Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

either way, send me your host suggestos and i'll post them tomorrow? or friday? I don't know how much time to give

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

i've already gotten 2 fwiw

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

what are you guys talking about?

Obviously the answer is to cardflip modkills right away.

whether or not it ends the game is irrelevant.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

this is what my overall point would've been
maybe it would be best to push the threshold for posting to EOD itself

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

it could impact the vote if a vote is happening

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

if it ends the game then yeah right away makes sense... but otherwise you might not want to do it right away

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

in this specific case, I expected WV to be mafia because literally everyone else did not meet my minimum criteria for the perception of an impossible situation (given the amount of players that cleared themselves or each other, anyone in the lynchpool would either feel like they had already lost the game or would need to try extremely hard to cast doubt on one of me/roundbox/DBP to turn game around, but neither happened. The only person that checked out entirely for both days was WV).

Still, Bug wasn't around, so I fully understand T-Force's position as a sub-host in this one to not want to end game and declare it for either side. He did honor the rules by announcing the modkill, but felt it wouldn't be appropriate to end the game entirely while Bug was away.

Bug coming back shortly before phase end could have taken it either way at that point. I understand the choice to honor T-Force's word that "modkill results will be announced at phase end". That shouldn't be faulted, as it is what is explicitly written.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

modkills in general just... suck. especially when you have to modkill the last wolf. i told trevor i would be unavailable for an hour while driving home from work, just in case anything crazy happened. i hadn't considered that someone wouldn't make the post threshold, so i hadn't even thought about it. trevor had to make the executive decision without me to modkill wv, and i think that was the right call. i don't think he flipped wv's role right then and there because ultimately he was just there to help me, not to host the game entirely. sorry it ending strangely... but i'm also not that sorry, because i was pretty much unable to do much until EOD anyways.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

sniped

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

I dont think there's a correct answer with the whole modkill thing. Both sunfan and Wolfe are correct. A modkill removes agency from both town and wolves, but the specific outcomes can favor either side on a situational basis. it just depends.

you can't just leave inactive players in the game--- therefore, modkills have to be allowed. sometimes it favors town, sometimes wolves. most of the time it boils down to how it affects parity. it's hard to legislate a single "modkill replaces a lynch" rule on the basis of fairness alone.

the important part, to me at least, is transparency and accountability. inactives will be modkilled, but when? players of all alignments need some kind of advance warning of the details of "how will XYZ be resolved" before they can play optimally.

Getting someone lynched, and then discovering that another player died because of a modkill, feels kind of fucked up because me knowing that XYZ was gonna be removed from the game would have 100% affected how I played the previous phase. Modkills are a necessary part of the game, but they remove player agency--- the question should be more about how to preserve the most agency despite this. i.e. giving the players the tools and information to reclaim ownership over the game's outcome even when something outside anybody's control happens.

should a modkill count as a lynch? I dunno, it depends. What matters more to me is "how much is a modkill gonna fuck up my ability to plan?" And minimizing that part, esp through transparency and accountability, at least lets us preemptively prepare for such scenarios.

a simple example is something to the effect of, "a player will not be modkilled without 2 hour's notice to the thread." that way we don't end up accidentally fuck up parity by causing 2 flips after EoD.

The WV situation is actually a good example of this--- for one, I'd feel even worse if there was no announcement about an impending modkill. Because we would have worked hard to solve the game and then would have been blindsided when not just one, but TWO flips happened. That could have easily gone south for town if WV wasn't a wolf.

tl;dr: modkills always suck and they're sometimes unavoidable. but having one all-ecompassing rule about how they affect lynches kind of sidesteps the real problem. It's not so much about "is this fair", because it's never going to be fair--- what matters more is that, even when it's not fair, there are no surprises in how the situation is handled, and that no matter what, we can adjust our play to accommodate around whatever is gonna happen, before it actually happens

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

And? We shouldn't be able to vote for the modkilled player, so of course it should impact the vote.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

hard disagree.

cardflipping modkills right away shifts the balance of the modkill "benefit" to town, because it gives them info they can use to reassess the vote prior to the actual end of day.

This is where cardflipping right away is the answer.

So rather than allowing town to play against each other pointlessly in normal circumstances following a modkill on the last wolf, (or allowing town & wolf to argue pointlessly following the modkill of a town in f3 when parity will win for wolves following the modkill), announce in those circumstances.

