yeah cuz uhm not everyone of you is getting it so:
if u exclude the host from the killing and u have more kids thinking like you that ruins the game:
1. doc dont have to go on host so he can freely pick another target - higher possibility of saving. same thing for bodyguards. cop can investigate host and dont be afraid about him dying - alive inno. ether way its worse for mafia. so if u think hostkilling is passe, please selfdelete
Do you think we should be against hostlynching d1?
12
very yes
7
yes
deletedalmost 10 years
My post was removed because I used a curse word lolz. Anyway hostkilling is irrelevant. Just because you made the game which anyone could do shouldn't give you privileges to not be killed. Just deal with it and move on
$***y post. Chandler aka MDD, I've reviewed some of your games and I've found out that you grudgekill the host in 90% of your games. Just pick the kill on random and stop nagging about everything and anything. If your brain can't handle that just use random.org (which I might use on my N1 kills).
Since Lolwot explained it perfectly, I'm only saying that it's not meant to discourage discussions during night meeting, it's meant to discourage people giving up their best interest at heart for whatever reason (he is mah buddy, he is not cop let's most likely lose instead etc.).
This barely happens in Comp, so this precedent is mostly for Training, and for players who are trying to subtly GT or give up the game cause it doesn't go their way.
Read that. Clicking a few times to boot up a game and then waiting for it to fill does not entitle you to any special treatment whatsoever. You are not immune to being killed and you are not immune to being lynched, beginning-game or not.
I strongly disagree with this. This is a problem with the community that has come to strongly oppose killing the host, not a problem with the game itself. Having just that host be there has been a very excellent way for me to avoid particular users without clicking the individual tables to see what games have these users I want to avoid. It also assists in me getting back into groups that I enjoyed playing with without having to do much of the same. It's a great feature and should stick. Again, the community is the issue here.
there is a way to fix this....dont show the host for ranked games. that way its even for everyone (maybe not for the second person to get in the game but whatever)
deletedalmost 10 years
hostkill then wifom and complain about it \o/
deletedalmost 10 years
I can see how you may feel that way. These sort of situations typically apply more to Fancy Pants/Classic Mafia/Guns&Hookers rather than any other Training Lobby setup. Forcing a NK in of itself itself is not considered gamethrowing, unless it puts mafia at a significant disadvantage.
Mafia NKing in Classic mafia gives town an extra clear, a ML and an extra cop report, effectively putting mafia into an autoloss. If both team members agree to NK because they believe doctor will be on one of them, then this can never be deemed as GT. But when a mafia partner refuses to vote with the other mafia and forces a NK, that is gamethrowing because they are refusing to play toward their win condition for whatever reason by not killing.
I hope that makes more sense.
Yeah, this is a terrible feeling and unfortunately there's nothing to prevent some mafia partners from not participating in night meetings. This clearly isn't gamethrowing but it still sucks. And because Training Lobby is moderated so loosely, you probably couldn't even get away with reporting them for ISP/Trolling if you notice them doing this EVERY SINGLE GAME to the point where they're missing their obligation to CC a pr. It's not fair to you, but there's not much we can do to prevent this kind of behavior. The best thing you can do is dodge these types of players, or play setups with 3 mafia.
I have to agree with HSOWA. If neither mafia member is willing to budge, why do we side against one in particular simply because they were slightly slower to click a name from the drop-down list?
This seems like a rather non-constructive precedent.... The way you've summarized it, it seems as though, so long as you can get your kill vote in first as mafia, there's no need to even discuss strategy with your partner at all; you might as well be playing by yourself and there's nothing they can do about it aside for bussing resulting in gt....
i got mad when my partner told me he is forcing nk since he is against hostkilling. the point is i dislike it because its not smart when u play as mafia but some people think its a common knowledge and everyone agreed on this. no.
play anon games play daystart games get people to know you until they don't n1 you the only reason you dislike hostkilling is because you were told not to like it, if there was no term to define hostkilling would you still make this thread?
Hosts are just like any other player, and being like any other player means you are subject to behavior like any other player experiences, including being n1'd. Don't think being host automatically gives you the privilege to not die or be killed on night one. Hosts aren't any special or different from anyone, okay? Geez.
deletedalmost 10 years
What Dez said. The second mafia is obligated to vote who the first mafia voted, or it will force a nk. Unless both mafia agree to NK, this is considered game throwing.
Wrong, precedent is, second mafia to vote has to align themselves to the first vote - they are the one stopping to play towards their win condition, when they refuse to kill someone based on anything. Precedent is set by zooink.
It is up to both mafia members to choose the kill. If you disagree based on any in-game-related issues and can not choose a kill, neither can be reported. If you disagree based on prior grudges or other OGI related things, then it can be reported.
