Newbie Setup (Matrix6 implemented)

[quadz08]

Yes.

[singersigner]

Yes.

He means the Matrix-style. We're opting for CES' with due credit to Quilford for helping getting the ball rolling.

Speaking of which.

Wholey crap.

Incoming...

[singersigner]

Hello everyone!

As has been previously discussed, we have FINALLY implemented the numerous amounts of changes we've discussed in the past year. Included in these changes are:

• updating the format of the OP so it's cleaner, and easier to read through for any relevant information
  
• changing the requirements for SEs from two completed games anywhere, to three completed games with one being from outside of The Road to Rome
  
• changing the requirements for ICs from five completed games anywhere, to five completed games with at least two being from outside of The Road to Rome
  
• newbie games will now have five newbies, three SEs, and one IC
  
• updating the newbie setup to reflect the Matrix6 format, with one of six options that I'll be randomizing, as shown below:

1. town jailkeeper, vanilla townie, mafia goon
2. mafia roleblocker, town cop, town doctor
3. town 1-shot bulletproof, mafia goon, town tracker
4. town jailkeeper, mafia roleblocker, town 1-shot bulletproof
5. vanilla townie, town cop, mafia goon
6. mafia goon, town doctor, town tracker

Wiki entries for the completed games and Matrix6 have been updated accordingly. The link to the Newbie Information on the wiki will be updated shortly. Wooooo!

[Mr. Flay]

*\o/*

[Rob14]

Ok, maybe I'm just stupid, but....

Doesn't a 3x3 matrix produce 8 options, not 6?

3 columns, 3 rows, 2 diagonals

Am I missing something?

[quadz08]

No diags are used in the setup.

[Rob14]

Well that would explain it.

[Mr. Flay]

I don't see an elaboration on this at first glance: I assume the Bulletproof passive is not Roleblockable, but that should probably be specified one way or the other.

:edit: Nevermind, talked to quadz, edited into wiki.

[StrangerCoug]

I'm under the impression that the fact that you can only roleblock an active ability is standard.

[Mr. Flay]

True, but back in the day we had a Doctor self-protect go through in a Newbie Game, because we didn't think we had to specify...

[StrangerCoug]

If you feel you have to make standards explicit because somebody somewhere doesn't know/care about them, fine.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Sorry all, I haven't been following the thread properly, so this may be answered elsewhere.

For the M6 setup

1. town jailkeeper, vanilla townie, mafia goon
2. mafia roleblocker, town cop, town doctor
3. town 1-shot bulletproof, mafia goon, town tracker
4. town jailkeeper, mafia roleblocker, town 1-shot bulletproof
5. vanilla townie, town cop, mafia goon
6. mafia goon, town doctor, town tracker

do we care that the Tracker will automatically catch Mafia in setup 3 above (assuming they track a Mafia)? The BP Townie ability is passive, so he can't be tracked. I don't see an issue with it, just throwing it out there.


Vel

[Leafsnail]

do we care that the Tracker will automatically catch Mafia in setup 3 above (assuming they track a Mafia)? The BP Townie ability is passive, so he can't be tracked. I don't see an issue with it, just throwing it out there.

The tracker will actually always know they've hit mafia if they track a successful kill - the only other town PRs that can exist are doctor (if they visited that person there wouldn't have been a kill on them) and bulletproof (who wouldn't produce a track result). I'd say they're still weaker than a cop though, since they have to target one particular mafia member (and the mafia can turtle and not kill if they really have to).

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

False tracker positives are generally going to be rare and unfun in such small games anyway. A weaker role like Reporter (Variant 1) does need false positives but I prefer Tracker without.

[Tierce]

3. town 1-shot bulletproof, mafia goon, town tracker
6. mafia goon, town doctor, town tracker

do we care that the Tracker will automatically catch Mafia in setup 3 above (assuming they track a Mafia)? The BP Townie ability is passive, so he can't be tracked. I don't see an issue with it, just throwing it out there.

Not quite, though almost. Look at setup 6; it has a doctor. Before claims, the tracker in 3 doesn't know which setup he is in. If he tracks someone to a dead body, he's obviously following a goon, but he might track a goon to the BP and consequentially think he tracked the doctor in 6. It's still a situation that screws that scum over and confirms tracker AND BP if they are both alive in massclaim, though, but it takes some doing to get the tracker to track scum to that particular role.

[Zachrulez]

I'm kind of concerned that both changing the SE requirements and upping the amount of SE slots is going to bottleneck the queue. Plus it seems like we're sending a mixed message in discouraging people from frequenting the queues by upping the requirements, and then encouraging it by upping the slots...

[Mr. Flay]

Well what we'd really like is to get back to two ICs per game, but there's a shortage, and has been for a long time. So upping the requirements slightly for SEs seems like a decent compromise.

Also I don't know if you've looked at the SE list lately, but it's a million miles long. Not much risk of running out soon, and if we do, going back to 6:2:1 is easy.

