Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Mafia: Super Duper Vanilla Game (Game Over: Mafia Wins!)

Rate this topic


Blue Jay 22

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Ceres said:

That is harsh.

 

I think we need to change our general approach to handling inactive players because Godkills should be used as an extreme measure. First off all, I don't think activity requirements should be purely based on how often someone is voting, whether it be once every round or once every two rounds. Imo it should be based on how much they are posting and contributing. A player voting every round while posting nothing else shouldn't be meeting any requirements. Conversely, a player contributing each round that happens to forget to vote once or twice should never be GKd or removed; players don't have to vote to be doing work.

 

Second, trying to avoid the GKs all together is probably ideal as they are very unhealthy for the game. By this I mean being careful about letting in players that probably are not going to meet your requirements. And also potentially trying to find a sub if a player is inactive and needs replacement in the early game.

The same standard should be used universally however. So if you would try to sub out a player with a power-role instead of GKing them, then the same should be done with VTs. And if you GK a VT for not meeting requirements then you have to be prepared to do the same to mafia or power roles as well.

i've been using gk's in a strategic and extremely angleshooty way for this reason by asking unproven town late game to gk themself

  • Like 1
Link to comment
59 minutes ago, hoggers said:

i've been using gk's in a strategic and extremely angleshooty way for this reason by asking unproven town late game to gk themself

I have it on excellent authority that this strategy is causing holes on the ozone layer.

 

 

 

 

 

Save the planet, you bastard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, hoggers said:

i've been using gk's in a strategic and extremely angleshooty way for this reason by asking unproven town late game to gk themself

Really?

 

Yeah, that's why discussing GKs is or should be against the rules in my mind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
14 hours ago, falcon45ca said:

In.

 

 

@luckylager the real quote is about chewing bubblegum & kicking ass, but gawd damn Dazed & Confused is a purdy all right movie.

I knew what I was quoting.

Bubblegum is for losers and cops, unless there's LSD in the bubblegum. And if there is, it's probably not totally gay to chew bubblegum.

 

Coulda sworn I signed up tho... BJ is shunning me for my apathy. 

 

200.gif

  • Like 2
Link to comment
12 hours ago, Ceres said:

That is harsh.

 

I think we need to change our general approach to handling inactive players because Godkills should be used as an extreme measure. First off all, I don't think activity requirements should be purely based on how often someone is voting, whether it be once every round or once every two rounds. Imo it should be based on how much they are posting and contributing. A player voting every round while posting nothing else shouldn't be meeting any requirements. Conversely, a player contributing each round that happens to forget to vote once or twice should never be GKd or removed; players don't have to vote to be doing work.

 

Second, trying to avoid the GKs all together is probably ideal as they are very unhealthy for the game. By this I mean being careful about letting in players that probably are not going to meet your requirements. And also potentially trying to find a sub if a player is inactive and needs replacement in the early game.

The same standard should be used universally however. So if you would try to sub out a player with a power-role instead of GKing them, then the same should be done with VTs. And if you GK a VT for not meeting requirements then you have to be prepared to do the same to mafia or power roles as well.

I’ll obviously look for subs before GKs.

 

I’m gonna stick with the no vote = GK though. A no vote is allowed, but a lack of voting in a round isn’t fair or good enough imo. 

  • Like 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
27 minutes ago, Blue Jay 22 said:

I’ll obviously look for subs before GKs.

 

I’m gonna stick with the no vote = GK though. A no vote is allowed, but a lack of voting in a round isn’t fair or good enough imo. 

How would you have time to find a sub if someone is getting instantly GKd for missing a vote? 

 

Actually. Why am I even arguing this. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...