Posts from Mafia: general discussions. Auto-translated

notes from testers

Notes in general are a bad thing)))

This was mentioned a long time ago.

But on the other hand, at least they try to counterfeit them, which is a kind of bluff.

Nebko, this is just my opinion, there's no need to react so sharply. No one is taking your piece of the pie, and it's obvious that they won't do it that way. Relax.

Nothing is more irritating than being told to calm down and relax.
And that's after I simply quoted a rule and asked a rhetorical question. What's so bad about that? I referred to the rule, and that's it, but Rimpel somehow saw "sharpness" in it and suggested I "relax." What are you even talking about? Oh, right, probably it's psychology, because you can read between the lines, right? Too sharp statements and responses to any remark can say a lot more with exclamation marks. Now I'm reacting sharply, yes.

x)

I was chatting with Lori about the map, he didn't accept my first submission, you can ask him yourself.

facepalm...=

In my opinion, the complete lack of willingness among players in Hv to bluff really forces us to completely eliminate any hints about roles. As a rule, not every hint should be believed, but here everything is perceived immediately and unconditionally, because no one bluffs, which is, in general, nonsense for Mafia. So, within the framework of Hv, the rule should be tightened.

For some, it's a bluff, and for others, it's outright lying. I don't think everyone will suppress their pride in an attempt to beg for their life.

In my opinion, mentioning an element of a role description is revealing it to some extent.

I completely agree.

But, as has already been written, the line is really very thin. Many things, one way or another, hint at one's own role: analysis, assessments of players, accusations against someone, interpretation of the newspaper. It's impossible to keep track of everything. A player analyzed the newspaper and attributed a certain role to an ambiguous corpse in order to show that his role is still alive. For an attentive person, this is quite a hint, especially if it is written in the correct format, but it is not a reason for punishment.
My humble opinion: everyone should play fairly. Tox, for example, played two games as a town member, and in both, he was revealed and punished by the GM. He just can't play as a town member. In all other games, he played as Mafia, and quite consistently. This is a hint, but now it is unlikely that anyone will believe him in the next game if he plays like Mafia and tries to convince everyone that he is a town member. All these hints, discussions, and arguments leave an imprint on a person. If he abuses something, it will affect him in the future; his "behavior and psychology" will be noticeable to the naked eye, and this will make the game more difficult for him. Of all the players who play more or less regularly, I can only remember a few who almost always play differently on both sides, and often these are silent players. So, there is, in general, not only one limiter in the form of a modkill or some kind of sanction.
However, all this topic also boils down to Rule #1 - the one about getting pleasure from the game. Banning certain elements, reducing randomness to a minimum, because "if the town wins, it's due to luck," although luck essentially determines the victory of any side, and you can get a Mafia game in Hv in the format of tournaments from the third section; I don't know about the others, but for me, this is questionable fun. In the last game, everything that Arandor said - that Drakoshka is not a mechanic, and he justified this with an interpretation of her death, from which the inquisitive town members drew a conclusion and decided to check everything at night with the mechanic's move. Later, however, there were complaints that he had practically revealed himself to them. I think he did the right thing. At the same time, Plesen did it wrong, directly writing that a certain player has a certain status. Leaving both without punishment is wrong, punishing both is wrong, punishing selectively, only one? Omega wrote about bluffing there, and Plesen himself also referred to the rule and could have been lying. And what to do at the end of the game when the roles are already known to everyone? Continue the charade?
In general, I can only repeat that, in my opinion, everyone should play fairly. Of course, this is very vague, but since we're at it, the GMs have recently started modifying certain game elements: clues, notes, and so on. It would be logical to at least try to play a few games so that each specific GM interprets the rule about revealing roles as strictly or freely as he deems necessary. In the end, the settings are also different, and if in one there are a lot of blocks and displayed roles, then hints are often not needed. They are not as common as they seem at first glance. And if the roles are not displayed, there are few blocks, or they do not work, then it is difficult to do without improvisation, and I think everyone understands this.

Let's abolish the rule about hints altogether. Everyone will be on equal footing; everyone can lie and bluff. Whether to believe or not is up to each individual.

I once wanted to try hosting a Mafia game like that – with snails and psychology. But it didn't work out.

Why not try it once, as an experiment?

Next time, I'll play more calmly and avoid unnecessary risks.
I don't want to repeat such foolish mistakes.
Thank you, Neyre and Hostor, for giving me a good talking-to and helping me understand that what I did was not only ungentlemanly but also simply stupid.
Even though my risky move helped the team, I've learned my lesson...
But I still want to play without getting killed.

So, don't listen to Morny. :D
I'll play peacefully and with restraint.

What I dislike most about the Mafia game is having to wait for the newspaper all day; it's annoying.

What is this? It's much more annoying when players keep writing to you: "Where's the newspaper?" "When will the newspaper be out?" "Please write it today, or I'll have to leave soon," and so on. :)

Although... there is definitely a certain advantage to your version - Lorelei is probably aware of Vishmaster's musical tastes and could have easily created such a clue, as I think.

Musical clues FTW!

Judging by the latest events, it was clear that someone was behind all of this. The murder of two heroes of Haven could only have happened if there was a traitor among them.

Could someone please correct the spelling?

Try writing without mistakes at 5 AM, see how it goes.

I don't judge. Actually, it's strange that no one helped him.