Back to Epicmafia

ban guns from competitive games

deletedover 10 years

people are using the same mentality for shooting a gun as lynching, it's absolutely impossible to make a competitively viable setup with guns, they promote trolling and gamethrowing, the power to instantly remove one person from the game is overbearing and this community can't handle it. furthermore, remove deputy, sniper and gunsmith from competitive lobby and training lobby. part of the problem is guns cause games to become trollish, fast-paced and lower effort which has leaked onto other games, guns probably should be banned from competitive lobby yes, guns are slowly killing competitive lobby. and by slowly, i mean someone get nikki on the phone and tell him to ban guns from competitive lobby. guns are becoming the new lynch, that'st he problem with most new setups. lynching is only ever for lylos now, and equivalent to set in stone absolutes, rather than placeholders for FOSes and reactions. it also encourages a chain of command that makes reading harder, hence why most gun setups end up being scumsided. not only do you run the risk of a *** pr, you also lose any valuable voting process and instead get SHOOT KYLE LOL a bunch. by replacing lynching for a ML with guns, you effectively neuter most competent setups and ruin any form of methodical strategy that could be employed.

guns shouldnt be in comp lobby.. plain and simple, they are either game breaking for town and make easy wins out of nothing or they give mafia a free win because the person with gun shoots. also , theres an entire rule dedicated to hipfiring with guns. guns give people an excuse to grudge lynch people without being able to be opposed. if youre pr with gun you have full control no matter how much town objects, which is just silly.

setup the best setup is what more setups should look like. both PRs shoudl optimally hide instead of claiming , PR claim d1 is the only bad thing about VDLI. if one of the power roles was squishy instead of hard to kill (doc is "squishy, bp is "hard to kill", etc") then it would be great , imo.

and i remember when people actually LIKED playing those scumhunt based setups,. they preferred it to gimmick ones. regardless of whether anyone thinks overall play is worse or better, the attitude people have towards scumhunt setups or scumhunting in general is worse now, which makes overall play worse as a result.

Peta
over 10 years

Peta says

I think the best short-term solution is to prohibit guns every other round, or every two rounds out of three.

deletedover 10 years
guys i called you nerds now feel ashamed and stop arguing
thebrontosaurus
over 10 years

thebrontosaurus says

Here's an idea. It's late and I'm tired, so I apologize if this comes off as half-baked or incoherent:

Let's take Goodbar's idea and expand on it a little bit - Let's have a temporary ban on guns, say 5-10 rounds - I will remove deputy/sheriff/any gun roles from competitive lobby, for those rounds. Let's see what happens.

As far as what the deliverables of a temp ban would be, I think ultimately it would be to see if participation increases/decreases, number of reports filed before and after, and ultimately get a taste of whether Comp Lobby is better or worse without guns. I'm sure I missed something, so any goals for this or things to track as a result of the temp ban would be nice. You can't argue with numbers.

I want to run this by the mod team first to see what they have to say about it, but I think a temp ban would be an interesting experiment to see if the lobby improves.

What do you guys think about this?


New page
deletedover 10 years
haha he did the think where he is so mad he furrowed his brow and copied each little part of the post into a separate quote so he could respond to it - classic!!!
Peta
over 10 years

Malaka says

Straw man me more please.


OK.


Malaka says

Would it be fair if I suggested that you think we should be forced to compete on classic mafia since it's fair and highly based on verbal communication.


Classic Mafia is a setup that is (1) fair and (2) based on verbal communication. There are very many other setups that satisfy these criteria. So no, it wouldn't be fair if you suggested that I think that.


Malaka says

No, it wouldn't because we aren't talking about extremes.


It doesn't matter if we're "talking about "extremes." Your argument entails the absurd extreme that I gave as an example. My argument doesn't entail the absurd extreme that you tried to wedge into it.


Malaka says

I am talking about games which aren't inherently mostly based on chance.


So there is such a thing as the spirit of the game to you.


Malaka says

They are legitimate games, and points are based on average win percentages of these games.


Nah, games involving silencers and fiddlers aren't legitimate games.


