Open Setup Certification Group

[Xylthixlm]

/in

I am also of the opinion that Xyl or JDodge should be hauled in for this. They have a different point of view than who I expect to be on this team.

I'm not wildly enthusiastic, but I'd be willing to help.

[Xylthixlm]

Meh.

/in since JDodge isn't.

[Xylthixlm]

Would it be wise or feasible for us to get together on AIM to discuss this?

Tuesday or Wednesday.

I'm fine with either, you guys? Korts is also a consideration, timezone being an element.

I could stay up late Wednesday, depending on what time approximately you intend to be up. I can be until 2-3 AM GMT+1 (8-9 PM East Coast Time) tops.

I get home at maybe 4 PM PST, that gives us 2 hours maximum window.

I get home at 7 PM PST, and I can only use AIM from home. So... probably not going to work.

[Xylthixlm]

Before we charge into certifying setups, maybe we should do some thinking about what sort of stuff to look for.

* Breaking strategies - there are a few of these that pop up over and over. It would be good to make a checklist to consider. Pairing, circling, hypocop, having a certain role always claim immediately (usually with doc)... what else?

* EV - games which have very high or low EVs under random lynches tend to be broken, but what's "very high" or "very low"?

* Degenerate endgames - kingmaker situations, happily ever after, any others? Even if these don't disqualify the setup we should decide what would happen if they come up.

* Game length - sometimes the game can end very quickly due to night actions. Should that be considered? Should it ever be disqualifying by itself?

* Night vs day game - how much of a game can be decided by correct night choices?

[Xylthixlm]

I'm all for handing PMs and rulesets to the new mods. They can use them as reference when they design their own game.

[Xylthixlm]

We should borrow Tarhalindur's format.

Then the crunchy bits can be predone as part of the setup, and the actual mod can write the flavor.

A few paragraphs of italicized flavor text or a relevant quote.

Welcome to [GAME NAME],

[PLAYERNAME]

. You are

[ROLE NAME] (from [POINT OF ORIGIN])

. [Flavor text justifying that role name's presence and abilities in the game.]

You are a

[FACTION AND ROLE CLASS]

. [BASE FACTIONAL ABILITIES, IF NECESSARY]. [In addition to your abilities as a a member of FACTION,] You have the following special abilities:

Factional Abilities [NON-TOWN ONLY]:

[ABILITY 1 NAME]

- [ABILITY 1 EFFECT].

(Reminder text if necessary.)

(note: almost always a falseclaim ability)
[OTHER FACTIONAL ABILITIES, IF ANY, GO HERE]

Passive Abilities [IF APPLICABLE]:

[ABILITY 2 NAME]

- [ABILITY 2 EFFECT].

(Reminder text if necessary.)

[OTHER PASSIVE ABILITIES, IF ANY, GO HERE]

Active Abilities [IF APPLICABLE]:

ABILITY 3 NAME

- [ABILITY 3 EFFECT].

(Reminder text if necessary.)

[OTHER ACTIVE ABILITIES, IF ANY, GO HERE]

Please note that you may only use one active ability per day. [CHANGE IF ROLE ALLOWS MULTIPLE ABILITY USES OR HAS FURTHER RESTRICTIONS]

[WIN CONDITION] (Note: Usually "You win when all other factions have left the game, or nothing can prevent the same.")

Please confirm via [CONFIRMATION METHOD].

[Xylthixlm]

Well... let's start by certifying some setups, and then we can work on role PMs if we run out of other things to do

I'm pretty sure we can safely certify C9 and vengeful without any major changes.

[Xylthixlm]

Rebels in the Palace confusion

(by the way I have no idea how that setup ever got to Little Italy)

It has an uninformed majority, an informed minority, and lynches. Why shouldn't it go in Little Italy?

[Xylthixlm]

That doesn't need to extend to streamlined role PMs; just to working out all cases beforehand.

EDIT: I don't have a problem with requiring setup-designers to write sample PMs, but this doesn't necessarily cover all cases as you're implying--for example, whether a roleblocker or a gaoler would get priority. And it shouldn't keep newbmods from typing up their own PMs as long as they're functionally the same.

I think the problem is that newbmods may not know which differences are functional.

