Soulmaster was lynched. He was a 203.8 metres (669 ft) long hotdog, the longest hotdog ever (Vanilla Townie):
See you in approximately 1 month.
Type: Posts; User: Thingyman
Soulmaster was lynched. He was a 203.8 metres (669 ft) long hotdog, the longest hotdog ever (Vanilla Townie):
See you in approximately 1 month.
Sorry, I forgot my password, but Makaze helped me reset it.
I’ll do a proper reveal tomorrow but so as to not leave you in more suspense: Soulmaster was town.
GG wolves, gg everyone!
Well done toga - thanks for the strong representation of Denmark 🇩🇰🇩🇰🇩🇰 and good job stepping into this game even though it didn’t suit your preferences
As many of you know I'm not around much these days, but I saw this thread and wanted to share a few thoughts and my own story.
With regards to this initiative
I personally want to commend and thank roro and co. for this initiative.
I also want to thank everyone else who has participated in this thread for offering their feedback, whether negative, positive or in between, because what's clear - to me, at least - is that everyone cares. And that's the best starting point this can possibly have. In the midst of whatever disagreements there might be, I hope we can have that as our connecting guideline - we all care.
To be clear, I'm not involved with the project, nor do I have any education within the field of mental health, so all of this is just my subjective opinion as a fellow MU community member. But in my view, I do agree it's important to raise awareness about mental health. I have already learned new things from reading people's replies to this thread, and it has inspired me to share my own story for the first time.
Of course, I'm sure there are many opinions on how awareness should be raised, whether it should be raised on a forum meant for playing games, and finally how mental health and all that relates to this should even be handled. It's impossible to come to an agreement on all these matters for a plethora of reasons, but it does seem like together we're coming up with some compromises, improvements and ideas that could potentially do some good, if even just a little bit.
I think that's an amazing second connecting guideline - being together in this discussion of mental health. So I think it's a great idea that Manasi also created a thread that was more of a "this is the community talking and being together about this in whatever way, shape or form they feel comfortable with".
My own story
I saw that these stories were spoilered in the other thread so as to avoid potential triggers, so I'll do the same here.
I've done my best to structure the story in a logical fashion, but it's a bit difficult. Here goes.
My father died to suicide at the age of 48 in October 2019.
This sent me into a depression of my own. I had suicidal thoughts, I blamed myself for my father's death, I didn't sleep well, I had a hard time focusing on simple tasks, I was no longer able to properly evaluate how I was coming across in everyday interactions (I was afraid that what I said was hurtful or "wrong" and needed to consult with others to make sure that wasn't the case), and my emotions were raw.
I clearly remember how every negative thing that happened in this period led me into a negative spiral of thoughts centering around my father's death and from there leading back to suicidal thoughts. It could be a discussion with my wife, or it could just be a slightly negative post or comment whether online or IRL.
Then there were of course also all the things that reminded me of my father. I got my interest in movies, tv shows and gaming from him, so it was hardly possible to do any of my usual hobbies without being reminded of him and thus reentering the negative spiral mentioned above. I also recall tearing up when I saw the trailer to Star Wars: Rise of the Skywalker. My father had introduced me to Star Wars as a kid, and now we wouldn't get to the see the conclusion together. After having watched the movie, I felt less sad about this.
I didn't tell any of my friends about my father's death for the first couple of months. It was just too difficult to broach the subject. I think partly because I didn't know how to, and I think partly because I've always felt uncomfortable about having others listen to my troubles. I think I've just always felt that "this is something that's happening to me, so why should I make others uncomfortable?". (Which is a general pattern in my life, a need to make others like me and to completely shy away from all conflicts or unpleasant interactions.)
I was back to work within a week, and we went through with our "moving in party" that we'd planned for the next week as well where I managed to keep up appearances. Of course, my wife and our families knew as did my colleagues. In hindsight, I was a complete fool for not taking a leave of absence from my work (the therapist had cleared me to take a "leave of sickness" or whatever you'd call it) and cancelling our events, but as the "responsible" person that I am I just couldn't bring myself to do it.