Malaka says

The fact that you believe you have so much knowledge over what is the spirit of mafia and what isn't mafia, shows how egotistic you are.


Anyone who has a high enough reading level to understand the Wikipedia entry on the game can have the same degree of knowledge. I don't know why you're so eager to flaunt your illiteracy.
deletedover 10 years
you guys are nerds lol
deletedover 10 years
..yes
Malaka
over 10 years

Peta says

I think we should just stop arguing with Malaka, because he's a known idiot.


I'm rubber, you're glue so ur insults bounce off me and stick to you. But in all seriousness, this is a childish comment.
thebrontosaurus
over 10 years
Here's an idea. It's late and I'm tired, so I apologize if this comes off as half-baked or incoherent:

Let's take Goodbar's idea and expand on it a little bit - Let's have a temporary ban on guns, say 5-10 rounds - I will remove deputy/sheriff/any gun roles from competitive lobby, for those rounds. Let's see what happens.

As far as what the deliverables of a temp ban would be, I think ultimately it would be to see if participation increases/decreases, number of reports filed before and after, and ultimately get a taste of whether Comp Lobby is better or worse without guns. I'm sure I missed something, so any goals for this or things to track as a result of the temp ban would be nice. You can't argue with numbers.

I want to run this by the mod team first to see what they have to say about it, but I think a temp ban would be an interesting experiment to see if the lobby improves.

What do you guys think about this?
Malaka
over 10 years
[quote=Peta]

Malaka says

"Interesting" is highly subjective, but I'm pretty sure blacking out the votes and chat box for a player doesn't make the game more interesting. It doesn't matter, though. Whether or not it does has nothing to do with whether it belongs in the game. Your argument entails that if creating a setup consisting of seven killers, two interceptors, and a cultist is interesting then we shouldn't remove it, even though the setup is, by definition, not Mafia. You can go to the Sandbox if you care so much about not playing Mafia.


Straw man me more please. Would it be fair if I suggested that you think we should be forced to compete on classic mafia since it's fair and highly based on verbal communication. No, it wouldn't because we aren't talking about extremes. I am talking about games which aren't inherently mostly based on chance. They are legitimate games, and points are based on average win percentages of these games. The fact that you believe you have so much knowledge over what is the spirit of mafia and what isn't mafia, shows how egotistic you are.
Peta
over 10 years
I think the best short-term solution is to prohibit guns every other round, or every two rounds out of three.
thebrontosaurus
over 10 years

GuyFawkes85 says

Bronto, if a clear has hammer on a cross / selfs, he can change his mind, but only before he hammers. Once he did hammer (once the person with the gun shot) there is no way back.

SAME thing.

Guns change nothing.

The only thing which can change, is if somebody hipfires, but that's GT (work for you mods, yeah...) but also the same as having a clear saying "speedgame: CROSS NOW" 10 sec into the game. What changes the game is the clear, not the gun.


The gun promotes the bad behavior. At least with the hammer, you're given more time to consider. With guns the strategy tends to be shoot sooner rather than later, which is problematic.



You still scumhunt and do those things in setups with guns. The gun is usually only provided as the mislynch. Ultimately, it is the clear's scumhunting prowess that determines the outcome of the game.


While true, there are plenty of setups that revolve around unclears actually doing something and not having to have the PRs handle everything. There's a lot of separation between PRs and blues right now, when in reality there shouldn't be such vast differences between them.
Peta
over 10 years
I think we should just stop arguing with Malaka, because he's a known idiot.
Malaka
over 10 years

kyle says

malaka it's a point thats already been brought up twice and refuted w/ the fact that the competition is dead and unless you feel like waiting a long time you have to run on the most popular setup


Perhaps, these setups are popular for a reason. I remember long time ago, I tried to run on an anon setup, but it wouldn't fill, so I didn't run. There is no guarantee that your idea of the "fairest" setup will be agreed upon by others, and no guarantee that people will enjoy playing it.
Peta
over 10 years

Malaka says


Peta says


Malaka says


Peta says

Probably every single gun-based setups should be banned, but your arguments in this thread mostly suck. You should be pushing for a ban from Competitive Lobby on roles that are against of the spirit of the game, e.g., silencer, fiddler. If or when that happens you can try to make the case that roles involving guns fall into that category.


