Haha, no doubt. 
(But have you forgotten the spaceship mafia from Idle’s board so soon? (I wish I could …) My worst game to date. Town would have been much better off if you’d succeeded in getting me lynched on day one. 
)
You are absolutely right. I am all about the preponderance of evidence when building cases against people. So when building a full case, I would agree that even smaller/weaker points should be included because sometimes the only way to catch scum is to find the one person who has a bunch of weak points stacked against them.
In general I think it’s more likely that the person with 6 or 7 weak or circumstantial points against them is more likely to be scum than the person with one big tell.
But again, that’s why I don’t really care too much about catching scum in the first few Days. Bonus if we do, but it’s secondary.
And my point is that if scum randomly take out the detective that’s their own fault. If they know who the detective is, and the detective has not investigated the GF, then it’s up to them to decide if they keep the detective alive to boost their GF, or kill him to stop the investigations. I think you’ll find most scum teams in most circumstances will view a dead detective as more advantageous than trying for the GF investigation anyway.
Town gets punished for making the correct move frequently. Scum watchers and trackers are devestating to town power roles. Should detectives stop investigating because they might be seen/followed?
Scum bombs frequently kill townies who made the right lynch choice? Do you consider that unfair?
Luck screws both sides over evenly. Are redirectors unfair because they punish people who make the right move? What about blockers? (Yes both roles can actually help in the case of a side making the wrong move, but that’s a rare event.) There are certain combos that I would say are patently unfair (e.g. compulsory vigs with scum redirectors are an unfair mechanic without some external balance in town’s favor), but in Mafia, sides can get punished for playing well. It happens.
And what’s more, I would say it’s choices like that which make the game interesting. If scum have a GF and manage to find the detective then they have to make a choice. Kill the detctive and eliminate a very real risk, or let the detective live on the chance that the GF will be cleared. That sort of thing makes the game interesting.
I wish more games incorporated mechanics that forced players to make choices that were neither 100% postitive or 100% negative, but rather simply more good than bad depending on the circumstances.
But isn’t the chance of the detective investigating a normal scum much greater than of his investigating a GF? It just seems due to probability, it’s way easier to just get rid of the detective. Then again, I always sucked at maths.
Probably, it depends on when in the game the scum find the detective and how many scum are left.
Uh. That’s my point.
Of course scum will eliminate a known detective if possible regardless of GF. It is CLEARLY more advantageous to do so. Yet, the JSP system indicates that the net point gain is minimal. Something doesn’t add up there.
Either: JSP is inadequate
Or: killing the detective hurts the scum as much as it helps them.
I think it is the former.
If it were the latter I would have a philosophical problem with it.
Generally I have problems with game mechanics that reward bad play and punish good play – most notably recruitment.
The two examples you give don’t measure up the same way.
(1) Scum watchers and trackers are inherently more powerful than their town counterparts. “Balance” comes from creating the game to compensate for this power. It isn’t punishing a town role for using a power; it rewards scum for correctly choosing a town power to track or watch.
(2) Scum Bombs are a known quantity. That is, the game design KNOWS that the path towards Town victory involves a scum bomb kill. There is no reward/punishment. It is an unavoidable process.
For the GF case, I question whether the pointing system adequately captures the GF dynamic. Specifically, I think 7 points for a GF is too high.
I think what we forget is that the JSP was a work in progress that JSexton was sharing with us, and that it was meant to be used to check to make sure that the balance was in line, and not really intended to be used as a sole method of balancing a game.
I believe he came back at some point and said that he think he overvalued doctors, and undervalued both cops and godfathers.
I can believe the undervalue of cops and overvalue of doctor, but I think godfathers are overvalued. GF is completely dependent on the power of a town player. If anything, I think a GF is simply a means of containing the power of the detective, but isn’t very powerful in and of itself.
I think the threat of a godfather is stronger than an actual godfather. That is, a game with no godfather will always leave the town wondering if those investigated as “Town” are possibly scum. But with a GF, once he’s dead… Town knows.
I’m less positive about the Godfather, he may have just said scum power roles were undervalued. The one that struck me as most surprising was he belief that he seriously overvalued doctors. He was saying that they should be valued at closer to 1.5 because scum play as though there is a doctor in the game regardless of whether or not the game actually has a doctor, so the actual effect on the game is limited to the people they can save. So since it’s relatively rare for a doc to actually protect someone successfully they aren’t much better than vanilla town.
