BZP Mafia Discussion
Other topics
Is there a limit to the amount of side-games that can go on at a time? I'd like to host a side game at some point, but if it's too clogged right now I'll wait.
It's simple, really. A cruise to the Southern Sea, stopping at various islands along the way for sightseeing and fun is hijacked by a group of criminals who want to kill everyone aboard. Special nautical themed roles appear and change up the game, and a huge Twist dramatically alters the game, making it unlike any other game of Bionicle Mafia to date.
I'm game for that!
Oh, and by the way, may I tentatively reserve the next open numbered game? I have an idea for a game in which the scenes are delivered as accounts of what happened (e.g. history-books, diaries, etc.) This is not merely a narrative gimmick, but rather a way of putting an interesting, but subtle, spin on gameplay.
It should be far less labyrinthine than Damage Control, so even if my health is not greatly improved (though it will have to improve somewhat for me to finish DC,) it should be manageable.
Man, last time we had 40 people was Big City, wasn't it?
Man that was so hype.
Man so many people went inactive in that game. xD
Maybe we could get it on the front page, though. That would help with getting the spots filled, I bet.
Who knows if it would bring in people to stay, though. =P
@Seaborgium ~2 mafia games has proven to be the best balance, many more than that and people start getting lost and all the topics begin to get inactive
@QP: That sounds much like 35 and XV. Which is good because 35 never got past the first scene because the forums went down, and XV didn't get much past that. I would be glad to see a game like that finish =P
Is damage control still considered "active"? I know it hasn't ended but it hasn't had a new posts since November.
Is damage control still considered "active"? I know it hasn't ended but it hasn't had a new posts since November.
It is if I have anything to say about it.
You know, Seaborgium, how you wanted to host a game? Perchance you might get something of an early start by co-narrating the last few rounds of Damage Control, now that you're dead? It would certainly make things easier for me.
Front Page for Red Sea would be glorious, and the more people who join, the better the Twist gets. But I'm gonna start hyping it up when we get a bit closer than four games away 
Big City was great back when, I enjoyed that game very much... so I'm all for another huge game, Red Sea sounds promising. Would also volunteer to help with hyping (i.e., write a blog entry or something). 
Assuming there's going to be like three deaths a night or something to ensure that the game doesn't last forever... that'd be awesome. Though it might be a bit difficult to fill up the player list entirely.Yo, so, question for everyone.
How do you feel about the notion of Red Sea being a massive game? As in, literally 40+ players?
EDIT: Oh. I see that I forgot to refresh the page some time between yesterday and today. Oops.
I really enjoyed hosting Big City. Big games are fun.
(Why'd you guys all have to die on me? ;n;)
*Snaps fingers*
Because people like killing the active people, I do believe. =P
Note to self: Inactivity is worse than pleading for death.
Because people like killing the active people, I do believe. =P
It's a strategy that I understand but dislike, and it was rather aggravating to watch the Mafia group in XIX Phase 1 employ it. While I understand that killing off the active players makes things easier vote-wise, you're also... killing off the active players. Which is essentially the exact same thing as killing the game.
In regards to that, I find it better to use at the very end. Like, when you're able to be down to just one active and one inactive.
It's how I managed to make that one guy who had blue in his name win against Baltarc I think. =P that mafia was freaking awesome and I orchestrated every single part of it, it was so amazing.
One of the main problems with combating the "kill active players" strategy is that it takes a very deliberate plan to combat it. Like, just in general when looking at the player list as a Mafian, those who are active stand out more. Even when not actively thinking of using it as a strategy, it's just natural that the people who are most active seem the most dangerous and worth killing.
*shrug* Just some more random thoughts from me
Well, as long as I can actually play Big City, I'll be fine with it.
Because people like killing the active people, I do believe. =P
It's a strategy that I understand but dislike, and it was rather aggravating to watch the Mafia group in XIX Phase 1 employ it. While I understand that killing off the active players makes things easier vote-wise, you're also... killing off the active players. Which is essentially the exact same thing as killing the game.
I don't recall us employing that strategy until the very end. For the most part, we were more concerned with killing off players we deemed astute or killing the Medic and Detective.
XIX's rule 5 adds incentive for the Mafia to kill active players, by the way.
XIX's rule 5 adds incentive for the Mafia to kill active players, by the way.
I'm not seeing it. It's not going to make it more or less likely.
If a dead player is allowed to participate and if his role is revealed upon death, he can then act as a proven innocent (as Lloyd did in a few games, for example) to spearhead investigations, whereas before his death, his investigation would have been hampered by the reluctance of players to give information to someone who could be a mafian. This can give the mafia an incentive to keep good, active players alive. I distinctly remember being in a mafia group and debating whether or not we should should kill a certain active player, given that he would likely continue to participate, and by killing him, we would be removing him from suspicion. Had he been banned from affecting the game after his death, we would not have hesitated to kill him. However, I haven't been following XIX, so perhaps other factors outweigh this calculation in that particular game.
If a dead player is allowed to participate and if his role is revealed upon death, he can then act as a proven innocent (as Lloyd did in a few games, for example) to spearhead investigations, whereas before his death, his investigation would have been hampered by the reluctance of players to give information to someone who could be a mafian. This can give the mafia an incentive to keep good, active players alive. I distinctly remember being in a mafia group and debating whether or not we should should kill a certain active player, given that he would likely continue to participate, and by killing him, we would be removing him from suspicion. Had he been banned from affecting the game after his death, we would not have hesitated to kill him. However, I haven't been following XIX, so perhaps other factors outweigh this calculation in that particular game.