[Xylthixlm]

I think anything that's run 3 times without problems is safe enough. Going by mith's list those would be

C9
F11
Pie E7 (1, 11, 20)
Vengeful (7, 8, 14, 15, 26, 49, 58, 64, 75, 77, 92, 123)

Bird C9 (27, 98, 117)

(flagged by Xyl)

Trendy and Subversive C9 (90, 91, 94)

(flagged by Xyl)

Lovers Nightless (97, 102, 113)

Basic Twelve Player (3, 9, 54)

(flagged by Lord Gurgi)

Masons and Monks (12, 23, 56)

(flagged by Adel)

Strawberry (17, 46, 62)

(flagged by Adel)

Polygamist (76, 83, 88)

(flagged by Adel)

Near-Vanilla (14, 53, 93, 122)

The New C9 (50, 60, 81, 104)

(flagged by Adel)

Nightless Vanilla (6, 19, 41, 79)

(flagged by Xyl)

If anyone wants more discussion any of those setups, speak up and we'll flag that setup for the next pass. Then we can approve the rest by acclamation.

[Xylthixlm]

I'll flag Bird C9, Trendy and Subversive C9, and Nightless Vanilla as needing some discussion.

[Xylthixlm]

I'm assuming that "Vengeful" is the 5P setup. But I could be wrong, in which case I flag vengeful 7P.

[Xylthixlm]

If there are no further flags, I think we can approve that list for a first batch. shaft.ed? Korts?

[Xylthixlm]

If there are no further flags, I think we can approve that list for a first batch. shaft.ed? Korts?

I'm just a guy

You're on the list in the first post

[Xylthixlm]

I agree with certifying all the unflagged setups.

[Xylthixlm]

(Just out of curiosity: How many players would you guess are needed to balance, 50-50, a Vanilla game with 10 scum? I may post a little "balance quiz" tomorrow, see how user perception matches up with the EVs.)

Let's see. Nightless games are balanced at a 3:1 town:scum ratio, so a night start game should need a 7:1 town:scum ratio. 70 townies, or 69 if it's day start.

EDIT: Actually that doesn't work exactly; a night start game isn't quite the same as a nightless game with half as many players but the same number of scum, because the scum in the nightless game have more voting power. So, more like 65 townies or so.

EDIT2: I think I've got a fundamental error here. Grrrr.

EDIT3: Oh yeah, nice big fundamental error.

[Xylthixlm]

Am I alone in thinking that the relation between size and power of mafia groups is not linear?

I see 2:4 or even 2:5 as being much more balanced than 4:8 or 3:9.

It actually is linear in nightless. With nightkills, not so much.

[Xylthixlm]

Doesn't work.

[Xylthixlm]

Okay, here's the setups that were flagged:

Bird C9 (27, 98, 117)

(flagged by Xyl)

Trendy and Subversive C9 (90, 91, 94)

(flagged by Xyl)

Basic Twelve Player (3, 9, 54)

(flagged by Lord Gurgi)

Masons and Monks (12, 23, 56)

(flagged by Adel)

Strawberry (17, 46, 62)

(flagged by Adel)

Polygamist (76, 83, 88)

(flagged by Adel)

The New C9 (50, 60, 81, 104)

(flagged by Adel)

Nightless Vanilla (6, 19, 41, 79)

(flagged by Xyl)

Let's start with nightless vanilla since I expect that will be easiest

I definitely think that nightless vanilla games belong in the open queue. However, we should discuss specific sizes & scum-counts. The theoretical 50% point (with random lynches) for vanilla nightless is 1 scum:3 townies. I think that's a good balance, so I'd suggest certifying these three setups:

2:6 vanilla nightless
3:9 vanilla nightless
4:12 vanilla nightless

Thoughts?

[Xylthixlm]

We could certify a variable-players nightless vanilla setup (game starts at a preset time with however many players are signed up), with the number of scum depending on the number of players. It would be good as an always-offered option, although it might need some tweaking on how often they run.

7-9 players: 2 scum (2:5 to 2:7)
10-13 players: 3 scum (3:7 to 3:10)
14-16 players: 4 scum (4:10 to 4:12)
17-20 players: 5 scum (5:12 to 5:15)

[Xylthixlm]

I don't think the argument about "obvtown" holds water. If a

scum

manages to get counted as "obvtown", they'll win! Nightless is basically a challenge where the scum try to get one of their number into the last two players lynched (or 2 of them into the last 4, or 3 into the last 6, etc), and the town try to stop them.

