By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Mafia Round 14 - Game Thread

zexen_lowe on 18 March 2010
Falcon095 said:
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:


Ive been saying the same thing all along, if you die in a game, you cant play again till the next round, thats the rules EVERYONE ELSE played to, without fail, including me and you.

Please show me where that rule is

Oh God, come on, you get the point, if you are dead you will stay dead unless there a special case, it doesn't really need to be in the rules, it's how every game works unless it's marked the other way.

No, it's not. It's pretty much the same as getting anyone else in the game to replace him. It's not the first time we've had replacements, I fail to see how it's any wrong. Fuck, even MM got replaced first night for trashleg. If you wanna complain about not everyone being replaced, fine, do so, but otherwise, dtewi being replaced by dsister or dtewi being replaced by yeswiican it's the same for the game




Around the Network
zexen_lowe on 18 March 2010
SciFiBoy said:
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:


Ive been saying the same thing all along, if you die in a game, you cant play again till the next round, thats the rules EVERYONE ELSE played to, without fail, including me and you.

Please show me where that rule is

from role-pm's:

"You don't want to be lynched because you can't win if you're dead (though your team can...)."

read the bolded.

you cant win if youre dead, meaning you personally cannot still be in the game and "win" by surviving all game (as dsister did)

your team, can win, thats fine, im not arguing against that.

also, its called DEATH, not GHOST (replace an inactive player at any time) - 2 very different things...im sure you agree?


or, are you saying that people should be able to re-enter the game?

how is that fair? unless EVERYONE gets that oppurtunity, then its incredibly unfair.

Again, you're completely missing the point. dsister, the jail keeper, lost the game in night 1. Dsister never won the game. He only subbed dtewi due to him having an inconvenience, and thus, making dtewi lead to a victory, but dsister's role never was swapped or anything like that




SciFiBoy on 18 March 2010
theRepublic said:
SciFiBoy said:
theRepublic said:
SciFiBoy said:

then the mod should have said "in the interest of fairness, I will modkill any players that say they cant play anymore" replacing anyone makes the game unfair (or in this case, more unfair.)

what is so hard to understand, THE GAME SHOULD BE FAIR FOR EVERYONE, LIVING OR DEAD.

How do you propose to be fair to everyone?  Either you are fair to the dead, and the game is destroyed, or you are fair to the living, and the game can go on.

you make the game fair by making the teams as balanced as you can and by taking the same action to deal with all inactive players, if you do that everyone knows what they are signing up for and the game is largely fair. (this game is exceptional in terms of modkills, largely as it went on so long and had so many players, you can address that by setting more deadlines and having a smaller game(s) in future)

if you make the teams unbalanced, the game is unfair.

if you deal with different inactive players differently, then you unbalance the game, again resulting in it being unfair.

if you replace people, it tends to unbalance the game also, unless you replace everyone, and always with players who werent already in the game to make it fair.

if you replace people with people who already got knocked out of that game, it tends to unbalance the game AND be completley unfair to the other players.

I'm not talking in general.  I'm talking about this specific case.  Are you telling me that if you were mod, you would have had no problems with destroying the game in fairness to the dead?

destroy the game?

how so?

it would just have continued without dtwei/cop and reached whatever result it was gonna reach. (we have no way of knowing for sure what that would have been)




SciFiBoy on 18 March 2010
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:


Ive been saying the same thing all along, if you die in a game, you cant play again till the next round, thats the rules EVERYONE ELSE played to, without fail, including me and you.

Please show me where that rule is

from role-pm's:

"You don't want to be lynched because you can't win if you're dead (though your team can...)."

read the bolded.

you cant win if youre dead, meaning you personally cannot still be in the game and "win" by surviving all game (as dsister did)

your team, can win, thats fine, im not arguing against that.

also, its called DEATH, not GHOST (replace an inactive player at any time) - 2 very different things...im sure you agree?


or, are you saying that people should be able to re-enter the game?

how is that fair? unless EVERYONE gets that oppurtunity, then its incredibly unfair.

