Barrylocke
Member
If one of the games was Traube's game, then yes I'd have a very real chance.
If I had to play two games at once, I know for a fact I'd get confused which is which, fuck up some analysis and, then die.
Playing two games at once sounds terrifying to me.
I strongly believe we shouldn't have people doubling up.
why?
The most obvious reason is that we have a list that's overflowing already. Granted, if we're being realistic, there will be a few people who drop out for whatever reason; still, at the quantity we're at now and however many additional people we enlist in the coming days, it's likely we're just not going to have enough open slots for people to play into two games.
Even if we had a shortage of players, it's just not realistic to expect a single person to participate in two games - assuming people have lives outside of these message boards and actually have to sleep. I'm not saying a person couldn't participate reasonably well in two games the majority of the time, but there are a myriad of scenarios where having to provide activity in the two games would be nigh impossible. For example, if a player in two games is the target of suspicion in both games on the same day phase, both day phases end around the same time on the same day; it's a pretty demanding task for that player to actively defend themselves in both games within the same period of time, not even taking into account any extenuating real-life circumstances. Even more alarming, other players may take advantage of the split attention to mount up arguments or attack players based on differences in behavior between two games; in general terms, it invites more metagame analysis.
And as Kark mentioned above, the split attention could be a detriment to both games. Squidy is a pretty great example of why this is a bad thing, because he's very active and writes well-researched/reasoned posts about nearly every player; imagine him having to do it for 40+ players, while having to fight off counter-arguments. Even if it's possible, it would affect the quality of the gameplay a player employs. I'm pretty sure Squidy or anyone can attest that even though there's a bit thumb-twiddling at times, there are periods where games can get very intense and require loads of activity; I would not want to imagine having two games coming down to that at the same time and my having to monitor the two at the same time.
From the perspective of having everyone play to the best of their abilities, and leave the moderators with less of a headache, I really don't think this is something we should do.
oh my posts are well reasoned now?
The only reason this came up is because traube said he wanted to run a 30 player game which means we're short. If we're really overflowing, then obviously no one should play two games until everyone gets a turn.
However if we are short on people, I don't see the problem. Anyone who has played a game knows how time consuming it is and can make up their own minds on how much / little they'd like to participate. We're all grown ups here, we know how to schedule our time.
If I had to play two games at once, I know for a fact I'd get confused which is which, fuck up some analysis and, then die.
if people don't vote for a scummy player out of pity because of something that happened in a completely different game, they are dumb and deserve to lose.
Alright, I never played a mafia game in my life so I am probably completely wrong, but wouldn't a town player that is confused and fucks up his/her analysis have a higher chance to survive longer? That would create some chaos on the town side, which would benefit the mafia players. So it would be in their interest to keep you as long in the game as possible.
It will be the town players who will send you off, either because they accuse you of being a mafia playing dumb, or just a huge liability anyway
I feel the moderators for next round should also have some say over the taking part in two games idea as they also have the ability to cock up in regards to a players roll, seeing as they are privy to all games running.
I mean after Karks big blunder could any of us us trust him with this scenario? =P
I feel the moderators for next round should also have some say over the taking part in two games idea as they also have the ability to cock up in regards to a players roll, seeing as they are privy to all games running.
I mean after Karks big blunder could any of us us trust him with this scenario? =P
Don't listen to this scum Kark, you did the best you could.
Player's being in two games should be a last resort after we've exhausted normal recruitment.
Even then, I think I'd prefer to play 2 larger games instead of 3 with dupes.
I agree. I don't think that playing in two games at once will work well. It was hard enough for me to keep track of one game. Can't imagine how confusing it gets with two games. Especially if you have some player who are in both games.
As for my game. Planing is almost done. Hope Kark and MattyG can take a look at it for some final feedback.
Oh and btw. The Thing would probably be a great theme for a game.
Do the infected know they're infected in the Thing?...this game literally is The Thing. How has noone thought of that up until now.
Do the infected know they're infected in the Thing?
If there is still room for new players I'd really like to have a go. I played a few games on an old forum a few years ago and it was a great time. Would be nice to interact with the community here a bit more.
Should still be time to get you added. Crab will need to know what pronoun you prefer, i.e. male/female/other/eater of worlds.
They should. But they may not know who else is infected.
The most obvious reason is that we have a list that's overflowing already. Granted, if we're being realistic, there will be a few people who drop out for whatever reason; still, at the quantity we're at now and however many additional people we enlist in the coming days, it's likely we're just not going to have enough open slots for people to play into two games.
Even if we had a shortage of players, it's just not realistic to expect a single person to participate in two games - assuming people have lives outside of these message boards and actually have to sleep. I'm not saying a person couldn't participate reasonably well in two games the majority of the time, but there are a myriad of scenarios where having to provide activity in the two games would be nigh impossible. For example, if a player in two games is the target of suspicion in both games on the same day phase, both day phases end around the same time on the same day; it's a pretty demanding task for that player to actively defend themselves in both games within the same period of time, not even taking into account any extenuating real-life circumstances. Even more alarming, other players may take advantage of the split attention to mount up arguments or attack players based on differences in behavior between two games; in general terms, it invites more metagame analysis.
And as Kark mentioned above, the split attention could be a detriment to both games. Squidy is a pretty great example of why this is a bad thing, because he's very active and writes well-researched/reasoned posts about nearly every player; imagine him having to do it for 40+ players, while having to fight off counter-arguments. Even if it's possible, it would affect the quality of the gameplay a player employs. I'm pretty sure Squidy or anyone can attest that even though there's a bit thumb-twiddling at times, there are periods where games can get very intense and require loads of activity; I would not want to imagine having two games coming down to that at the same time and my having to monitor the two at the same time.
From the perspective of having everyone play to the best of their abilities, and leave the moderators with less of a headache, I really don't think this is something we should do.
While we wait, might as well share how we all discovered Mafia (if you haven't already)?
My first Mafia-like experience was playing dozens of online custom games of Parasite in Warcraft III, then actual Mafia in Starcraft 2 Custom.
Should still be time to get you added. Crab will need to know what pronoun you prefer, i.e. male/female/other.
FTFY
While we wait, might as well share how we all discovered Mafia (if you haven't already)?
My first Mafia-like experience was playing dozens of online custom games of Parasite in Warcraft III, then actual Mafia in Starcraft 2 Custom.
While we wait, might as well share how we all discovered Mafia (if you haven't already)?
While we wait, might as well share how we all discovered Mafia (if you haven't already)?
My first Mafia-like experience was playing dozens of online custom games of Parasite in Warcraft III, then actual Mafia in Starcraft 2 Custom.
While we wait, might as well share how we all discovered Mafia (if you haven't already)?
My first Mafia-like experience was playing dozens of online custom games of Parasite in Warcraft III, then actual Mafia in Starcraft 2 Custom.
I had said that I didn't think I'd have time to play (I've been moving city, hunting for a job, brother was getting married) but it's looking like things will be calm by the time the games kick off. I might not have quite as much free time as I did in previous games but I'll still be able to read and post most days (and I'll be jealous if the games kick off and I'm not involved!)
Archer would be my number 1 choice.