The goal of the game is to have fun.


No, it's not. The goal of the game for one team, the informed minority, is to eliminate the uninformed majority. The goal of the game for the other team, the uninformed majority, is to eliminate the informed minority. Both goals are achieved primarily through verbal interaction, so anything that obstructs verbal interaction goes against the spirit of the game.


Just because verbal communication is a major part of EM, doesn't mean that we should try to get rid of all the other parts of EM, which make the game more interesting.


"Interesting" is highly subjective, but I'm pretty sure blacking out the votes and chat box for a player doesn't make the game more interesting. It doesn't matter, though. Whether or not it does has nothing to do with whether it belongs in the game. Your argument entails that if creating a setup consisting of seven killers, two interceptors, and a cultist is interesting then we shouldn't remove it, even though the setup is, by definition, not Mafia. You can go to the Sandbox if you care so much about not playing Mafia.
deletedover 10 years
if i had a thread-removing gun i would shoot it at this thread
Malaka
over 10 years

Peta says


Malaka says


Peta says

Probably every single gun-based setups should be banned, but your arguments in this thread mostly suck. You should be pushing for a ban from Competitive Lobby on roles that are against of the spirit of the game, e.g., silencer, fiddler. If or when that happens you can try to make the case that roles involving guns fall into that category.


The goal of the game is to have fun.


No, it's not. The goal of the game for one team, the informed minority, is to eliminate the uninformed majority. The goal of the game for the other team, the uninformed majority, is to eliminate the informed minority. Both goals are achieved primarily through verbal interaction, so anything that obstructs verbal interaction goes against the spirit of the game.


Just because verbal communication is a major part of EM, doesn't mean that we should try to get rid of all the other parts of EM, which make the game more interesting.
deletedover 10 years
guyfawkes85 is a username that should indicate how not seriously that person should be taken.
Peta
over 10 years
You can prove that guns aren't competitively viable either logically or empirically. The logical argument basically follows what thebrontosaurus said. I think it's pretty weak. The empirical argument involves compiling a sample of gun-containing games and demonstrating a dearth in meaningful participation - a lower volume of participation by a lower proportion of players - compared to non-gun-containing games. This can probably be done, and it would mirror the reasons for Reverse Mafia's ban from competitive play.
GuyFawkes85
over 10 years
For those who didn't see it, here's the poll:

https://epicmafia.com/topic/62515
Sims
over 10 years
well, you're wrong
deletedover 10 years
i'm done here, i'm tired of repeating myself. SPIRIT of mafia and all that
pranay7744
over 10 years
self vote meta stemmed from my superior leading skills as the clear
GuyFawkes85
over 10 years
Bronto, if a clear has hammer on a cross / selfs, he can change his mind, but only before he hammers. Once he did hammer (once the person with the gun shot) there is no way back.

SAME thing.

Guns change nothing.

The only thing which can change, is if somebody hipfires, but that's GT (work for you mods, yeah...) but also the same as having a clear saying "speedgame: CROSS NOW" 10 sec into the game. What changes the game is the clear, not the gun.
deletedover 10 years

thebrontosaurus says


Peta says

Probably every single gun-based setups should be banned, but your arguments in this thread mostly suck. You should be pushing for a ban from Competitive Lobby on roles that are against of the spirit of the game, e.g., silencer, fiddler. If or when that happens you can try to make the case that roles involving guns fall into that category.


This is a good point. Silencer/Fiddler are both roles that need to go imo (especially Fiddler).

The argument that the person with the gun greatly impacts the outcome of the game is essentially true of any setup that revolves around PRs and them hammering, albeit guns give people immediate control and disallow them from changing their reads, like how you may change your mind when someone is kicked on or putting pressure on via votes. You can't really do that with a gun.

It is unfortunate that setup makers would be limited, but to be fair no one seems to mind that a lot of roles don't find their way into comp.


You still scumhunt and do those things in setups with guns. The gun is usually only provided as the mislynch. Ultimately, it is the clear's scumhunting prowess that determines the outcome of the game.