Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

[Mini-Phalla] of Brass: The Philosopher Kings (God Save The Queen: Cultist/Templar Win)

1111214161722

Posts

  • KetBraKetBra shut up and jamRegistered User regular
    MMEEEGGGAFROOOOOST

    ...I mean, it wasn't me.
    yA895.png
  • RetabaRetaba Rintaro Okabe Mad ScientistRegistered User regular
    Well, don't look at me. I wasn't even in that game.
  • ObiFettObiFett Phalla Bounty Hunter Seeking ContractsRegistered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    I propose:

    That there should be enacted a goldenrod vote, in which the populace will choose someone who has previously been killed to be hypothesized back to life again. This vote must pass a super majority of 3/4 of the population in order to coordinate the massive debate efforts that would be required for such an act. This resurrection will bring the player back with unchanged win condition the day after a successful vote. Only one player may be selected each day. This player does not count towards majority population for the village on the night of their return for purposes of win condition calculation, although obviously once they are living again, they will.

    I challenge retaba to engage with me on this topic.

    Support

    Phalla Bounty Board coming soon...
  • ObiFettObiFett Phalla Bounty Hunter Seeking ContractsRegistered User regular
    ObiFett, this game is probably the closest you are going to get to a Phalla University discussion of mechanics. Might want to make use of that.

    I refuse to believe this
    Phalla Bounty Board coming soon...
  • RetabaRetaba Rintaro Okabe Mad ScientistRegistered User regular
    Just so you guys know, my debate experience extends only to saying "NO U" to my sibling.

    But I think I can win it! (Because the rule is likely broken, you see)
  • TheRoadVirusTheRoadVirus Well then, no time to lose. I'm the Doctor. Do everything I tell you, don't ask stupid questions, and don't wander off.Registered User regular
    Retaba wrote: »
    Accusation: Your face is dumb and also stupid and also a butt. You should lose the game. I bet you cannot challenge this one.

    Recollection: Did anyone else see this? This unit feels that it is important

  • RetabaRetaba Rintaro Okabe Mad ScientistRegistered User regular
    edited May 2013
    You shouldn't share information from our proboard, TRV.

    It might give people the wrong impression!
    Retaba on
  • Zombie HeroZombie Hero Registered User regular
    I got betrayed by my own in the Deadlands game.

    I should explain what happened to you.

    Among others, i was talking to you and Mikey CTS. Mikey claimed CSA and told me he was attacking you every night (which is a story that totally checks out). You reported that you were taking no damage, when i new that, allegedly, at least 7 was coming you way.

    On night two i had a 10 heal incoming, and i was healing myself. Afterwards that night I had 23/25 hit points, and i had assumed that 15 damage was coming my way (i thought MrT was later trying to get me to reveal my hp in thread). You had reported no damage, so i was pretty sure you were lying. I gave mill my story to support my theory that you were mafia.

    What I didn't know, was that jdark busdrove you and I. Peccavi's 10 heal went to you, explaining why you didn't have any damage on you, and Mikey's 5 attack went to me, hence leaving me with 23/25 after i bandaged. Mrt also thought i was a crazy person at that point. So everyone was telling the truth, even though the stories didn't match up, because of the busdrive.

    Xbox Live: Pastalonius
  • Iron WeaselIron Weasel Totes not mafia, guys Oh shit, an awlRegistered User regular
    That's hilarious.
    Currently Playing:
    Skyrim
    GT/Twitter: Tanith 6227
  • Zombie HeroZombie Hero Registered User regular
    I found out about the busdriver like 2 minutes before vote close that evening. just barely enough time to phone vote post at that point
    Xbox Live: Pastalonius
  • LockeoutLockeout Anchorage, AKRegistered User regular
    There were several versions of different proposals to get more seer calls but none of them made it to debate. We should try to come up with something definitive on that front.
    I propose that each day the top two dodgerblue vote-getters are publicly seered, with the results posted in narration. I challenge The Anonymous to argue otherwise.

    Also TheRoadVirus for continuing to make pointless proposals involving Geth instead of actually trying to propose something useful to the village.
  • SeGaTaiSeGaTai Registered User regular
    Lockeout wrote: »
    There were several versions of different proposals to get more seer calls but none of them made it to debate. We should try to come up with something definitive on that front.
    I propose that each day the top two dodgerblue vote-getters are publicly seered, with the results posted in narration. I challenge The Anonymous to argue otherwise.

    support
    PSN SeGaTai
  • jdarksunjdarksun Scion of Chaos Registered User regular
    That game, I learned a very valuable lesson about how awesome it is to bus drive people without their knowledge or consent.
  • PhyphorPhyphor Registered User regular
    I am not going to argue against wanting people to have fun - that is a tautology for a game and I support it, nor will I argue that unfun games discourage new and future players, that much is obvious. However, I will instead demonstrate that if people are not having fun it is not going to be because of this proposed rule, and therefore the second half of your argument doesn't apply.

