Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

How should roles be given out?

Hosts should be forced to ensure some basic balance for their games, such as making sure at least one experienced player is mafia/wolf.
1
2%
The host should have the power to choose whichever method they deem worthy.
10
21%
Hosts should be forced to fully randomize open games, but may choose whichever method they want for closed and semi-closed game.
5
10%
Hosts should always be forced to fully randomize every game, be it open, semi-open or closed.
11
23%
Taco
21
44%
 
Total votes: 48
User avatar
Rainboy
Posts: 1923
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 4:38 pm
Location: Somewhere Over the Rainboy
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Rainboy »

So, we've had... issues. We've had two games descend into mindless arguments now and I'm getting really tired of it. This discussion is here to let you all argue it out without directly affecting gameplay.

I've heard a lot of people claim to know this or that about my personal position on the issue, so I'm also going to clear that up right now. In my games, including open games, I side more with Unownist in that I make mild efforts to make sure the game is balanced before we go into it. Teams that know eachother will usually have at least one experienced player, and roles that are central to the game will generally not be given to new players. I do randomize, but it's hardly ever completely random - it's quite common for me to throw out setups that I feel leave one side at a significant disadvantage and reroll.

That said, I respect those who take Maki's stance on the issue. In my opinion, it's just two different interpretations of fair. One tries to make sure teams have fair chances of winning, while the other tries to make sure players have fair chances at all roles. I don't fault either side for their view, but I most certainly disapprove of all the drama going on over it. So get the drama done with here so we don't have to repeat this next time this issue crops up.

I'm making a poll to gauge the community's feelings on the subject. The outcome of this poll is NOT guaranteed to affect how we do things. It's just here to help the permamods decide on how to handle the situation.

Also, if I hear anything about this in any game thread from now on, I will be deleting the offending posts. Hosts and other permamods are advised to do the same.
Sense? What fun is there in making sense...?
User avatar
MMage
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 1:11 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by MMage »

Your poll was missing a very important choice among these choices. I have now added it and picked it.
Delicious tacos below. They're all mine and you can't have any.
Spoiler!
Image-Image-Image-Image-Image
User avatar
Rainboy
Posts: 1923
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 4:38 pm
Location: Somewhere Over the Rainboy
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Rainboy »

You're a taco.
Sense? What fun is there in making sense...?
Maki
Friend of the Community
Posts: 4410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:57 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 53 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Maki »

MMage wrote:Your poll was missing a very important choice among these choices. I have now added it and picked it.
But... I can't vote Taco and something else at the same time... y only one vote?!

Edit by MMage: I changed it, everyone is required to vote Taco when they vote.
These users thanked the author Maki for the post:
Mendel
Image
Maki
Friend of the Community
Posts: 4410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:57 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 53 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Maki »

Maki wrote:
MMage wrote:Your poll was missing a very important choice among these choices. I have now added it and picked it.
But... I can't vote Taco and something else at the same time... y only one vote?!

Edit by MMage: I changed it, everyone is required to vote Taco when they vote.
MMage, you're amazing. I absolutely love you.
Image
User avatar
Shadi
neonDragon Amdin
Posts: 15337
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:44 am
Location: Behind yo house
Been thanked: 628 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Shadi »

for WW I think it's fair enough when u make closed games, I don't do it myself, though.

Here's what I do in mafia; I've not yet encountered it except for one game.

I randomise everything and see if the teams look fair (so me not choosing, but judge if there's going to be decent balance) which is always the case except for my first game where one who always went afk after round 1 ended up getting a core village role and I decided to "cheat" him out of that role and give it to a more engaged player. (by randomising it again)

Imo everyone should have about equal chances and new players should be given exact same chances to get a role; or people will keep using the argument like "lol, host would never give newbie a good role" or "once we found an experienced player in the mafia team we can leave the rest of them alone"

An alternative is that the host decides to tell exactly what he's going to do before he hosts, randomising, randomising with a potential fix if the balance is broken or choosing by himself. It sounds a bit vague, but then players can decide whether they wanna join a game based on its standards or not and whining is prevented.
To be humble to superiors is duty, to equals is courtesy, to inferiors is nobility.

- Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
Lien~
Posts: 13998
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 11:08 pm
Location: Wirral - United Kingdom
Has thanked: 182 times
Been thanked: 545 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Lien~ »

I would always like to see a fair balance in all teams, and if that didn't work when random appointing the roles then the host should be allowed to make a couple of changes in order for it to become more balanced. However, I do not agree in doing it so that it's done as 'I'll give him this and this just because he is smarter than the others and should have a greater chance in leading the topic' etc. So in a way, I agree with Maki (not sure what exactly has been said but I feel Maki, you know what I'm sayin?...)

^ Not sure if I can explain what I meant with that but I believe HATER knows exactly what I mean with it, so he might be able to explain it for me.

Also, IF the host decides he might have to flip around the roles to make it more balanced, then I agree with the following;
Shadi wrote:An alternative is that the host decides to tell exactly what he's going to do before he hosts, randomising, randomising with a potential fix if the balance is broken or choosing by himself. It sounds a bit vague, but then players can decide whether they wanna join a game based on its standards or not and whining is prevented.

As for the actual votes, they don't fit my opinion so I didn't vote :/
User avatar
SiX
Posts: 2818
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 56 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by SiX »

In my opinion WW should be all randomized.
Doesn't every player deserve to have the equal chance to get different roles?
Giving out Power-roles to only experienced players leads to special treatment amongst the less experienced ones, and who would enjoy WW based on simple normal villager roles?
I thought we tried to make people find interest in the game not based on who wins the game but based on sending the message that it's actually interesting that one is able to do something.

In addition to what has been said above, the mafias would only aim for the same players over and over such as shadi, mati, cml, hater, rainboy etc > This is how it's usually happening already, but wouldn't it increase the reason to why the mafias would do it if there would only be power-roles amongst semi-experienced to experienced players?
Not to mention that the Power-roles are faster exterminated and there's no PR hiding amongst the less experienced ones.

I'm totally against the host choosing Power-roles or random them only between certain players.
User avatar
Unown
Posts: 7478
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Summoners Rift
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 101 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Unown »

SiX wrote:In my opinion WW should be all randomized.
Doesn't every player deserve to have the equal chance to get different roles?
Giving out Power-roles to only experienced players leads to special treatment amongst the less experienced ones, and who would enjoy WW based on simple normal villager roles?
I thought we tried to make people find interest in the game not based on who wins the game but based on sending the message that it's actually interesting that one is able to do something.

In addition to what has been said above, the mafias would only aim for the same players over and over such as shadi, mati, cml, hater, rainboy etc > This is how it's usually happening already, but wouldn't it increase the reason to why the mafias would do it if there would only be power-roles amongst semi-experienced to experienced players?
Not to mention that the Power-roles are faster exterminated and there's no PR hiding amongst the less experienced ones.

I'm totally against the host choosing Power-roles or random them only between certain players.
You didn't read the topic, it's not about giving experienced players a PR, it's about making team fair. So a mafia team could exist out of 3 new people (so they still have a PR) while having 1 experienced person. <- For example.
If noone comes from the future to stop you from doing it, then how bad of a decision can it really be?
Tough runs don't last, tough Runners do.
User avatar
Mati
Posts: 4389
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Austria
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 157 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Mati »

Unownist wrote:
SiX wrote:In my opinion WW should be all randomized.
Doesn't every player deserve to have the equal chance to get different roles?
Giving out Power-roles to only experienced players leads to special treatment amongst the less experienced ones, and who would enjoy WW based on simple normal villager roles?
I thought we tried to make people find interest in the game not based on who wins the game but based on sending the message that it's actually interesting that one is able to do something.

In addition to what has been said above, the mafias would only aim for the same players over and over such as shadi, mati, cml, hater, rainboy etc > This is how it's usually happening already, but wouldn't it increase the reason to why the mafias would do it if there would only be power-roles amongst semi-experienced to experienced players?
Not to mention that the Power-roles are faster exterminated and there's no PR hiding amongst the less experienced ones.

I'm totally against the host choosing Power-roles or random them only between certain players.
You didn't read the topic, it's not about giving experienced players a PR, it's about making team fair. So a mafia team could exist out of 3 new people (so they still have a PR) while having 1 experienced person. <- For example.
Apart from that it's not really fair to every player, it also makes assumptions possible. If an experienced mafia player dies, players can deduce that the rest of the mafia team is more likely to be inexperienced, making the remaining experienced players more safe. I think that's a bad thing to have. Also, trieing to balance the teams, doesn't guarantee that the outcome itself will be balanced anyway.
lol
User avatar
Shadi
neonDragon Amdin
Posts: 15337
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:44 am
Location: Behind yo house
Been thanked: 628 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Shadi »

Mati wrote:
Unownist wrote:
SiX wrote:In my opinion WW should be all randomized.
Doesn't every player deserve to have the equal chance to get different roles?
Giving out Power-roles to only experienced players leads to special treatment amongst the less experienced ones, and who would enjoy WW based on simple normal villager roles?
I thought we tried to make people find interest in the game not based on who wins the game but based on sending the message that it's actually interesting that one is able to do something.