It's difficult to say how long the depression lasted, but I do know that it was very important that I talked to someone about it. Something that my wife had to convince me to do, so I finally went to see a therapist.
The first time, it didn't really do much.
The second time was the first time where I began to have "aha moments". Even though I consider myself very self-aware, there were just connections that I'd never made before when reflecting back upon my life. And it wasn't that the therapist claimed that these connections existed or anything, but the conversation led me to make these "conclusions" on my own, so to say.
The third time the unimaginable happened. I cried for only the second time in... My adult life? The first time had happened only weeks prior on the first night of the day where I learned about my father's death.
The impact of my father's death
The fact that it was suicide hit me hard.
At first, when my mom called to tell me, she hadn't mentioned suicide. So I assumed it had something to do with his heart, as he had suffered a mild heart attack a couple of years before.
I went over to their house and there were two policemen outside. I asked them what had happened and they said suicide. And it just completely changed everything for me. If the world had seemed dark before this, it was pitch black now.
That part might read strange to someone who hasn't experienced something similar (and maybe still some of those?), but... What was before a state of shock mixed with grief, I imagine, was now an endless flow of emotions and thoughts all centered around why he'd "choose to leave us", "what could I have done to prevent this", and the like.
I remember obsessing over how his final day was. Without being too direct, I wanted as many details as I could get from my mother and my 3 siblings still living at home. I searched through his browser history to see if there was anything - there was not. He didn't leave a note - I made sure to check everywhere I could. I wanted to know the approximate time of death, but the police said they don't check for that when it's suicide, which infuriated me. I wanted to access his phone and his email, but I didn't have any luck. How can there not be any way to break into an iPhone and see its contents if you don't have the password?
Like I already mentioned, I initially blamed myself a lot, then I was angry with my father, and I'm sure that cycle repeated a few times.
My father wasn't a good man. For those curious, uttering this was what broke me at the therapy session. Honestly, in some ways, it's better that he isn't here. I won't delve deeper into this particular part of the story.
So why did/does it hurt so much? Because I loved him and I miss him still. Because I know he loved me, I know he loved my siblings, and despite a strained relationship I know he loved my mother. In spite of all his shortcomings, I've never doubted any of this.
Also, I sympathize with his story, and I feel very sad at how his life turned out. He lost his father too soon. He lost his brother (my uncle) to an OD, and he lost his multi handicapped son (my brother) in 2006-2008. I was there, so I know it wasn't easy to have a multi handicapped son, but he loved him endlessly and was always there for him. On top of that, his wife (my mom) suffers from several mental health issues as well as physical ailments that might very well lead to her dying within the next few years. Then add to this his dwindling group of friends, his beforementioned heart attack, and then there's another huge part which I also won't get into publicly.
Suffice to say, though I am leaving many things out here, it wasn't difficult for me to piece together an interpretation of how he came to die by suicide.
"Moral of the story" - talking helped me
Despite all of these things, I had no idea he suffered from depression, much less suicidal thoughts. Looking back, it seems like absolute stupidity on my part. But I swear, his death was a complete shock to me and everyone else in his life. A complete shock.
I've found myself wondering... If I was a therapist or psychiatrist, would I have known? Maybe? Probably? But the fact is I had no idea.
And the main reason I had no idea was because he never shared it. He was a manly man who had gotten into many brawls in his life, and he certainly never talked about his feelings, unless they were of an angry or accusatory nature.
One might think this would leave me to absolving myself of my sins of not realizing his situation. How could I know it if he didn't share it with me? This is partly the case, and partly not. I still found (and find) myself thinking back to conversations that I only remember tidbits of, reanalyzing and reinterpreting the things he said. Were there clues? Was he ever reaching out in his own way, and I just didn't pick up on it?
But there is nothing to do about it. And I've come to terms with that.
Better yet, I decided to learn from my father's mistake. Despite having had the very same inclination of not wanting to talk to anyone about it, I caved and did what my wife pleaded me to do many times - to please talk to someone about it. That step can be very hard, trust me, I know, so that is why I'm a fan of this initiative. Having that push was immensely helpful for me, so if it can do the same for even just one other soul out there, this is all worth it.