The game will probably be over by the end of next week if the current death rate continues; so in this case, I'm not too worried.
Even if it were a cause for worry, I think the pros outweigh the cons as far as Rule 5-type rules go, despite whatever effects they may have on game activity. Though I can see why people might think otherwise, depending on the sort of game they want to engage in.
Even if it were a cause for worry, I think the pros outweigh the cons as far as Rule 5-type rules go, despite whatever effects they may have on game activity. Though I can see why people might think otherwise, depending on the sort of game they want to engage in.
Yeah. I didn't realize it when putting the rule in place, but I've effectively shut down any "Lloydtiming", which is definitely a strategy that saw overuse recently (I was probably the most guilty, but still). It's definitely made things too easy for the Village in the past, and I think part of the fun with Mafia that BZPower has lost somewhat is trying to win as your numbers (and your allies) are slowly whittled down.
XIX's rule 5 adds incentive for the Mafia to kill active players, by the way.
I'm not seeing it. It's not going to make it more or less likely.
They'll kill us to shut us up with the knowledge that we won't be able to do anything once we're down.
I agree that it's logical in relation to the Detective's role and to the immersion of the game, but I hope you understand why it's frustrating. 
The final installment is out! Click the banner to read the prologue. I hope you all enjoy... and I suggest you stay for the ride. It's going to be very worth it.
If you're new, do not worry - I've written Extermination with the intention of it working as a standalone story.
Is that picture going to become a link tomorrow?
Is that picture going to become a link tomorrow?
I expect that there shall be a new picture to replace it tomorrow. 
Is that picture going to become a link tomorrow?
It should. If he doesn't do any linking it's going to make me mad
So Bionicle Mafia XIX: The Voltex Constant has ended! I'll post a writeup on the game later with my thoughts, including my approach to building hype for the game. In the meantime, hopefully Ehks will have XX up soon. It's going to be a mad time indeed.
(Click to join!)
First post has been updated! All games are there, I think.
You numbered #12 wrong. It's 12 not XII.
You numbered #12 wrong. It's 12 not XII.
Third Age uses Roman Numerals tho
Since Windy closed the topic before I was done writing, I'll just post this here.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Congratulations, Tyler! You were a worthy Drifter, wrong-footing the lot of us with ease.
It's been quite the experience, folks. Good game, y'all!
I'm not sure what to think of the Voltex Constant as a whole. It was fun conniving and guessing, but at the same time, I don't quite feel like I've played two games, but rather as if I've contributed to a serialized story. Part of that is down to the rather skewed role-distribution, which was beyond Voltex's control. I think the other part is that I feel as if we've (rather appropriately) all been shooting in the dark, even by Mafia standards.
The only player who managed to advance himself by cunning was, by my watch, Tyler. Xaeraz, while certainly competent, had his work cut out for him, and he seemed to be the sole mastermind in the Village. The first phase Mafia tried its darndest (or so I, in my obvious objectivity, believe), but the odds were against us. The Village was more competent second round, but with everyone dropping like flies, it didn't really have a chance.
So what am I trying to say? I'm just getting my thought out on this. It wasn't bad by any means, I just have this weird feeling. I don't feel like there were any winners, I suppose. But that's just how it seems to me, in my incurable oddity.
I should like to heartily thank you, Voltex, for hosting this behemoth. While we had a few disagreements along the way, but all in all you were a superb host, and most definitely worthy of your reputation.
Here's to the future of BZPower Mafia!
While I would beg to differ on the count of Xaeraz being the only competent first-phase villager, that is an otherwise mostly accurate analysis.
One thing I am confused about - how was I executed? I thought the votes didn't end up falling that way. *shrug*
Xaeraz*Xaerez, while certainly competent, had his work cut out for him, and he seemed to be the sole mastermind in the Village.
Also, that's partly because you killed me while I was inactive. =P
While I would beg to differ on the count of Xaeraz being the only competent first-phase villager, that is an otherwise mostly accurate analysis.
I didn't mean to say that he was the only competent Villager, just that he was the only ringleader, as it were.
Xaeraz*Xaerez, while certainly competent, had his work cut out for him, and he seemed to be the sole mastermind in the Village.
One of these days, I will get that right...
Fixed.
Also, that's partly because you killed me while I was inactive. =P
Bat-logic FTW!
While I would beg to differ on the count of Xaeraz being the only competent first-phase villager, that is an otherwise mostly accurate analysis.
One thing I am confused about - how was I executed? I thought the votes didn't end up falling that way. *shrug*
When ToaD's votes were disqualified, the Drifter voting stood at 1 for you and 1 for me. In that event, my original hang ToaD/kill Shadowhawk/double hang the two of us gambit worked as planned.
It probably wouldn't have, if Shadowhawk had voted me as Drifter, but when I saw that he only voted Mafia my guess was that he wanted to kill me himself in the next night cycle and come out the sole survivor. That was how I knew to day kill him instead of you.
-Tyler
Oh, I'd missed the part where ToaD's votes were nulled. Thanks for clarifying.
On Friday may it be fine to start the newbie mafia game?
