Actually, one person dominating the /votetheme is almost as bad as one person dominating /starttheme. When you start a votetheme, you can suggest a theme to feature among the available themes to be voted, and you also get the first vote, which is used to determine which theme wins a vote in case of a tie. That means that if a same person monopolizes /votetheme, they are restricting other player's chance of choosing a theme as much as someone that monopolizes /starttheme.
The themes that can be voted should be restricted though. So it shouldn't be possible to play Zelda within 5 games of it previously being played. At least that was my understanding of it. If that is not how it works then the code will be changed so that it is how it works. I guess we can restrict /votetheme too if it is that much of a deal.
Yes, the themes that appear at /votetheme still follow the cooldown. The actual issue is having a single person dominate the theme selection process, be it with /starttheme or /votetheme.
I've talked to people that attempt to dominate the the first vote, so I'm still failing to see much of an issue. If someone tries to dominate the starting vote, it can always be changed as well due to other themes that are in the 'queue' of others to choose from, so really it is kind of easy but hard at the same time to constantly dominate themes in the voting process.
I agree that it's not a big issue, but still is an issue that could be fixed, specially because there's almost no reason to not have that restriction except maybe for non-peak times. Also, like I said before, the vote can be changed, but the first vote still gets an advantage, which, for some people, may be unfair if a fast spammer can monopolize it. EDIT: And I just saw people admiting they snipe /votetheme to prevent other people from /starttheme something else. IMO, restrict it.
How about a new addition to /playedgames where the info includes who won the games. It would be a nice touch to see who won the last few games. Like I said, it isn't completely necessary but a nice touch.
It might also take up too much space if village won or something. Just the side that won would be better.
There's nothing particularly wrong with that idea, just post it in Theme Critique & Review if you need someone to write a theme for you, or Mafia Review when you have the code completed. It will be dealt with accordingly from there. Good luck! Edit: I'm still suggesting a command that replenishes charges :x
About my idea for seeing who won games, how about /wins to see how many games yourself has won. Very similar to how you view tourwins and rankings but with mafia games.
IMO not a good idea. The criteria to determine who won would be too controversial. Mafia is a team game, so you can't simply mark people who finished the game alive as a winner, since players often sacrifice themselves to help their team. On the other side, it just doesn't feel right to have the entire team being marked as winner even if they died, as that is also quite misleading. Also, when we had Achievements, people would often manipulate the game to get them. I've seen people letting other sides win so they would get an achievement, and some kind of win count like that would just bring the same issues.
The main issue that I can see with that is regarding deadtalk. Having a player not in the game suddenly being in the game can lead to many situations where someone will enter the game with information neither they nor the player leaving should have.
In Oracle, there's an issue where all roles but Oracle are limited to two wishes/daykills (and Oracle only gets more than two if they use /see on a different person), because the "recharge" aspect of the daykill doesn't reset if a role is converted back to itself. I've created extra roles specifically to allow them to have more daykill chances, but it seems like an unnecessary solution if we could just have something specifically in the code to deal with it.
I'll probably end up coding it myself in the next year but: If no game has been started for like 5-10 minutes, then anyone should be able to /start a game (and non-peaks should automatically be enabled if they aren't already... such as a random 15 player -> 0 player drop), bypassing the "You started a game X games ago" limit.
IMO, non-peaks times by themselves should already allow for players to bypass the /start cooldown, regardless time.
The new Deadtalk feature is really cool. It helps keep people around after they die so the channel doesn't empty out after a long theme as much. Only problem is that apparently death isn't absolute. It seems you can pierce the veil by simply typing in "." - a single period. I forgot to save the log from when I discovered this, but the period doesn't appear with the [Dead] tag. I had a live player confirm that the period was visible after the game. So, while not lethal, this should probably be looked at.
I'd rather people called it Dead Chat or something else to not confuse with the Deadtalk that is against the rules :x About the period, don't worry about that. That will only show to yourself, no one else. It's for people to test for lag without flooding the chat. You can confirm that by joining with 2 alts and typing the period (your other alt will not see it).