Again, you're completely missing the point. dsister, the jail keeper, lost the game in night 1. Dsister never won the game. He only subbed dtewi due to him having an inconvenience, and thus, making dtewi lead to a victory, but dsister's role never was swapped or anything like that

fine then, let me put it like this, it may not be in the rules, but thats because its assumed that NO-ONE WHO HAS DIED SHOULD BE BACK IN THE GAME, AS ITS COMPLETLEY UNFAIR TO THE OTHER PLAYERS, its assumed that no moderator would be that unfair, clearly, it should be in the rules if moderators dont think fairness is important in these games.




zexen_lowe on 18 March 2010
SciFiBoy said:
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:


Ive been saying the same thing all along, if you die in a game, you cant play again till the next round, thats the rules EVERYONE ELSE played to, without fail, including me and you.

Please show me where that rule is

from role-pm's:

"You don't want to be lynched because you can't win if you're dead (though your team can...)."

read the bolded.

you cant win if youre dead, meaning you personally cannot still be in the game and "win" by surviving all game (as dsister did)

your team, can win, thats fine, im not arguing against that.

also, its called DEATH, not GHOST (replace an inactive player at any time) - 2 very different things...im sure you agree?


or, are you saying that people should be able to re-enter the game?

how is that fair? unless EVERYONE gets that oppurtunity, then its incredibly unfair.

Again, you're completely missing the point. dsister, the jail keeper, lost the game in night 1. Dsister never won the game. He only subbed dtewi due to him having an inconvenience, and thus, making dtewi lead to a victory, but dsister's role never was swapped or anything like that

fine then, let me put it like this, it may not be in the rules, but thats because its assumed that NO-ONE WHO HAS DIED SHOULD BE BACK IN THE GAME, AS ITS COMPLETLEY UNFAIR TO THE OTHER PLAYERS, its assumed that no moderator would be that unfair, clearly, it should be in the rules if moderators dont think fairness is important in these games.

Stop saying "it's assumed" because it's not. If you don't like it, fine, but it's not a rule because you say it so. I didn't find anything wrong with dsister replacing dtewi when it happened, and I still don't have now. It's as unfair as some people being killed in night 1 and some people living more. Shit happens. And, what's more, dsister of the players who had died was the logical choice, it was either him or FF since both had died on night one and thus barely played or got any info. Maybe we could use a lucky draw to see who could have replaced him instead of handpicking, but it's not more unfair than what all the odds here can decide for the fate of each player

And stop typing in caps, it's damn annoying, if you can't hold a civil discussion without screaming entire sentences, stop talking to me




Around the Network
SciFiBoy on 18 March 2010
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:


Ive been saying the same thing all along, if you die in a game, you cant play again till the next round, thats the rules EVERYONE ELSE played to, without fail, including me and you.

Please show me where that rule is

from role-pm's:

"You don't want to be lynched because you can't win if you're dead (though your team can...)."

read the bolded.

you cant win if youre dead, meaning you personally cannot still be in the game and "win" by surviving all game (as dsister did)

your team, can win, thats fine, im not arguing against that.

also, its called DEATH, not GHOST (replace an inactive player at any time) - 2 very different things...im sure you agree?


or, are you saying that people should be able to re-enter the game?

how is that fair? unless EVERYONE gets that oppurtunity, then its incredibly unfair.

Again, you're completely missing the point. dsister, the jail keeper, lost the game in night 1. Dsister never won the game. He only subbed dtewi due to him having an inconvenience, and thus, making dtewi lead to a victory, but dsister's role never was swapped or anything like that

fine then, let me put it like this, it may not be in the rules, but thats because its assumed that NO-ONE WHO HAS DIED SHOULD BE BACK IN THE GAME, AS ITS COMPLETLEY UNFAIR TO THE OTHER PLAYERS, its assumed that no moderator would be that unfair, clearly, it should be in the rules if moderators dont think fairness is important in these games.

Stop saying "it's assumed" because it's not. If you don't like it, fine, but it's not a rule because you say it so. I didn't find anything wrong with dsister replacing dtewi when it happened, and I still don't have now. It's as unfair as some people being killed in night 1 and some people living more. Shit happens. And, what's more, dsister of the players who had died was the logical choice, it was either him or FF since both had died on night one and thus barely played or got any info.