[Xylthixlm]

I'd break that down differently:

6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
9-12 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:9)
13-16 players: 4 scum (4:9 to 4:12)

Also, given the number of 7, 9, and 12 player setups that are run all the time anyway, I'd propose that we consider excluding them from the setups that can be run with variable numbers (Vanilla, Nightless, and Lovers being the most likely, I guess).

That table looks fine to me.

I don't see the point of excluding specific numbers from variable-numbers; if exactly 12 people sign up for nightless vanilla in whatever the window is, let them play nightless vanilla with 12 people.

[Xylthixlm]

Those results surprise me a bit, but okay. More scum are needed.

[Xylthixlm]

Ew. Statistics. Let's see if I can remember this, I try to repress it....

To do this correctly, you need a hypothesis and a null hypothesis. Then you calculate the probability of seeing the results you saw if the null hypothesis is true. If it's low enough (usually 5%) you reject the null hypothesis.

The null hypothesis here would be that town wins at most the amount you would expect from random lynches (1/3). The hypothesis is that the town does better. Assuming the null hypothesis, the chance of town winning all three times is 1/27, or 3.7%. That exceeds our 5% significance level, so we reject the null hypothesis; the data is enough to conclude that town probably does better than the random lynch EV in 4:8 nightless.

How much

better is an open question.

[Xylthixlm]

My dad is a statistician and my mother is a biologist. I'm a math nerd, but for some reason I hate statistics but like biology. Go figure.

[Xylthixlm]

Based on the data so far I say go with 4:8 instead of 3:9. If there's a streak of scum wins we can revisit that decision.

[Xylthixlm]

We'll get to new setups eventually. Right now we have enough to do .

[Xylthixlm]

Fine. We approve vanilla nightless with the following scum ratios:

6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
9-11 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:8)
12-16 players: 4 scum (4:8 to 4:12)

If there are no objections, let's move on to more interesting stuff.

[Xylthixlm]

6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
9-12 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:9 and 4:8)
13-16 players: 4 scum (4:9 to 4:12 and 5:11)

I added two extra ratios.

You broke the formatting. You're actually suggesting this:

6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
9-11 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:8)
12 players: 3 or 4 scum (3:9 or 4:8)
13-15 players: 4 scum (4:9 to 4:11)
16 players: 4 or 5 scum (4:12 or 5:11)

I'd really like to nail down those "or"s.

[Xylthixlm]

Speaking of prisoner's dilemmas, is there any way to resolve symmetrical ones without a heavy chance of a town win that didn't involve the town failing to catch scum up to that point?

Shootout Rule:

If night starts with three players alive, all of whom are on different teams, a gun battle breaks out which kills everyone (including the poor innocent townie who gets caught in the crossfire). The game is a draw.

[Xylthixlm]

Let's deal with the one-scumgroup setups first.

I move that "Trendy and Subversive C9" be taken out back, shot, and buried with all the other setups that contain a nurse and/or backup cop.

[Xylthixlm]

Can we finish up with Monks?

2v2v9 seems good enough to me, can we certify?

Slow down. 2-scumteam setups need deeper analysis.

[Xylthixlm]

IMHO, cop and doc versus mafia is broked or sucky.

We aren't worrying about sucky. Why is Cop + Doc + 7 Townies, vs. 3 mafia broken.

The cop claims, then the town nolynches repeatedly while the mafia frantically tries to nightkill the doc before the cop can get too many results.

[Xylthixlm]

Adding a mafia roleblocker would go a long way towards fixing the setup. Still not sure on the overall balance level, though.

I don't like prohibiting No Lynch; it feels like a band-aid for the fundamental problem that the town is more powerful at night than the mafia.

[Xylthixlm]

After some discussion in Site Ideas, I am starting to implement some of the suggested changes in the way we choose Open Setups to be run. The first change is a split in the discussion thread. The (renamed) Open Setup Ideas and Discussion thread remains open for posting new setup ideas. This thread will continue discussion of these setups, with the goal of "certifying" certain setups which meet some number of basic criteria.

Among these criteria are:


The setup must be Open or Semi-Open.

The setup must qualify as "Normal".

For the most part, approved setups should be small (5-12 players).

Setups must retain the basic premise of Mafia; the outcome of the game should depend primarily (though not necessarily entirely) on whether or not the pro-town players can determine the identities of the Mafia through their posting and behaviour. "Broken" setups (setups where the town has a strategy which maximizes their chances of winning through "Following the Cop" or similar methods should not be considered. (Note: This item probably needs clarification.)


