Proposed changes to phantom rules

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

Yeah, tps, one phantom can't be helped sometimes, but barely posting and getting 2+ phantoms in one game is unacceptable in 99% of situations. I've moved twice in the last couple weeks and have been without the internet for at least 2 days both times, and I still made sure I did what I could to read up on the game and post about the current situation. If I can do it when I'm not playing and my mom is getting a divorce and moving back in and then back out of her to-be ex husband's house, other people can do it when they're actually playing. Maybe I'm not compassionate enough, but maybe, just maybe, these people shouldn't be wasting every else's time.

[sertman]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

Yeah, tps, one phantom can't be helped sometimes, but barely posting and getting 2+ phantoms in one game is unacceptable in 99% of situations. I've moved twice in the last couple weeks and have been without the internet for at least 2 days both times, and I still made sure I did what I could to read up on the game and post about the current situation. If I can do it when I'm not playing and my mom is getting a divorce and moving back in and then back out of her to-be ex husband's house, other people can do it when they're actually playing. Maybe I'm not compassionate enough, but maybe, just maybe, these people shouldn't be wasting every else's time.

However, if my parents were getting a divorce, TWG would be the least of my worries.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

Believe me, life isn't too pretty right now, but I'm not going to abandon people who are depending on me if I can at all help it, even if these are people who I don't know that I've met through some "game on an internet message board." My family is important, my girlfriend is extremely important, and my friends are extremely important, but if I can make it back to the people of FFR once in a while whilst going through my mom's divorce, I will.

[MiniNeo]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

sertman, stoic is dbp's brother.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

OMG DOUBLE POST GUYZ

PARAGRAPH BREAK LOLZ

READ MY POSTZ PLZ!!11one1shiftone!exclamationpoint

TEST, ENTER ENTER, LOLZ

Ps. Props to Iggy for being dedicated (and half way intelligent) along with me.

EDIT: Yes, he is, which is why he's had such a hard time keeping up with everything. He's been a little late but he's made it back almost everytime he's supposed to have. If we can be at least present during one of life's trials, people with "FRIENDS LOLZ" can make it to a computer once in 48 hours. *tear* just for them. Peace.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

Ok this is important. Discussed every point from chardish's proposal and came up with a revised one. This is bascially what everyone wanted and agreed on for the most part so it's a lot better IMO.

1) If you get two phantoms during a game you will be kicked out of the game, issued a two game ban, a replacement will be found for you, and since you are replaced, you lose the game. (for recording puposes)

2) Any number of phantoms is counted as follows: one phantom = .001 votes; two phantoms = 1.001 votes; three phantoms = 1.002 votes.


Reasons for each number:
1) One phantom would equal your, "oops, I was out with friends or something came up." excuse. Two would be you not being able to stay active in the thread and therefore you need to be punished. If you get one phantom, either step it up or find someone to replace you. If you get replaced, you should lose the game because you have been ejected because of basically not caring and not living up to your duty to be somewhat active.

2) I don't see too many people getting three phantoms as they would be replaced with someone more active, but if it happens, then only the individual suffers and not the team. It also allows for whoever has the most phantoms to break a tie or something, without having an EoG bandwagon from the wolves (like we had last game).

Things thrown out:

There's no reason to silence a player. That gets confusing and revealing roles is advantegeous. Getting ejected is simpler for getting two phantoms.

All those other rules that comes when you get two phantoms are way too complicated to remember. I mean, having a vote count but not towards an insta? Anything beyond ejection probably would have to be explained to newer players and therefore hard on the host/players. Having modifers depending on the number of offenses makes it hard to keep track of everyone who has 2, 3, or 4 offenses and therefore hard to keep track of how many games they are banned for. A two game ban plus kicked out of the current game is good enough for getting two phantoms and you don't need to add more for more offenses.

In short: don't get two phantoms. one is fine but realize that there will be harsh punishments if you do get two. DON'T sign up if you don't think it's possible for you to stay active. Remember, these rules don't apply to you posting, they just apply to you voting. Meaning check the forums every 48 hours. Which is more than fair for everyone. Especially if you sign up for a game XD.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

btw, if you talk about ideas from now on, they should be from these rules because they are a lot clearer but still eliminate inactives from signing up/playing.

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

You throw around the idea of ejection like finding replacements is an easy thing to do.

[sertman]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

sertman, stoic is dbp's brother.