Basically what Rice said above. Since you said someone confirmed they could see the period anyway, I tested with a dead player: Spoiler (20:46:54) *************************************************************************************** (20:46:54) ±Current Roles: Student, Student, Student, Teacher, Teacher. (20:46:54) ±Current Players: ChaoticLight, Coin Flip, DeadpoolFTW, Jack Bradley, miku96. (20:46:54) ±Time: Day 1 (20:46:54) It's time to vote someone off, type /Vote [name], you only have 30 seconds! : (20:46:54) *************************************************************************************** (20:47:02) Coin Flip: jerk? such mean words (20:47:13) Coin Flip: I don't like using mean words mean words are for bullies (20:47:15) Jack Bradley: Well, you're kinda just being hard to talk to. (20:47:24) *************************************************************************************** (20:47:24) Times Up! : (20:47:24) No one was voted off!: (20:47:24) *************************************************************************************** (20:47:24) ±Current Roles: Student, Student, Student, Teacher, Teacher. (20:47:24) ±Current Players: ChaoticLight, Coin Flip, DeadpoolFTW, Jack Bradley, miku96. (20:47:24) ±Time: Night 2 (20:47:24) Make your moves, you only have 35 seconds! : (20:47:24) *************************************************************************************** (20:47:26) Coin Flip: excuse me auth Jack Bradley is bullying me (20:47:28) Jack Bradley: And rude. (20:47:32) Coin Flip: I don't appreciate this form of player put-down (20:47:47) ChaoticLight: i agree with Jack Bradley (20:47:54) Coin Flip: oh so you both are bullies (20:47:57) 22: be nice y'all (20:47:58) ChaoticLight: your being rude Coin Flip (20:47:59) *************************************************************************************** (20:47:59) Times Up! : (20:47:59) ±Kill: Jack Bradley (Kindergartner) was brutally expelled. (20:47:59) *************************************************************************************** (20:47:59) ±Current Roles: Student, Student, Student, Teacher. (20:47:59) ±Current Players: ChaoticLight, Coin Flip, DeadpoolFTW, miku96. (20:47:59) ±Time: Day 2 (20:47:59) You have 30 seconds to debate who are the bad guys! : (20:47:59) *************************************************************************************** (20:48:00) 22: drop the convo (20:48:02) Coin Flip: 22 they are bullying me (20:48:07) Coin Flip: and Teacher is targetting me (20:48:11) ChaoticLight: -.- (20:48:12) miku96: lol (20:48:14) Coin Flip: She just called me a jerk for no reason (20:48:14) *** ChaoticLight facepalm (20:48:16) miku96 left the channel. (20:48:23) Coin Flip: obvious bully needs to be muted for bullying but droppin (20:48:29) *************************************************************************************** (20:48:29) ±Current Roles: Student, Student, Student, Teacher. (20:48:29) ±Current Players: ChaoticLight, Coin Flip, DeadpoolFTW, miku96. (20:48:29) ±Time: Day 2 (20:48:29) It's time to vote someone off, type /Vote [name], you only have 30 seconds! : (20:48:29) *************************************************************************************** (20:48:35) miku96 joined the channel. (20:48:36) ±Game: Coin Flip wants ChaoticLight expelled! (20:48:39) froggydojo joined the channel. (20:48:41) Coin Flip: die buly i mean scum (20:48:44) *** ChaoticLight facepalms with a chair thats on fire inside a nuke iinside an atombomb laces with poison (20:48:48) ±Game: ChaoticLight wants Coin Flip expelled! (20:48:50) Coin Flip: oh hey froggydojo how is the failure theme going (20:48:52) Coin Flip: i mean (20:48:52) Diamondslight is active and ready for battles. (20:48:54) ±Game: DeadpoolFTW wants Coin Flip expelled! (20:49:00) ChaoticLight: Coin Flip is a studeny (20:49:01) *************************************************************************************** (20:48:06) 22: hey (20:48:09) 22: could you do me a favor (20:48:13) 22: and type "." (20:48:16) 22: just the period (20:48:19) 22: in the chat (20:48:22) Jack Bradley: Why? (20:48:29) 22: i need to