    I propose that these class of games are, essentially, unfun for the majority except to a subset of people as they are predicated around complicated rules lawyering anyway; or at least they are if such people are playing, and this is precisely the sort of game that would draw such people, so it is safe to assume that they do and will. But, what my rule will allow is for people who aren't this kind of person - and let's face it, there really aren't that many people that find an arbitrarily mutable rule system fascinating to play with; Calvinball is fun in concept, but in practice it's just frustrating for most - to enact changes that are fun to them
    Gizzy wrote: »
    Eh I prob won't propose rap battle today since I'm supporting a kind of fluffy proposal already (the Geth one).

    Consider this post - Gizzy is supporting a "fluffy" proposal already and doesn't want to do a second one. Why? Because "fluffy" proposals do not directly help us win, but are inherently fun, yet still consume one of our two valuable slots for rule changes. By allowing extra changes to go through, we can have have our serious game changes and our fun changes too without sacrificing one for the other. Cake that we can eat!

    These games are necessarily experimental. That is fine, so long as they aren't the only thing being played, but expecting the more obscure experimental games to be the ones that are welcoming to new players is not normal. Personally, I started in a very experimental game and loved it, but that game played to my analytical strengths. Traditionally a "newbie phalla" is run every so often specifically to get new blood, and after a series of complex games a vanilla phalla is run to let the people who just enjoy the pure game have their fun. These are the ideal games for new players, not the complicated games. Of course, people are welcome to join up whenever, but we can't expect to make every game newbie-friendly

    Now, for this game. Let us consider the hard facts of this game. Three people have died, therefore there can be a maximum of 5 debates if this rule was in effect today. Tomorrow the hard maximum will be 4, then the day after that 3. The expected progression currently is 2, 2, 2, 1, ... Changes in the expected kills affect this sequence, but in a very small way.

    This is not a dramatic increase. Your contention is that it will cause people to give up playing because of the percieved increase in complexity due to having to keep track of proposals, while I argue that the perceived increase is slight and won't cause any extra discouragement. Indeed, I expect it to reduce it as some fun proposals will get through instead of being shot down by "real" changes, allowing that subset of players to participate when they would otherwise be sidelined.

    Let us now consider your game. I agree, the sheer number of proposals was absurd. But the number of proposals for the blue vote was also quite high, and with only one change the argument and frustration would be in picking the best one to implement. Let us look at a sampling of the proposals that day.
    There can be discussion between vote close and narration.
    Players may communicate outside the thread so long as both parties know the other's forum identity.
    Seers are necessarily reliable. Any player with the ability to identify another's alignment will have that player's true victory condition. This supersedes any ability, passive or otherwise, that prevents a player's alignment from being truthfully revealed. (This rule may no longer be altered.)
    All rule changes are to be made public in the narration of the night they are approved. (There can be no exceptions to this rule).
    Role seers will always correctly identify their target's role. Alignment seers will always correctly identify their target's alignment. Action seers will always correctly identify their target's action for the night. (This rule may be [and has been] altered once only)
    Each night in the narration/results post, the Hosts shall include a complete and up-to-date version of all rules affecting the game or its players. Any rule not so included shall not be considered to be in effect. (This rule cannot be altered)

    What do these all have in common? They restore basic phalla functionality as expected - the rules are known, seers work, people can talk with each other, etc.

    That is why this game will be fundamentally different. We don't need a plethora of rule changes just to get basic functionality. This game also isn't going to be quite so bad with wordings, so there won't be 5 competing versions of the same rule either. There was a (valid) assumption in your game that the mafia got free rule changes and that needed to be defended against; in this game there is no such assumption, partially I would guess because no changes are actually guaranteed to get in, and they take time, so letting the mafia have a fiat change would be excessive.

    I would also like to point out that there was no complaining that I could see until the second half of that long day. Long days are draining to the village under the best of circumstances (especially one where most of us didn't even notice until around close time), creating lots of apathy in the second day of having to keep track of more than usual. That day was essentially just a clusterfuck with Burnage doing his thing too.


    Essentially, it boils down to this: you are arguing that the extra village effort to handle 3 or 4 possible debates instead of 2 is insurmountable and will cause everyone to abandon the game. I find that position to be incredibly silly.