[Zachrulez]

Well what we'd really like is to get back to two ICs per game, but there's a shortage, and has been for a long time. So upping the requirements slightly for SEs seems like a decent compromise.

Also I don't know if you've looked at the SE list lately, but it's a million miles long. Not much risk of running out soon, and if we do, going back to 6:2:1 is easy.

I'm aware of how long it is, my consideration is to the possibility of a future shortage and I'm not really a fan of switching the number of SEs based on what the queue is like over and over again. I would just load more SEs in to get rid of the backlog. (This used to be done, I don't know why it doesn't still happen.)

How many people in the SE line have looked into replacing into games? That was what I tended to do when I wanted a game right away.

Also, have you thought about forcing players with IC status to actually play as an IC? How many people are currently SEing that have IC status?

[Quilford]

Huzzah!

*sneaks off to copyright the Matrix format*

[quadz08]

Forcing people to IC is a terrible idea. If you don't want to IC, you're practically guaranteed to not do the job properly.

Also, if the SE queue gets shorter, then I imagine the number of SEs per game will drop to match.

[Zachrulez]

Forcing people to IC is a terrible idea. If you don't want to IC, you're practically guaranteed to not do the job properly.

Also, if the SE queue gets shorter, then I imagine the number of SEs per game will drop to match.

Arguably you have no business in the newbie queue if you have IC status and aren't willing to IC?

[Tierce]

Arguably you have no business in the newbie queue if you have IC status and aren't willing to IC?

No? That's why we have the SE roles, people who are demonstrating what 'typical' play is in MS. Very few people bother to explain things to newbies in games outside RtR, so why should we make sure that

everyone will explain everything in RtR

? I understand it would be kind, and goodness knows there are ICs who don't really explain a lot by default (and SEs who are fine with explaining a lot by default), but it could end up with newbies being overly coddled and unable to take the plunge if you ensure that every experienced player in RtR will be willing to explain every little bit of mafia theory.

EDIT: Adding to this that many SEs really have little clue about site meta outside the Newbie queue to begin with; the current SE queue is majorly composed by mid-2012-onward players, iirc. There is nothing wrong with that, obviously, but I remember that the SEs (and the IC!) in my first newbie game were little more than newbies themselves. Letting a few experienced SEs play without forcing a teaching position on them seems like a much wiser choice than imposing an IC position on them should they dare to sign up to SE (in which case several people would probably not sign up to SE-IC at all).

We don't really ever run out of ICs. When the queue runs low, people sign up. It's just that they don't do it all that often on a regular basis, but since November 2011 I have yet to see a game pending to start because a starting IC has not been found.

[quadz08]

I would personally not ever IC. I appreciate those who do, but I simply do not feel that I would be any good at it, and would be doing the newbies a disservice by ICing. I would SE if we didn't have a million billion already. *shrug*

[Zachrulez]

Arguably you have no business in the newbie queue if you have IC status and aren't willing to IC?

No? That's why we have the SE roles, people who are demonstrating what 'typical' play is in MS. Very few people bother to explain things to newbies in games outside RtR, so why should we make sure that

everyone will explain everything in RtR

? I understand it would be kind, and goodness knows there are ICs who don't really explain a lot by default (and SEs who are fine with explaining a lot by default), but it could end up with newbies being overly coddled and unable to take the plunge if you ensure that every experienced player in RtR will be willing to explain every little bit of mafia theory.

EDIT: Adding to this that many SEs really have little clue about site meta outside the Newbie queue to begin with; the current SE queue is majorly composed by mid-2012-onward players, iirc. There is nothing wrong with that, obviously, but I remember that the SEs (and the IC!) in my first newbie game were little more than newbies themselves. Letting a few experienced SEs play without forcing a teaching position on them seems like a much wiser choice than imposing an IC position on them should they dare to sign up to SE (in which case several people would probably not sign up to SE-IC at all).

We don't really ever run out of ICs. When the queue runs low, people sign up. It's just that they don't do it all that often on a regular basis, but since November 2011 I have yet to see a game pending to start because a starting IC has not been found.

From my understanding SEs were never meant to have any teaching function whatsoever. They were for newbies who played more than a set number of games so they wouldn't keep taking up newbie slots and for players with IC status who didn't want to IC.

Which gets to another point I want to make about the perception of what it takes to be an IC. I think the role is overly glorified on the site. I've ICed several games, and I never really played any of the newbie games I ICed any differently than I would have a regular game. All you really need to do is answer questions for players when they have them or if they're not sure what to do, but aside from that the best thing you can do as an IC is teach by example by simply playing the game. You will teach newbies far more than you think by just playing. There's so much for them to learn just in breaking down your play after it's over and you explaining your play as necessary when it's over.

As far as I know I've never received any complaints for the way I've ICed and I've never had to go out of my way to put an IC hat on all the time, so basically I'm saying it's not a big deal to make people IC.

[Tierce]

There's so much for them to learn just in breaking down your play after it's over and you explaining your play as necessary when it's over.

Crux of the issue, IMO. Some ICs bail after a game is over without providing feedback.