This list should not be considered complete or final in any way; rather, it is a starting point for discussion.

Part of our mandate is deciding what criteria we use for approving setups.

[Xylthixlm]

I'd say reject it and kick it back to open setup discussion for a fix.

[Xylthixlm]

I'm leaning towards certifying trendy/subversive, although I seem to remember there were two versions of it when Thesp originally posted it. I'm going to dig it up if necessary, but the two versions looked like this:

V1

1 of Cop/Nurse
1 of Doc/Deputy

V2

1 of Cop/Doc
1 of Nurse/Deputy

The latter is better for town because they have a power role guaranteed.

Also,

certify Bird C9

Let's see...
V1:
25% cop + backup cop
25% doc + backup doc
25% cop + doc
25% nothing
V2:
25% cop + backup cop
25% doc + backup doc
25% cop only
25% doc only

So, which is better: 50% cop+doc and 50% nothing, or 50% cop and 50% doc?

Though, V1 has a possible follow-the-cop strategy: backup cop claims if there is one. If there's no backup cop, there must be a doc, so the cop can safely claim. That's a point against it.


I don't have anything in particular against Bird, but it is

not

a "C9" setup: it's fully open rather than semi-open. It needs a rename at the very least.

[Xylthixlm]

Confusion
1 Roleblocker
1 Goon

1 of Cop/Nurse/Doc
1 of Doc/Deputy/Cop
3 Townies

No.

[Xylthixlm]

What is this, "Gradually change every setup until it becomes F11"?

[Xylthixlm]

No objection on Polygamist.

[Xylthixlm]

vote: Kill Strawberry

[Xylthixlm]

What was The New C9 again?

[Xylthixlm]

*twitch*

[Xylthixlm]

Vote: The New C9 sleeps with the fishes

If anyone wants to run it again, they can always do it in New York. It's too large and too complicated for the open setup list.

[Xylthixlm]

New mods can run setups from the Open Games list.
20-player games are not good games for new mods to run.
Therefore, 20-player games should not be on the Open Games list.

That doesn't mean 20-player open games are bad, just that they should go through one of the other lists.

[Xylthixlm]

2 v 2 v N, with random lynches, 10000 trials, day start:

Code: Select all

--- 3 townies ---
Town 1081, Mafia1 4253, Mafia2 4446, Draw 220
Average length 2.11, std dev 0.49
--- 4 townies ---
Town 1050, Mafia1 3981, Mafia2 4002, Draw 967
Average length 2.59, std dev 0.50
--- 5 townies ---
Town 1313, Mafia1 3811, Mafia2 3758, Draw 1118
Average length 2.86, std dev 0.48
--- 6 townies ---
Town 1694, Mafia1 3995, Mafia2 4106, Draw 205
Average length 3.24, std dev 0.56
--- 7 townies ---
Town 1708, Mafia1 3773, Mafia2 3859, Draw 660
Average length 3.65, std dev 0.51
--- 8 townies ---
Town 2023, Mafia1 3614, Mafia2 3611, Draw 752
Average length 3.98, std dev 0.56
--- 9 townies ---
Town 2159, Mafia1 3817, Mafia2 3865, Draw 159
Average length 4.34, std dev 0.59
--- 10 townies ---
Town 2230, Mafia1 3612, Mafia2 3701, Draw 457
Average length 4.76, std dev 0.62
--- 11 townies ---
Town 2391, Mafia1 3448, Mafia2 3635, Draw 526
Average length 5.08, std dev 0.65
--- 12 townies ---
Town 2663, Mafia1 3660, Mafia2 3535, Draw 142
Average length 5.45, std dev 0.71
--- 13 townies ---
Town 2756, Mafia1 3397, Mafia2 3451, Draw 396
Average length 5.83, std dev 0.72
--- 14 townies ---
Town 2835, Mafia1 3356, Mafia2 3435, Draw 374
Average length 6.18, std dev 0.76
--- 15 townies ---
Town 2943, Mafia1 3395, Mafia2 3527, Draw 135
Average length 6.56, std dev 0.81

Edit: Redone to correctly account for draws.
Edit2: Script was bugged, see next page.

