use the basic formula of Mafia, but will also be an experimental ground for the original Mafia game.

Gangsters will be played independently from Mafia with its own player pool, run-time, and possibly story setting (if the GM chooses so).

Like in Mafia, a General Manager (GM) will host the game. The GM will appoint one or two players (dependent on total number of participants) to be the "Gangster(s)".
The game knows two time-settings: Day and Night. During nighttime, a player will be killed by (one of) the Gangster(s) (and eliminated from playing). During daytime, the surviving players will all vote for who they believe is the (a) Gangster. The person who receives the most votes is then killed and eliminated from playing.

When there are two Gangsters appointed, they will alternate kills until one of them is killed. The appointed Gangsters do NOT know of each other that they are Gangsters. Therefore, it is possible that one Gangster kills the other. Both Gangsters will have different killing styles to distinguish them from each other.
If there is only one Gangster, then the GM will have him/her leave some kind of clue as a signature.


Rules
- Any member can sign up to play Gangsters, but a player may not simultaneously play Mafia and Gangsters.
- However, if a player is already killed and eliminated from playing Mafia, s/he is allowed to participate in a new round of Gangsters. The opposite is true as well: if a player is already killed and eliminated from playing Gangsters, s/he is allowed to participate in a new round of Mafia.
- Surviving players have 24 hours time to cast their votes on who they think is a Gangster. This rule will be flexible during weekends (depending on the voting situation).
- Players may only cast one vote per voting round. This vote is made through a closed ballot by PM'ing the vote to the GM. Votes made in the game thread will not be accepted.


Comparison to Mafia
Here's a brief rundown of the similarities/differences with Mafia.

Similarities
- Basic formula
- Vote structure

Differences
- Player pool (mutually exclusive)
- Run-time (independent from Mafia)
- Story-setting (if GM chooses so)
- Voting form (closed ballot)


Discussion
If there are any comments or questions or anything, please post them.

Since it is a holiday weekend coming up, I propose that the sign-up can wait until Tuesday.

Is there anyone who fancies hosting this game? (If no-one else wants to, I wouldn't mind doing it.)

[Snowflake]

Mutually exclusive player pool means people who are still alive in the current mafia game are not eligible to sign up for it right?

[Zopperoni]

That is correct.

[DarkCloud]

both options are valid, but private vote is eventually the one that counts; proposed by ADG

Isn't that the same idea as closed ballot? Since people can lie about their choices with closed? ;)

-
I'd be up for signing up today actually ;)
-
I would also like to suggest a heavy-roleplaying flavor for the game- (since I like roleplaying) with the characters behaving like it's a murder mystery... sort of like the movie CLUE ;) (If anyone has seen it)

Everyone plays a role, like in mafia, and then by general concensus and deduction in-thread and by secret support (we can assume taht those who don't publicly denounce anyone merely stand by and nod wehn the majority selected murderer gets the axe), they execute their role! ;)

[DarkCloud]

I mean- if the signup started today- it could end on tuesday and then the game could start on wednesday... ;)

[Zopperoni]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Isn't that the same idea as closed ballot? Since people can lie about their choices with closed? ;)
No, I cut some corners with the explanation there. The idea was that if you cast a public vote without casting a private vote, then the public vote stands. However, if you cast both a public and a private vote, then the private vote stands.

This method gives the GM a lot of headaches, so it's best to not implement it.

[DarkCloud]

oh, ok.

[Ljube]

I have only one objection. To the name. Why wouldn't this game be called mafia, since it indeed differs only slightly from the established rules and follows the same concept? If I remember correctly, there was already one game called gangsters in which you had real mafia gangs with their hitmen, lieutenants and bosses. This name may actually cause confusion, rather than bring more clarity.

[Adagio]

How about just calling it: Mafia TE


TE = The Experiment


Which also gives that if someone has an idea on how to make it better, we could use Mafia TE as a test-base ;)

[Zopperoni]

"Gangsters" is, of course, only conceptual, but I strongly oppose a name with "Mafia" in it, because it would only work confusing when browsing for the thread.

What's the opinion on this?


Other possibilities could be:
Mobsters
Cosa Nostra
Underworld

[DrSpike]

I think it's too late. I already think of it as Gangsters. :)

[DarkCloud]

But I don't see how Gangsters are involved in it in any way- "Assassins" makes more sense... as would "Stealth Murderers"... (though I personally prefer Assassins) ;)

[Adagio]

...how about Maniac..? :)

[DarkCloud]

Maniac would be all-right.

Assassins seems to fit it better, however.

Gangsters just seems wrong... what's gangsterish about just randomly killing people?

"Murderers" maybe?