Then why isn't he yelling at his brother, who missed 2 days as the HOST, if it's that goddamn important to him

Seriously, if you think that FFR matters when you have an ugly divorce like that, you need to reevaluate your priorities.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

You throw around the idea of ejection like finding replacements is an easy thing to do.

Well just taking last game as an example. You had...

tass (volunteered to be a replacement btw)
talisman
guido
stretchy
kefit
omega

...not playing. Now granted I'm not expecting a huge amount of people to be ejected, but the players are there. You may have to drop jtwg or make sure they have 10 or less players of newer players only. But in all reality, after two or maybe three game of jtwg, you should be ready for twg.

This way you create a demand to play and get in. Which leads to the faster (and hopefully more active) players getting in and people willing to sub in just in case people need to drop out.

So no I don't see it being a problem. You take out necamus, tps, tokzic, ddr for thier bans and you still have two active players that normally play in games anyways. This doesn't count lower twg players that you could find either.

And if ejection is a problem, then keep the player in the game. Even if he gets more phantoms, it's not like it's going to hurt the rest of the team. Probably should get more game bans but still, easy solution.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

Seriously, if you think that FFR matters when you have an ugly divorce like that, you need to reevaluate your priorities.

lol real life is never more important than ffr forums. Seriously if there's a conflict between the two then I go with real life.

But just because your life is crazy doesn't mean the rest of the game should be affected by those who have the time to play. Get a couple game bans, straighten your life out, then come back ready to go... simple.


Ultimately, if you think about it, if someone is too busy to play in the first place then what's a couple games to sit away from? A two game ban may hurt someone who has time for it, but if you're already not posting, then two games isn't a big deal at all.

[User6773]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

I like my rules a lot better, frankly. Even if someone gets punished for getting two phantoms it still gives the humans one less day because the wolves can just keep that person alive and then insta them on the last day.

My rules create a scenario where people who choose not to play the game through the accrual of phantoms become a non-issue. I forgot to mention in my first post that people who are silenced can no longer post or vote for the rest of the game (in exchange for their role being revealed.)

It's like if you and your buddies are playing a game of cards and your friend leaves and doesn't come back and you don't know when he's going to be back, you flip over his hand so you can keep on playing. You don't sit there and keep on betting even while his hand is still hidden, and then award him all the chips if he happens to win.

Would people use this as a strategic ploy? Never. If you get withdrawn from the game, lose the game, and can't play for 2 more games (4 if this has already happened once), you're not going to do that just so your teammates can win.

As for the 200 word requirement, I think that it's necessary. In real Mafia if someone's being quiet you can force them to speak up or else get lynched (because what reason is there to not say anything otherwise?) In TWG if someone's being quiet you can't force them to speak because they might just be an inactive human and lynching someone you don't know about is a foolish option. We need to give people a reason to speak up. 200 words is not difficult - again, this post is 349 words and I'm making it before going to work for the day.

As for the Jurs situation, lay off her. If anyone, Kilga and Randumb should be blamed for turning the end of the game into a brainless charade. If I were in Jurs's shoes, I would have done the same thing.

[Tasselfoot]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

TWC will be getting together, hopefully tonight, to hammer this out.

[sertman]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

I like my rules a lot better, frankly. Even if someone gets punished for getting two phantoms it still gives the humans one less day because the wolves can just keep that person alive and then insta them on the last day.

Of course you like your rules a lot better. You also liked your last proposal a lot too, in order to "increase activity", and that did nothing but accelerate the inactivity and make it extremely overwhelming for new players to come into the game who haven't played before.

My rules create a scenario where people who choose not to play the game through the accrual of phantoms become a non-issue. I forgot to mention in my first post that people who are silenced can no longer post or vote for the rest of the game (in exchange for their role being revealed.)

The only rules that make sense that you put forth are the ones that iggy lined out in his "revised rules". Instead, you have a scenerio where inactive players hurts their team a LOT more than before, and that isn't fair to the active players.

It's like if you and your buddies are playing a game of cards and your friend leaves and doesn't come back and you don't know when he's going to be back, you flip over his hand so you can keep on playing. You don't sit there and keep on betting even while his hand is still hidden, and then award him all the chips if he happens to win.

I know it's a hypothetical situation, but wouldn't you just continue playing without him? You did say "buddies" after all, so there would be more than one. You wouldn't flip his hand over... you'd just remove him from the game, and that's it. That's one of the rules that makes sense, the ejections. But silencing is ridiculous.

Would people use this as a strategic ploy? Never. If you get withdrawn from the game, lose the game, and can't play for 2 more games (4 if this has already happened once), you're not going to do that just so your teammates can win.