And I've heard the feedback and I know maybe it won't help everyone. But I hope we can all agree that it's something worth exploring for everyone in a similar boat.
Where am I today?
I now no longer suffer from depression, thankfully. But I can still have minor "relapses", and certain stressors can amplify that.
The past couple of months have been worse than the months before. Which is probably not too strange, considering the stressors of being unemployed (I finally quit my job last year to focus on my mental health as well as my family), moving into and renovating a new house, failing my driver's license test a couple of times, and worrying about my mother and my siblings. A combination of stressors that on bad days can make me feel like a failed man.
And watching Bridgerton, funnily enough, also made me realize that I have an apparently common fear of dying at a young age caused by one's own father dying at a young age. This was very heightened at the time of my depression, but fortunately a bit more fleeting now.
But! Today I earned my driver's license, we're making good progress on the house, I am doing my best to be there for my family, and hopefully the job will come along soon.
I feel good right at this moment. But it's okay to feel bad. For me, talking helps. If anyone ever wants to talk, you can hit me up here on Discord. I'm not as active these days, but I'll reply at some point
It’s all good, just leave this one as is. There are two other “runs when it fills” sign-ups, so hopefully those will fill quickly as well.
Edit: But the worldwide corona situation might make it not so important that we are delayed this season.
Maybe someone could start a "runs when fills" test game for the other variant? If there's someone willing
Seems like it could fill.
1x Town Jailkeeper
1x Town Even Night Vigilante
10x Vanilla Town
1x Mafia Roleblocker
2x Mafia Goon
We could start a test version for both of those? If they seem to fill fast enough. Maybe just start with the one.
Would anyone be willing to host either?
Could also make it a 2-time limited even night vig, just to reduce variance.
By the way, I know a few people expressed that they were happy with the potential fake claims that mafia could make in the original bear setup, but I think, on the other hand, that there isn't much "strategic" thought to be had there. I think it's just a gift that the mafia are sometimes handed, and that it's easy to claim a role that you know to be dead and the town doesn't (if you need to claim, of course), so I'm a bit meh on that as a selling point. But that's not to say I'm against flipless as a concept - I just think that for the balance of that setup I prefer tweaking it and not doing it like that.
I'm unsure about having a vigilante. But at the same time, it is a normal role and it could deserve another chance if we at least limit it. Meh.
I think I'd adjust the setup to this instead:
1x Even Night Vigilante
10x Vanilla Townies
1x Mafia Roleblocker
2x Mafia Goons
With normal flips.
If we take last year's setup as a baseline for reasonable balance, here you are adding a Jailkeeper and an Even Night Vigilante instead of two JOAT's with Doc, Track and Motion Detect.
An even night vigilante is a bit more powerful, I think. A jailkeeper is about the same'ish value, since it also can block the even night vigilante, and even when it is used to protect or block a kill they cannot know what occured.
So to make up for the added value to town, you have the added mafia roleblocker.
Thank you for your service, Dp
Hmm... It should add some EV to town, yes, but I’m not sure it would be enough. But maybe a mix of this and changing the ratio would create the perfect balance. But I think people aren’t too fond of the idea of a 2-man mafia team, and I can see why.
However, that makes me like it less for another reason, albeit that is a personal reason and not one I weigh here as an argument against the setup being used: It basically makes it just a second elimination, which is boring.
Adding one mislynch in a non-power setup only increases town win % by a few %.
If a 12v3 Mountainous with 4 mislynches produces a 25% town winrate, I think we need more than just the added shot. I don't think that shot doubles the town winrate.
Or another way of looking at it; last season we had 2 JOAT's. Is their value only equal to a shot?
I'd definitely be curious to get more stats on this. Maybe we could even run a turbo or two.
Not that we're gonna be able to get "meaningful" stats in this amount of time, but it can help to see how they shake out.
My gut feeling is; I think I'd change it to 13v3, and then it's probably fine.
@Cuthalion - I think you said you knew of 2 instances of this game being run elsewhere? Do you have links handy/results?