    Finally, I leave you with one reason to enact this change. It forces hosts to determine if this is a thing they want to have in their games. By adding it into the expected meta for a rule-change game, hosts must then compensate either by accounting for it, or explicitly banning it. This is an inherent good. By breaking games, we force better designed games in the future.
  • TheRoadVirusTheRoadVirus Well then, no time to lose. I'm the Doctor. Do everything I tell you, don't ask stupid questions, and don't wander off.Registered User regular
    Lockeout wrote: »
    There were several versions of different proposals to get more seer calls but none of them made it to debate. We should try to come up with something definitive on that front.
    I propose that each day the top two dodgerblue vote-getters are publicly seered, with the results posted in narration. I challenge The Anonymous to argue otherwise.

    Also TheRoadVirus for trying to have fun instead of being a fuddy duddy.

    Response: I have edited your previous statement to better cover the actual facts, meatbag.
    Command: Onboard AI, remove Lockeout from the premises. Authorization 298R81272IESD182GTFO

  • PhyphorPhyphor Registered User regular
    I don't think it strange that one robot would support another!
  • LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    Gizzy wrote: »
    I think I like it better if Geth just straight up kills some folks - not give them guns.

    gizzy your sig is way too big.
    PoQ0cUz.jpg
  • LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    jdarksun wrote: »
    I have no idea how to track debates.

    i think simply tracking and linking the back and forth would be fine, and then inserting the winner.

    not that you have to do this, but it would work without actually having to track people's points.
    PoQ0cUz.jpg
  • Grunt's GhostsGrunt's Ghosts Registered User regular
    ATTACK:

    Knowledge is like a lightsaber. In the right hands, its a tool that helps preserve peace, strike down injustice, and help humanity out. In the wrong hands, its a weapon used to strike fear and confusion into the hearts of men, destroy the foundations of a group, and enslave the weak minded. When you talk to someone, you are handing them a lightsaber and hoping that they don't strike you down with it. I've watched too many time (and just pointed out some) where a player gave that lightsaber to someone just to doom the village because they didn't think about what they were saying. Even now, I got people PMing me, trying to confuse me in some way, so I don't shoot them (and you know who you are). The honest truth is that what once help the village find mafia is now the very poison the mafia is using to kill it. Time and Time again this happens. Allowing people to keep talking as ghost just means that instead of ending the thread of conversation, the mafia can kill someone AND keep talking to them. As the vig in this game, I want every threat eliminated. This rule will not only make that job harder, it will become a threat to the village. And I want to win.

    DEFEND

    Let's again put ourselves in mafia's shoes: This time, let's say that we are mafia, and that a ghost contacts us. What do we tell them? We are essentially put on the spot and we must lie to the ghost, instead of just the normal laying low\flying under radar etc.

    A nice side effect of this rule is that it requires the mafia to be proactive with their lies, which makes it easier for the village to catch them.

    Don't always consider worst case scenario (time phalla), nor the scenarios where a ghost talking would be a village home run (assuran's most recent one). Let's imagine what is most likely to happen, where passing the ghost rule would be a slight to moderate village win.

    Attack:

    I always consider the worst case scenario. The village has proven time and time again that when they have information, they give it away without a care. It happen in Niceville and Time Flux when I could view it. It must have happen in Deadlands. But whatever, now we are going in circles and I'm tired of arguing. Let the ghost come. When we lose this game because some ghost player couldn't help but run his mouth, then don't come crying to me. I know whats going to happen.
  • ObiFettObiFett Phalla Bounty Hunter Seeking ContractsRegistered User regular
    Lockeout wrote: »
    There were several versions of different proposals to get more seer calls but none of them made it to debate. We should try to come up with something definitive on that front.
    I propose that each day the top two dodgerblue vote-getters are publicly seered, with the results posted in narration. I challenge The Anonymous to argue otherwise.

    support


    Phalla Bounty Board coming soon...
  • TheRoadVirusTheRoadVirus Well then, no time to lose. I'm the Doctor. Do everything I tell you, don't ask stupid questions, and don't wander off.Registered User regular
    ObiFett wrote: »
    Lockeout wrote: »
    There were several versions of different proposals to get more seer calls but none of them made it to debate. We should try to come up with something definitive on that front.
    I propose that each day the top two dodgerblue vote-getters are publicly seered, with the results posted in narration. I challenge The Anonymous to argue otherwise.

    support



    Question: Is voting for someone in dodgerblue considered mandatory? If not, other units may not feel compelled to use such a mechanic.
  • Zombie HeroZombie Hero Registered User regular
    DEFEND:

    Permanent ghosts would allow TRV do continue to do his hilarious RP'ing throughout the entire game.
    Xbox Live: Pastalonius
  • TheRoadVirusTheRoadVirus Well then, no time to lose. I'm the Doctor. Do everything I tell you, don't ask stupid questions, and don't wander off.Registered User regular
    Observation: Blush capacitors operating at 172% normal capacity. Rerouting coolant to cranial circuitry to offset thermal output
  • jdarksunjdarksun Scion of Chaos Registered User regular
  • PhyphorPhyphor Registered User regular
    I would like to point out that the specific rule is
    Zombie Hero is debating that dead players should receive the ability to send and receive messages to a single player of their choice, and may alter that choice each day. Grunt's Ghost opposes this, and has first post.