[Xylthixlm]

It looks like the basic question in 2 v 2 v N setups is "How long do you want the game to last before the town loses?"

[Xylthixlm]

was that with each scum group using a random NK?

Yes.

[Xylthixlm]

Huh... there's a really interesting pattern there. It seems there are fewer draws when the number of townies is a multiple of 3.

[Xylthixlm]

It might help if I make sure that double kills are handled correctly. One of these days I'm going to write a good simulator instead of the hackish Perl script I'm using

Code: Select all

--- 3 townies ---
Town 1002, Mafia1 4335, Mafia2 4321, Draw 342
Average length 2.16, std dev 0.52
--- 4 townies ---
Town 1178, Mafia1 3773, Mafia2 4024, Draw 1025
Average length 2.63, std dev 0.50
--- 5 townies ---
Town 1448, Mafia1 3909, Mafia2 3844, Draw 799
Average length 2.90, std dev 0.50
--- 6 townies ---
Town 1743, Mafia1 3932, Mafia2 3955, Draw 370
Average length 3.32, std dev 0.57
--- 7 townies ---
Town 1849, Mafia1 3661, Mafia2 3867, Draw 623
Average length 3.70, std dev 0.53
--- 8 townies ---
Town 2054, Mafia1 3617, Mafia2 3827, Draw 502
Average length 4.06, std dev 0.58
--- 9 townies ---
Town 2268, Mafia1 3618, Mafia2 3825, Draw 289
Average length 4.43, std dev 0.61
--- 10 townies ---
Town 2351, Mafia1 3539, Mafia2 3688, Draw 422
Average length 4.84, std dev 0.62
--- 11 townies ---
Town 2542, Mafia1 3543, Mafia2 3577, Draw 338
Average length 5.17, std dev 0.66
--- 12 townies ---
Town 2718, Mafia1 3500, Mafia2 3532, Draw 250
Average length 5.57, std dev 0.71
--- 13 townies ---
Town 2772, Mafia1 3372, Mafia2 3485, Draw 371
Average length 5.92, std dev 0.73
--- 14 townies ---
Town 2899, Mafia1 3422, Mafia2 3409, Draw 270
Average length 6.29, std dev 0.78
--- 15 townies ---
Town 3112, Mafia1 3305, Mafia2 3393, Draw 190
Average length 6.67, std dev 0.82

[Xylthixlm]

One more time, this time with kingmaker endgames (1v1v1 or 2v2v1) counted in addition to wins/draws.

Code: Select all

--- 3 townies ---
Town 1003, Mafia1 4307, Mafia2 4376, Draw 314 (Kingmaker 3798)
Average length 2.15, std dev 0.52
--- 4 townies ---
Town 1175, Mafia1 3843, Mafia2 3960, Draw 1022 (Kingmaker 3052)
Average length 2.62, std dev 0.50
--- 5 townies ---
Town 1358, Mafia1 3961, Mafia2 3909, Draw 772 (Kingmaker 3287)
Average length 2.90, std dev 0.51
--- 6 townies ---
Town 1706, Mafia1 3937, Mafia2 4014, Draw 343 (Kingmaker 2422)
Average length 3.31, std dev 0.57
--- 7 townies ---
Town 1874, Mafia1 3707, Mafia2 3814, Draw 605 (Kingmaker 2083)
Average length 3.70, std dev 0.53
--- 8 townies ---
Town 1991, Mafia1 3724, Mafia2 3767, Draw 518 (Kingmaker 2207)
Average length 4.05, std dev 0.59
--- 9 townies ---
Town 2224, Mafia1 3708, Mafia2 3786, Draw 282 (Kingmaker 1739)
Average length 4.44, std dev 0.61
--- 10 townies ---
Town 2391, Mafia1 3484, Mafia2 3663, Draw 462 (Kingmaker 1593)
Average length 4.82, std dev 0.63
--- 11 townies ---
Town 2458, Mafia1 3542, Mafia2 3627, Draw 373 (Kingmaker 1682)
Average length 5.18, std dev 0.66
--- 12 townies ---
Town 2737, Mafia1 3490, Mafia2 3531, Draw 242 (Kingmaker 1382)
Average length 5.57, std dev 0.71
--- 13 townies ---
Town 2821, Mafia1 3333, Mafia2 3513, Draw 333 (Kingmaker 1253)
Average length 5.94, std dev 0.73
--- 14 townies ---
Town 2993, Mafia1 3310, Mafia2 3450, Draw 247 (Kingmaker 1328)
Average length 6.29, std dev 0.80
--- 15 townies ---
Town 3113, Mafia1 3317, Mafia2 3385, Draw 185 (Kingmaker 1115)
Average length 6.67, std dev 0.82

Now, actual play might avoid kingmaker endings - I don't know - but with random lynches/kills, they're actually more common than town wins for any setup under 9 players! Does that worry anyone else as much as it does me?