Doctors rarely pull off a block. That’s probably why he thinks they are overvalued at 3 points. Doctors are valuable in combination with other Town power-roles. But in an of themselves, they aren’t very useful. I can believe and support re-thinking on this matter.
Me too, it makes sense when you think about it that way.
And again, it’s not good to use the JSP as the only balance method. You have to look for role synergy and actual effect ect in addition to point balancing.
Gotta agree with Drain Bead here. If I were playing, I would be all over Oredigger about that post.
Sorry for the incoherence below, I’m on no sleep and no coffee.
Someday it might be interesting to see how often comments like “scum are manipulating us to do X while they just sit back and laugh” are actually made by the scum, and how often they’re made by over-paranoid townies. (For what it’s worth, my own strong bias is that scum are almost always OVER-estimated (though the notable exceptions do tend to stick in the mind!), and that the town is more than capable of screwing up royally all by itself.)
I don’t think that comment by Oredigger is worth a vote all by itself, at least not on day three and coming from someone who’s providing a decent record of votes and comments to analyze. Basically all it is is a poorly-justified vote on one of the lynch leaders – it’s as likely to be lazy town as anything else, IMO.
Or, Oredigger could be scum and feeling in a bind. But I don’t like Drain’s vote based on just this one bit. It’s too automatic, too easy, and it avoids both lynch leaders, which is something scum often feel obligated to do. If she’s town, she’s being almost as lazy as Oredigger was with his vote, in not checking whether her impression from that one post was borne out by anything else that Oredigger has done.
(Note I don’t mean lazy as an insult here. I just can’t think of a more appropriate word to describe that “oh my god I can’t stand to make a real case today and anyway I have no idea who’s scummy among the lynch leaders so what do I do” feeling (and resulting actions) that sometimes come over you when you’re playing Town.)
As an aside, I’m rather in love with Rysto’s post 1005. I want to give it a kiss.
Heh. Now Guiri’s post about Oredigger is much better.
Quoth BigT:
Am I really that transparent? Ah, well, I figured it was worth a try, and I didn’t really see a downside.
On the JSexton-Godfather discussion currently ongoing, I think it’s important to emphasize that JSexton points, or any other balancing rubric, are valid only at the beginning of a game. By the points, four vanilla Townies vs. one Scum would favor the Scum, but if a game started with, say, 20 people and got down to that point, Town would be in pretty good shape.
That said, though, the Godfather probably is overvalued, relative to the Detective: Ultimately, what a Godfather represents is a decrease in the power of the Detective. If you started with a balanced game with neither, and then upgraded one of the Townies to a Detective and one of the goons to a Godfather, then you’d be adding almost the same number of points to both sides, but that’s still a very significant boost you’ve given the Town. If there are, say, 16 people in the game, one of whom is the Godfather, there are still 14 people that the Detective will get an accurate read on, and only 1 he won’t.
On the gripping hand, though, I’m not sure that any linear game-balancing rubric (like one where you add up points) is valid. I’ve been doing some playing around with game balancing rubrics of my own, and the relative power of each individual player greatly depends on factors like the number of players. For instance, an all-vanilla game of 8 Town vs. 2 Scum is almost perfectly balanced (meaning that the chance of either side winning is almost exactly 50%), but an all-vanilla game of 16 Town vs. 4 Scum is a strong Scum advantage.
Dang! Well, good to know my grand tradition of finding you scummy no matter what your alignment actually is is holding up well, Chronos.
bashes head against wall, waves
Scum are greater than the sum of their parts even in a vanilla game. Town is not, unless the game has mechanisms by which to confirm players beyond all (or most) doubt. That’s why a lone scum vs four townies is advantage town, double that is balanced, and four times that is a blowout for scum.
A long time ago I did a probability analysis of game states which is consistent with what you state here. I don’t remember the specifics but I did note that the game does not scale linearly.
Are you telling me that Reverend isn’t a power role, or were you just funning me?
Even if I was accurate, it’s not like I didn’t WIFOM my way out of it in my next post.