[joncha]

assassins :b:

[Ljube]

Assassins sounds great :b:

[DarkCloud]

You know, I've got a good idea for a Mafia/Assassin's storyline ;) [although I probably shouldn't GM for my first ever game]

Basically, the idea is to set the game in a Dungeons and Dragons Style setting (people are characters and at the beginning pick their race, alignment, and their character class)

everyone is trapped in a cave-in after a draconic attack and are wandering around in the underdark.

I also run another character called the seer.

(The seer may be the mafia, but he also provides vital answers to questions and can see the future. However, he was hit on the head in a rockslide so his prophecies have been a bit messed up and vague.)

And basically, the game would be run like a Mystery/RPG ;)

[DrSpike]

Assassins is a good alternative. :)

[DarkCloud]

Thank you.
I'm glad the name is so popular ;)

[Adagio]

Assassins gets my vote too :b:

[Zopperoni]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Gangsters just seems wrong... what's gangsterish about just randomly killing people?
And what's Mafia-ish about it? :rolleyes:

I initially chose the name because it was close to "Mafia", but since there's support for "Assassins", I suppose we'll go with that.

Expect a sign-up thread sometime throughout the day tomorrow.

[:) Smiley]

I wonder if people will create DLs to play both.

[DrSpike]

Nah, if you create a DL you can play twice in one game. :)

[Snowflake]

Hey I like DC's idea! And yeay to Assassins! :b:

[duke o' york]

Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Gangsters just seems wrong... what's gangsterish about just randomly killing people?

The killings aren't random! The mafia has to choose the targets of each hit, and it is far more sensible to kill off the people who are closer to suspecting you than the others, who will just jump on the docpiles regardless of what happense. Of course, the fewer people remaining, the more chance everyone has of ending up under a docpile, but then everyone's playing the same game, and you're lucky if you win. If you go about it systematically, then you'll have a better chance of working out who the mafia is and then making a successful accusation, but you also leave yourself open to assassination.
It may be weird, the way that the victims are chosen, but it is not random. Well, not unless your mafia is an idiot. ;)

[Rasputin]

is this game going to be goer soon ??

[DarkCloud]

Expect a sign-up thread sometime throughout the day tomorrow.
I'm looking forward to that ;)

The killings aren't random! The mafia has to choose the targets of each hit, and it is far more sensible to kill off the people who are closer to suspecting you than the others, who will just jump on the docpiles regardless of what happense. Of course, the fewer people remaining, the more chance everyone has of ending up under a docpile, but then everyone's playing the same game, and you're lucky if you win. If you go about it systematically, then you'll have a better chance of working out who the mafia is and then making a successful accusation, but you also leave yourself open to assassination.
It may be weird, the way that the victims are chosen, but it is not random. Well, not unless your mafia is an idiot.
Well personally, if I were the townspeople, I would start suspecting something if everyone who voted for DarkCloud started mysteriously dying ;) I would be a bit more covert... (won't reveal my full strategy here, however) ;)

[Ljube]

Originally posted by duke o' york
It may be weird, the way that the victims are chosen, but it is not random. Well, not unless your mafia is an idiot. ;)



I think the best strategy for mafia is to choose their victims randomly.

[Adagio]

But it's more fun to carefully select the victims ;)


Like the game where I was the mafia and Guynemer was my brother, I chose to kill him, knowing that the clues would point towards me... and the fun I had afterwards with all those people getting lost in the clues :lol:

[DarkCloud]

Well, you can make a story out of it if you choose who you're going to kill...

frankly, I hope that Assassins has a lot of roleplaying and backstabbing going on! ;)

[Adagio]

...and then there were the time were I chose to stop all food-supply, by taking out farmers, etc :)

[Rasputin]

i had a plan of who i was going to kill when i was mafia , but i got docpiled too early :(

[Ljube]

You were mafia twice in a row.

And Assassins thread is up and running. Join us.

[DarkCloud]

It is? I don't see it- I thought Zopperoni would start it? ;)
-
Well, hopefully the players will roleplay as much as the grand storymaster plays ;) that might give him even more material to work with- they could create stories in the background! ;)

[Zopperoni]

Yes, the sign-up thread is here: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=116007

[Rasputin]

yeah and docpiled twice .... no one even saw any of the clues that pointed to me... i think for this game dont bother with clues at all , no one really uses them , well only the ones using them get killed first !!!!

[DarkCloud]

Well, if everyone roleplays then the clues should be even more obvious because we can all drop info about ourselves.

[Ljube]

Originally posted by Rasputin
yeah and docpiled twice .... no one even saw any of the clues that pointed to me...


Particularly because you changed one of those clues to incriminate the poor cooks.