test if it's a bug (20:48:30) Jack Bradley: I did. (20:48:33) 22: for dead players (20:48:35) 22: ok (20:48:36) 22: thanks (20:48:44) Jack Bradley: You can do it when you're muted too. (20:48:49) 22: I know (20:48:59) 22: I'm just checking if it conflicts with the deadtalk scripts now (20:49:07) Jack Bradley: Ah, okay. Although I have heard of a certain Android thing which makes the ping period show to all users. Not sure how that works though. EDIT: Seen on desktop as 22. Spoiler (20:54:47) *************************************************************************************** (20:54:47) ±Game: Coin Flip started a game with theme RPS (Rock-Paper-Scissors)! (20:54:47) ±Game: Type /Join to enter the game! (20:54:47) *************************************************************************************** (20:54:47) ±Game: One day, some children were arguing about who was the best at Rock-Paper-Scissors. After a massive uproar, a strange child said ''Hey, just go into teams. I'll be alone. Team that wins is the best'', and thus started the Super Mega Ultra Rock-Paper-Scissors Tournament! In as much as teams of 4, the teams will try to outdo each other and try to be the last one standing! A/N This theme runs on an HP system based on effectiveness. Good hit means 2HP for the opponent lost, bad hit means none lost, hitting the same type will cause your opponent to lose 1HP. Now you can Team Talk with your Known Partners! If you have any comments, questions, concerns, or bugs, please contact either obey to kyubey or Joeypals/Ariana_Grande/Xtina. (20:54:47) ±Game: Coin Flip joined the game! (20:54:49) ±Game: froggydojo joined the game! (20:54:50) ±Game: -Knight- joined the game! (20:54:50) Mikky Ekko: . (20:54:52) ±Game: Scythorus joined the game! (20:54:53) Jack Bradley: Bawk. Bawk. Bawk.... (20:54:53) ±Game: 22 joined the game! (20:54:54) ±Game: Jack Bradley joined the game!
MAs not in the game should be able to view Deadchat. At the very least, sMAs should be able to. People could break rules in there, or complain about someone that did break a rule, allowing an attentive MA to address the situation faster
Example: There was an evader a few days ago (the one who kept saying "HEIL SKARMPISS" among other things) who kept spamming it in deadchat. Luckily I was actually playing the game and had been the only one else dead at the time, and was able to report it.
I'd like a way for a role to be seen by two groups at once in the "team" part. Not necessarily an addition to winningSides (since some could be secret), but that is my primary reasoning.
I think that in addition to a boolean, userMustBeVisited, targetMustBeVisited, userMustVisit and targetMustVisit should also be arrays (they are just booleans now). For example: Code (text): { "role": "282384324", "translation": "Killer", "side": "undefined", "help": "Type /Kill [name] to kill someone!", "info": "Basic killer. Sided with Dry Lint.", "actions": { "kill": { "target": "AnyButTeam", "common": "Team", "priority": 20, "userMustBeVisited": ["mafia", "mafia2"], "targetMustVisit": ["ww", "don_mafia"] }, } }, With the above code: mafia and mafia2 must visit 282384324, and 282384324's target must visit ww and don_mafia.
What's the usefullness of this? And on which list would that role see itself? Unlikely to happen. Different from most booleans, those properties have actually 3 values: true, false and undefined. If you don't set it (undefined), it will work normally; if you have it true, then the action only works if the user/target visits/is visited; if false, they only works if they are NOT visiting/visited. As an array, it would not be possible to defined if you want it as true or false. Also, your description said "must visit ww and don_mafia", but it would also be necessary to specify if you want an "and" or "or" there.
The "current team". When seeing team on startup, you see all roles in the current team (If mafia) including conspirators set to them. Village would have it in the current team only since no team reveal. Solidifies who's on team and who isn't if all properly set. Just makes it easier per team.