    So he could only do it in PMs
  • jdarksunjdarksun Scion of Chaos Registered User regular
    Also, presumably someone would check out TRV as he was involved in that vote switcheroo yesterday.
  • Zombie HeroZombie Hero Registered User regular
    It stills exists, though
    Xbox Live: Pastalonius
  • TheRoadVirusTheRoadVirus Well then, no time to lose. I'm the Doctor. Do everything I tell you, don't ask stupid questions, and don't wander off.Registered User regular
    Claim: This one is innocent, as you have not witnessed any of the murderous acts it has may have committed. As such, you are bound by your rules and regulations to treat it as friendly.
    Statement: The upswelling of support for the continuation of this unit's life was not calculated, and has defied statistical predictions. Further algorithm corrections needed.
  • InvictusInvictus Registered User regular
    @Phyphor
    Was that post an attack or a defense?
  • InvictusInvictus Registered User regular
    FOR THE RECORD (emphasis added):
    Invictus wrote: »
    Note that I am not saying that this rulechange would destroy phalla, or anything so dramatic. I merely say that passing this rulechange would hurt the activity and vitality of the phalla community by both discouraging current and possible future participants.
    Phyphor wrote: »
    Essentially, it boils down to this: you are arguing that the extra village effort to handle 3 or 4 possible debates instead of 2 is insurmountable and will cause everyone to abandon the game. I find that position to be incredibly silly.

    I too find that position to be incredibly silly; that's one reason why I explicitly denied holding it. :P
  • Grunt's GhostsGrunt's Ghosts Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    DEFEND:

    Permanent ghosts would allow TRV do continue to do his hilarious RP'ing throughout the entire game.

    ATTACK: But not were I can see it. Who knows what he'll do once his circuits are fried. He already has a history of working with Sith Lords. Can you feel safe knowing that he's still out there. Functioning. Processing, Plotting.
    Grunt's Ghosts on
  • PhyphorPhyphor Registered User regular
    Pfft, what's a debate without extrapolation and hyperbole! (Also "destroy phalla" means to destroy the phalla community, "destroy this phalla" would mean just this game)

    That was a defend.
  • TheRoadVirusTheRoadVirus Well then, no time to lose. I'm the Doctor. Do everything I tell you, don't ask stupid questions, and don't wander off.Registered User regular
    Mockery: Am I all right? Oh, yes, Master, why, I am fine.

    Statement: I mean, I have only just been re-activated, only to find that there are sub-standard duplicates of me running all over the galaxy, corroding my good name. But if they are, in fact, hunting you, then I look forward to the opportunity to meet these units—and educate them in proper assassination protocols.
  • SLyMSLyM Registered User regular
    No one let pyphor or invictus ever debate again
    Steam Starcraft SLeague of Legends
  • kimekime Queen of Blades I am the SwarmRegistered User regular
    No, I like it, it's... a spectacle...
  • PhyphorPhyphor Registered User regular
    My walls of text shall cause more people to give up than my rule change ever would
  • InvictusInvictus Registered User regular
    SLyM wrote: »
    No one let pyphor or invictus ever debate again

    I bolded the importants parts, just for you!
  • Zombie HeroZombie Hero Registered User regular
    Why hasn't either of you put another rule change in the pipeline?
    Xbox Live: Pastalonius
  • PhyphorPhyphor Registered User regular
    Invictus wrote: »
    SLyM wrote: »
    No one let pyphor or invictus ever debate again

    I bolded the importants parts, just for you!

    Whereas I force people to slog through mine or skip it entirely (everyone will skip it)
  • SeGaTaiSeGaTai Registered User regular
    So the only problem I see with the debates thus far is distracting everyone from you know voting. We have a few votes for TRV and lockeout. All I got for analysis is that TRV had an early vote lead at one point yesterday but that shifted to grunt's ghost so can't really analyze after that.

    The lockeout votes are like counter-bad 2 votes, if that makes sense. Doesn't really seem like it will inform us of much.
    PSN SeGaTai
Sign In or Register to comment.