Basically the rule should be that the modkill flip will be announced at EoD, UNLESS the modkill ends game in which case it can be announced immediately (at T-60)

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

there are tangible examples of this im sure you can relate to:

* "I want to lynch this guy, but he's an inactive so he's gonna die anyway." -> "But WHEN is he gonna die? Is it at EoD today? Sometime tomorrow? Should I try to get him lynched or gamble on him being modkilled?"
* "I want the last phase to be a final 4, not a final 3. That way I can set up a mislynch on XYZ." (Wakes up, discovers that XYZ was modkilled, gets lynched, loses game.) "Well shit, if I knew that XYZ was gonna be modkilled, I would have just submitted a no-kill instead."

it's always better to be more open about this kind of thing.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

in my defense, the result of any/all modkills was stated in the OP

"Any modkills will be announced at approximately 1 hour before EoD, but the flip for any modkilled player will be withheld until after EoD. No votes will count from or against the player who is modkilled. Voting for said player will be equivalent to a "No-lynch" vote."

the only reason the modkill occurred a bit after the 1hr mark was due to T-Force not wanting to overstep his bounds as a co-host

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

this is a really good rule in general. this specific game was an exception, not the rule. I don't think we should let it change a generally useful policy. There's an alternate universe where WV was actually town, and if he was flipped before EoD, it would have deeply interrupted the game state.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

im defending this rule (and how the modkill was handled this game), I bring it up because most other games don't have this kind of thing and it ends up being more unfair to everybody because of that

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

yeah that's pretty much why I set it up so that the post limit is T-90 minutes, with the announcement at T-60. because setting the post limit to EoD itself just creates a disastrous mess for both factions and setting expectations / being open about the modkill lets everyone prepare their strategy better

I will say some realizations I had both in the previous game and this one is that, in both games, the low poster that baarely slid in needs to be able to confirm 10000% that they will post more in the next phase or get replaced early on at host discretion, and the substitutes should be asked to be ready for said substitution. Modkills should be minimized, but replacements can happen for the good of the game, and D0 says a lot about what people's activity is gonna look like.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

100% agree with this, and i should have been better about readying a substitute when wv was low-posting during the most recent day phase.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

I am really happy to see the rule being adopted. As a player, it frustrates me to no end how inactives are dealt with and basically given up on. Waiting til the last minute doesn't solve things, and it gets frustrating as either alignment to get surprised right at the thick of it.

I hear MML 100% in saying "I won't join a game without a post minimum" and I agree.

Bug saying they wanted to make sure it was included doubled my interest in the game, because I felt like I could be comfortable playing without worrying about my normal "lynch inactives first and foremost D0 and D1" strat here, which is the result of playing in an inactive meta. In our inactive meta, town ends up getting hurt basically spending 1-2 phases cleaning up the game of non-players while wolves get to kill who they want. It isn't right, and the solution is for hosts to tackle it head-on by implementing replacement and modkill policies that are open and transparent and prevent surprises for both sides.

Bug, don't beat yourself up. The game was fun and it not ending 40 or so minutes sooner is NOT an issue.

Re: TWG 204 - Forest Feast POST-GAME THREAD
 

For the record Bug I ain't arguing with you or how you handled the game in this situation; and it sounds like we pretty much agree on the spirit of the ruling regarding inactives in general.

I am arguing with SunFan because I don't agree with him though, but only for that reason

Game mechanics fascinate me and I'm always interested in how FFRTWG moves forward, so I am voicing how I feel things should go in ideal circumstances, nothing deeper

~

I think ShadoWolf's current Post Minimum rule is solid and is our best option. It's clear and gives players of both sides the kind of agency DBP is talking about because you can kind of tell hours out when someone is in danger be being modkilled, and the potential for a player to come back last second and be productive the last hour only benefits the health of the game in my opinion.

I wouldn't change a thing about it right now

I also agree the flip shouldn't happen before EOD. Other then it being the last town, the mod-killed player's alignment/role could confirm relations and drastically alter how much info town gets in a short amount of time. They'll eventually get that info, but it's more balance if it happens after voting---and honestly seems more satisfying for town since that voting phase would still require deductive reasoning and not just a flip giving an answer.

My complaint wasn't really about that though: I am simply saying that when the game is mechanically over, end the game. This EoD wasn't particularly emotional or intense but like if I had to play the last game's ending and then found out that the phase didn't mechanically matter I would delete my account. That's not a real healthy rule to have as a standard, and like I said it already sorta violates a near decade long established rule anyway.