Let me for once post a suggestion myself (and this only because this is not code-related). IMO, theme removal should follow a system similar to PO suspects. Every 3~4 weeks a few themes are nominated to be removed, then a thread is made to discuss its removal or not. The main point of this suggestion is the 3~4 weeks part, as there are usually more themes coming in than out, but many of those end underplayed, so maybe have them under the pressure of being removed could help towards improving the overall quality of themes.
There was a time where Fuzzy was going to be build a QC team only for re-review/evalutation this underplayed themes starting with KH, FMA, Eclipse,Transport, Asylum, ClanWar,Creatures, Chinchous, Hunter, PokeScum and Royals which have been disabled the previous 4 february , but I have no idea why in the end didn't happened. However if it should be done this every 3~4 weeks i suggest that this should coincide with the last 2 weeks of the months instead with the first one as it happened the previous february. Anyway because you are the one that is proposing this IceKirby: what would you think it is the minimal requirement to send a theme as candidate for theme removal day? I mean: it should be something like "If a theme has not been played an amount at least equal to 5% of the time that the first position theme has been played this month it should be removed!" ? Or there are some other requirements that this theme needs to be taken in consideration to be re-reviewed ? Oh another thing, maybe another requirement should be that a theme to be re-evalued it should have been accepted on server at least 1 month, this way we would have more information about this themes and we can this way even avoid to eliminate a theme that has not been played only because is still unknown to players.
To be honest, I still didn't think how all details would work, my focus was on suggesting that we need a flow of themes being retired too (even if small). IMO, that shouldn't be judged merely by playing frequency. Other factors could be average number of players per game (keeping in mind the minplayer for the theme), theme's relevancy to the channel, players drop when theme is started, etc. Or it could simply be a nomination-based system, where people would say which themes should be considered for removal discussion. And I think 2-3 months is the minimum period a theme should be not elegible to removal discussion. 1 month is not enough time. Also, just to be clear, my suggestion doesn't say a theme has to be removed every month; It would be possible for a few themes to be nominated but none of them removed due to good discussion and stuff; The important part is that themes that could very well be retired shouldn't simply lay around until some sMA decide to make a cleanup.
I second this idea. It allows more intelligent discussion to be generated through mafia, as well as a common expression of ideas.
I had this idea for some sort of a leaderboard. I know what you're gonna say: "omg no way target and ban etc etc never." Well, this would work differently. Every couple of hours or so, a bot automatically starts a random theme. Any theme from the currently enabled themes is started and players can join. (of course, if it is non-peak time, only non-peak would be started, and vice-versa.) Here's what's different: let's say a game of Kirby starts, and Ax Knight dies night one. Well, if the Meta Knights end up winning the game, everyone who was on the team (even those who died) would receive a leader board point. Basically these points add up, and by the end of the month, whoever has the most points is declared "Mafia player of the month" or something like that, and the leaderboards reset. What do you guys think? o:
I think it's a good idea really and the idea of "you win even if you're dead" stems back to Forum Mafia. Why not make the leaderboards accessible /right after/ they stop keeping score for that time period? Scenario uno: we have Month X - Month Y, and over that time period Player 1 gets 13 points, while Player 2 has 7 points. When the Leaderboard is posted, it will now keep score of Month Y - Month Z. Targetting might be solved?
That pretty much sums it up. Even if you didn't show the leaderboard until the end of the month, it could encorage people to target the winner of the previous "event game".
Most leaderboards in the past couldn't work because people would just target the winners of pervious games, preventing them from winning any games. But this is different: if you die night one but you're team still manages to win, you'll still receive a point regardless if you died or not.
That's not how that issue works. The problem here is that if you have any kind of ranking, players will often be inclined to target them because they are officially known as good players, which would be a threat to them in any game. Think about how often MAs and other popular players die N1 very often. A leaderboard would only extend that to more players. Also, there's another issue here: when we had achievements, players would often try to manipulate the game's result to give their friends an achievement. This could very easily happen again.
I just realized that the revealPlayersMsg appears regardless of whether the role(s) is there or not. Is that intentional?