[Xylthixlm]

The flaw in your plan is that you assume the scum will crosskill. Each scum knows they will lose anyways if there's a crosskill, so they may choose to shoot the townie and throw the game to the other scum. Not everyone takes the game-theoretical-optimal move if they think there's a 90% chance they'll lose anyways.

[Xylthixlm]

It looks like there are natural sweet spots for minimum draws and for minimum kingmaker situations, in a repeating pattern of 3. Unfortunately, they're offset. 2v2v9 is good for minimizing draws, and 2v2v10 is good for minimizing kingmaker situations.

I think I'd go with 2v2v10.

[Xylthixlm]

By the time it gets down to 1-1-1 it's usually pretty obvious who the townie is. If one of the scum can get away with fooling the other into thinking they're the townie, good for them. I've done that once or twice on IRC, but it's pretty hard.

The townie should just claim townie and no lynch, usually with a "fuck, you're both scum" in there for good measure.

[Xylthixlm]

That's why the EVs are based on random shooting

[Xylthixlm]

1-1-1 generally comes down to whichever remaining player is dumbest throwing the game to one of the other two.

[Xylthixlm]

Propose we cerify 2:2:9

[Xylthixlm]

I know this isn't in our list (except maybe as mountainous), but I'd like a certify of

mountainous 1:4

- day start, obviously. The EV is the simple (4/5) * (2/3) = 8/15 for scum, 7/15 for town.

[Xylthixlm]

Someone should go

troll

sift through the open setup discussion thread for any good ones to certify.

[Xylthixlm]

I tried running 1:4 mountainous for marathon day. It lasted three minutes.

I'm not sure if that's a minus or a plus.

[Xylthixlm]

Wheels on the C9+2:

Certify

Alternating C9:

Kill

. No need to make C9 even worse for the town.

Jungle Republic: looks ok, thoughts?

[Xylthixlm]

I didn't notice the scum bus driver in Wheels on the C9+2. Take that out and it's good.

Adel, boo.

[Xylthixlm]

Stick with the good ol' C9 formula: 50% none, 50% town.

[Xylthixlm]

A brief diversion on naming. (I think this has been said already, I'll say it again.)

A "C9" setup has two random options, A and B, with each of the following combinations equally likely:
AB (11)
- (00)
A (10)
B (01)
11001001 binary = C9 hexadecimal

A "F11" setup has three random options, A, B, and C, with each of the following combinations equally likely:
ABC (111)
A (100)
B (010)
C (001)
111100010001 binary = F11 hexadecimal

I oppose certification of any setup which has "C9" or "F11" in the name but does not follow the appropriate pattern.

[Xylthixlm]

We already have C9, F11, Bird 7P, and Pie E7. I don't think we need any more variations on "7 to 9 players with a cop and a doc".

[Xylthixlm]

Obviously.

That setup is actually interesting in a game theory way. If you are a townie, then the chance of your lover pair containing scum is 1/3, and the chance of each other lover pair containing scum is 5/9... so townies shouldn't vote to lynch their own pair. On the other hand, the chance of your lover being scum is 1/3, and the chance of any other player being scum is 5/18, so you should trust your own lover *less* than you trust other players.

[Xylthixlm]

Abstain

[Xylthixlm]

Wrong thread...

[Xylthixlm]

I have totally not been paying attention to this thread, what setups are currently being debated?

[Xylthixlm]

No no no.

Original Newbie, Reduced Even More

(day start)

• 2 Mafia Goons
  
• Cop, zero-shot
  
• Doctor
  
• 3 Townies

[Xylthixlm]

You know, we're supposed to be certifying setups, not inventing them. Yes I'm guilty here too.

I think we really have enough variations on the standard newbie, how many do we need? Let's work on something else.

[Xylthixlm]

I don't have an opinion either way, but my understanding was that new mods are eligible to mod Open Games of any size.