God forbid you actually use TEAMWORK in trying to win the game. It's all about the individual, apparently. It definitely makes the games more interesting, from what I've read.

As for the 200 word requirement, I think that it's necessary. In real Mafia if someone's being quiet you can force them to speak up or else get lynched (because what reason is there to not say anything otherwise?) In TWG if someone's being quiet you can't force them to speak because they might just be an inactive human and lynching someone you don't know about is a foolish option. We need to give people a reason to speak up. 200 words is not difficult - again, this post is 349 words and I'm making it before going to work for the day.

No, it just makes posts more meaningless, because some situations don't NEED to be explained in 200 words. Like what happened last game, when the wolf accidently revealed himself over AIM... does everyone have to use 200 words in explaining why they're going to lynch that wolf? It's overkill.

As for the Jurs situation, lay off her. If anyone, Kilga and Randumb should be blamed for turning the end of the game into a brainless charade. If I were in Jurs's shoes, I would have done the same thing.

Agreed

[DiscoBobbyPARANOiA]

Re: Proposed changes to phantom rules

I like my rules a lot better, frankly. Even if someone gets punished for getting two phantoms it still gives the humans one less day because the wolves can just keep that person alive and then insta them on the last day.

My rules create a scenario where people who choose not to play the game through the accrual of phantoms become a non-issue. I forgot to mention in my first post that people who are silenced can no longer post or vote for the rest of the game (in exchange for their role being revealed.)

It's like if you and your buddies are playing a game of cards and your friend leaves and doesn't come back and you don't know when he's going to be back, you flip over his hand so you can keep on playing. You don't sit there and keep on betting even while his hand is still hidden, and then award him all the chips if he happens to win.

Would people use this as a strategic ploy? Never. If you get withdrawn from the game, lose the game, and can't play for 2 more games (4 if this has already happened once), you're not going to do that just so your teammates can win.

As for the 200 word requirement, I think that it's necessary. In real Mafia if someone's being quiet you can force them to speak up or else get lynched (because what reason is there to not say anything otherwise?) In TWG if someone's being quiet you can't force them to speak because they might just be an inactive human and lynching someone you don't know about is a foolish option. We need to give people a reason to speak up. 200 words is not difficult - again, this post is 349 words and I'm making it before going to work for the day.

As for the Jurs situation, lay off her. If anyone, Kilga and Randumb should be blamed for turning the end of the game into a brainless charade. If I were in Jurs's shoes, I would have done the same thing.

Lol @ being 348.

I'M KIDDING.

At first I thought the word count was a bad Idea, but honestly, I make multiple 2,3,400 word plus posts when I have things to talk about. It may be because I just ramble on, but at least I won't have to worry.

I do, although, see this word count idea affecting alot of people. Moreso the jTWGers, and *possibly* one or two TWGers. I don't like thinking 'hmm, so the psychic I'm in an aliance with is going to get silenced for typing 3 less words than he should have '

I Don't know, it just seems to... strict. I REALLY like the idea of the host looking over the game afterwards (or during and writing stuff down) and him doing most of the banning or suggesting people to the TWC for banning.

About revealing roles. Chardish, you're right. No one will ever get 2 phantoms in a row to help their team win, especially if they are blue. Who wants to give up a blue role? No one, but, it could happen the way phantoms happen now.

Player X has a manditory 'lol we're going to indy for the weekend kids, c'mon' Or some bullcrap, router/modem problems, etc. Say people get phantoms (which happens now) it'll silence them, ban them, they'll be pissed. Well, if they care about the game, that is, but it would help their team. It'd give them a confirmed human that the wolves aren't going to kill until end game, and one more person that the humans don't have to worry about trying to lynch.

I think that a player should be punished for being inactive. I hated the game I hosted, even though I did a horrible job and wasn't there for all of it. It just made me sad to type out that phantom list every day. But, I don't think that it should affect the rest of the game, at all.

I would suggest:

Every day you:
write 150 words
Vote

Or you:

get a phantom

Get one phantom:

Warning shot

Get two phantoms:

Kicked from the game, 1 game ban.


Now, it'll come up endgame what your role was, and not mid game. If you were a wolf, your partners will be like 'What the ****, you screwed it for us.' If you're a human, or god forbid a blue, your team will react the same. Now the people you played with will realize that you messed it up, and they will let you have it, hopefully :-p

Another thing, I agree with the doubling, But make it 1,2,4,8, etc. (As in, start with one.)

I dunno, just my two cents.