And stop typing in caps, it's damn annoying, if you can't hold a civil discussion without screaming entire sentences, stop talking to me

its considerably more unfair than that, those things are part of the game and how its played, someone being allowed back in to the game like this, is not just part of the game, its an active interference by the mod that goes against the way people understood the game would be played. (i.e. we all assume that when we die, we dont play again till the next round, surely even you do?)

I can talk in caps if I want to, I generally do so when im trying to make a point, if people read what I said rather than being fesecious, maybe I wouldnt have to.



theRepublic on 18 March 2010
SciFiBoy said:
theRepublic said:

I'm not talking in general.  I'm talking about this specific case.  Are you telling me that if you were mod, you would have had no problems with destroying the game in fairness to the dead?

destroy the game?

how so?

it would just have continued without dtwei/cop and reached whatever result it was gonna reach. (we have no way of knowing for sure what that would have been)

You don't think this would have destroyed the game?  This happened Day Four.  So the game would have had 10 people: three townies, a nurse, a friendly neighbor, an alcoholic night watchman, a serial killer, one Corleone mafia, and two Tattaglia mafia (one of which is a mafia cop).  Four scum against six pro-town with no investigative ability.  That is virtually game over.  The only question is which scum faction wins.

Not to mention the fact that the previous day the game almost died on its own, and the mod would have just killed a player whose role was both known to everyone, and extremely important.  I can imagine several pro-town players quiting in disgust at that point, myself included.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
Switch - The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019)
Switch - Bastion (2011/2018)
3DS - Star Fox 64 3D (2011)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Wii U - Darksiders: Warmastered Edition (2010/2017)
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)

zexen_lowe on 18 March 2010
SciFiBoy said:

its considerably more unfair than that, those things are part of the game and how its played, someone being allowed back in to the game like this, is not just part of the game, its an active interference by the mod that goes against the way people understood the game would be played. (i.e. we all assume that when we die, we dont play again till the next round, surely even you do?)

I can talk in caps if I want to, I generally do so when im trying to make a point, if people read what I said rather than being fesecious, maybe I wouldnt have to.

He wasn't being brought back. I didn't see any Jail Keeper back after dsister died




SciFiBoy on 18 March 2010
theRepublic said:
SciFiBoy said:
theRepublic said:

I'm not talking in general.  I'm talking about this specific case.  Are you telling me that if you were mod, you would have had no problems with destroying the game in fairness to the dead?

destroy the game?

how so?

it would just have continued without dtwei/cop and reached whatever result it was gonna reach. (we have no way of knowing for sure what that would have been)

You don't think this would have destroyed the game?  This happened Day Four.  So the game would have had 10 people: three townies, a nurse, a friendly neighbor, an alcoholic night watchman, a serial killer, one Corleone mafia, and two Tattaglia mafia (one of which is a mafia cop).  Four scum against six pro-town with no investigative ability.  That is virtually game over.  The only question is which scum faction wins.

Not to mention the fact that the previous day the game almost died on its own, and the mod would have just killed a player whose role was both known to everyone, and extremely important.  I can imagine several pro-town players quiting in disgust at that point, myself included.

you would have quit in disgust if the moderator did something he had been doing all game? (modkilling people)

this game obviously had other issues too, as weve discussed (namely that it went on so long, if it hadnt, dtewi may have been able to be here)

as for it likely meaning that another faction may have won? so what? is that not the point of the game?

I was pro-town too, but im not gonna ignore the fact the game had flaws and was unfair just because my team won.




SciFiBoy on 18 March 2010
zexen_lowe said:
SciFiBoy said:

its considerably more unfair than that, those things are part of the game and how its played, someone being allowed back in to the game like this, is not just part of the game, its an active interference by the mod that goes against the way people understood the game would be played. (i.e. we all assume that when we die, we dont play again till the next round, surely even you do?)

I can talk in caps if I want to, I generally do so when im trying to make a point, if people read what I said rather than being fesecious, maybe I wouldnt have to.

He wasn't being brought back. I didn't see any Jail Keeper back after dsister died

dsister was in the game after he died.

im not talking about the jail keeper, heck I dont think I even mention the jail keeper in any of my posts.

im talking about him the player.

and you just proved my point about being fesecious as you already know what im saying. (ive posted the same things about 50 times now...)