In addition to what has been said above, the mafias would only aim for the same players over and over such as shadi, mati, cml, hater, rainboy etc > This is how it's usually happening already, but wouldn't it increase the reason to why the mafias would do it if there would only be power-roles amongst semi-experienced to experienced players?
Not to mention that the Power-roles are faster exterminated and there's no PR hiding amongst the less experienced ones.

I'm totally against the host choosing Power-roles or random them only between certain players.
You didn't read the topic, it's not about giving experienced players a PR, it's about making team fair. So a mafia team could exist out of 3 new people (so they still have a PR) while having 1 experienced person. <- For example.
Apart from that it's not really fair to every player, it also makes assumptions possible. If an experienced mafia player dies, players can deduce that the rest of the mafia team is more likely to be inexperienced, making the remaining experienced players more safe. I think that's a bad thing to have. Also, trieing to balance the teams, doesn't guarantee that the outcome itself will be balanced anyway.
ty for repeat!

jokes aside, thanks for the input
To be humble to superiors is duty, to equals is courtesy, to inferiors is nobility.

- Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
HATER
Posts: 2293
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 4:20 pm
Location: Behind you.
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 70 times
Contact:

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by HATER »

Will comment when I'm back.
You must disregard the statement I am currently making because every statement I make is inherently false.

ImageImage
User avatar
Blaze
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:50 pm
Location: In Your Toilet
Has thanked: 103 times
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Blaze »

I mean like.

My game wouldnt been as fucked up and fun if it werent for the unbalanced gamemode
Image
Maki
Friend of the Community
Posts: 4410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:57 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 53 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by Maki »

HATER wrote:Will comment when I'm back.
never commented, you've been out of home for a while.
Image
cml
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:25 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Ruleset Randomizing - Discussion / Vote

Post by cml »

I would suggest that it be up to the host how the roles are determined. It can be useful to ensure that an experienced player is on each team, and I would personally suggest this as good practice for any mafia game or when we have an influx of new players. Even with that in mind, however, I do not believe it would be a good thing to announce this as it gives a means of determining who is on each team. For example, if there are known to be four mafia roles and three of them have died and are known to be less experienced players, it would be easy to start looking at the more experienced players. This is made worse by the fairly common mafia tactic of trying to kill of the more experienced players first as it further reduces the number of suspects. The problem here is reduced somewhat in closed games as it is not always possible to know how many mafia/wolves there are.

A similar issue is that of how to determine who gets third party roles. I would usually suggest that they are randomised again, specifically in the case of serial killer type roles as they are easy to detect based on the additional kill. An exception to this would be in the case of any roles for which the player starts either hidden or not in the game at all (e.g. celestia and luna from chaos rising). In these cases, it is necessary to select a player before the game, often far enough in advance to prevent them from signing up for the game. With roles like this, it is often better to choose, if not a more experienced player, one who is likely to wish to join the game.

This brings me on to my next point. While I do not suggest determining roles based on experience in most cases, there is something similar that can be useful. Determining roles based on activity. In some setups, a team losing several rounds worth of actions from an important role can cause that team to lose. For evil teams, it is as simple as allowing another team member to send in an action if the player with the role doesn't send one. Unfortunately, due to the limited information available to them, it is not possible to do this for village teams. The problem with this idea is that people are more likely to go inactive if given a basic villager, which would open them up to getting more of the same in the future. The easiest way to deal with this would be to have everyone be active, but that is unlikely to happen. As such, we end with the same problem as before - it is possible to determine where the power roles are hiding.

Given the possibility of using any of these methods to determine roles, I suggest that all games (except possibly mafia games or games intended for newer players) be advertised as randomised and contain at least some measure of randomisation. How much is randomised should be up to the host, but it is important to remember that a game with insufficient randomisation leads to it becoming easier to determine who has what role as well as to a group of players feeling that they are less important to the game in some way which leads to further inactivity. As such, I would recommend placing a few roles at most and only if the setup requires it.
Post Reply

Return to “Community Discussion”