@anyone: Would anyone be willing to host test game of this ASAP maybe? With 12/12 or 36/12 phases, so it doesn't last too long :P
We do have some information to base this off of, given that we're so much in contact with other communities, and I have years of feedback from them.
This isn't an MU tournament. We are just the ones hosting it. I think it behooves us to take the responsibility seriously and try to imagine what all the other 100+ communities out there would be happy with.
Now, of course, it would also behoove us to have talked about this way more in advance, to have run multiple tests, and to explicitly ask or poll the communities on what they want. So that falls on us for not having done that, but it is indeed an exhausting affair all of this, and we're all just doing our best. Hopefully we get it right for next season
Wrt the other paragraph: The intricacies etc. being unfamiliar is okay. That is why we want new setups: We want to test new skills and abilities in people. But the core should be familiar. People should be like "okay, the cop role, cool", or "JOAT is new to me, but I've played with these functions", or "okay, there's a matrix, but the roles I all know".
Does Desperado have a familiar core? Well, it is the very first time that we introduce a "mafia picks something" mechanic, and it's the first time we have a "day shot... but it doesn't kill the target necessarily" mechanic. I don't think this falls within standard as much as maybe you and other people? Everything else "non-standard" we've ever done has been in relation to how the setup is randed, basically. This is definitely beyond that. But I'm not saying it's out of the question. I guess it's the best suggestion thus far, out of those seeking to innovate.
But other than that, I agree and disagree with your post. I don't agree that the JOAT's didn't impact game balance last year, but I do agree that it'd be nice to have some more rotation than just doing another "2 power roles setup". But the reason that I at first - and now I'm not sure anymore - went back to this is because I'm not personally fond of repeating Mountainous (so rather than rotation, I do prefer completely new setups, for as long as we can achieve that for), and I'm still unsure about Desperado.
- For 13 or 15 players
- Open or semi-open
- No third party, independent or neutral roles
- No complex or unusual mechanics that most communities wouldn't have heard or thought of existing
On top of that, we probably forgot to add:
- Should be reasonably balanced (not in a "champs setting", but just if you ran it regularly on MU, if it has a 45-55% winrate that'd be optimal, but we could probably also live with a 40-60% winrate though that's pretty meh)
- It should preferably be a new setup
With regards to the bolded
Some people think that if we ran a 15-man setup with a Tracker and a Jailkeeper (for example) that we would be repeating the same setup as last year. I can see why they say that. I hope those people can also understand those of us that don't necessarily think it's the same thing. It definitely creates a same'ish playing experience, but it's not the same setup. Moving on from that setup to Mountainous: This is a setup that we've run before, and many communities didn't like it, so even though it is pretty popular on MU, we would not be serving the general mafia community well by repeating it.
So do we want a new playing experience? Yes, preferably, and the reason for that is, as pointed out by Tsunami, that we do want different communities to be able to shine. But that setup still has to fit the other criteria, and if it doesn't, then it all becomes a matter of which criteria are the most important, and that is where everyone disagrees.
So, yes, the best would be if we had a balanced setup and new playing experience at the same time. Is that possible? So far, (but I've also had to skim a bit due to lack of time), it doesn't seem we really have any good suggestions for this that also match the other criteria.
JJJ's or my suggestions are definitely same'y playing experience. Mountainous has been done before, and it also isn't balanced from what the stats show (and I repeat that I think it would be irresponsible of us to just pretend those stats don't exist). So that'd leave Mountainous Desperado - if we feel that that matches the other criteria.
For anyone to be able to evaluate the balance aspect at least, we need some more data, so I ask again: Can someone please link all the Desperado games they know of? It's hugely relevant to the discussion
In any case, that was a setup containing familiar roles and familiar mechanics in terms of how to play the game. Having a Desperado shot chosen by mafia is, in my opinion, more unfamiliar than nay of that. This is part of the discussion we're having, and it's good to hear all the input. I'm not devaluing how you feel, so I hope you won't devalue how I feel. I can see that I'm not the only person who feels a Mountainado setup to not be exactly like mafia in terms of how I perceive mafia. If we're several people feeling this on MU, there are gonna be other people who feel that way as well. As those people aren't here for this discussion, and since this is a Championshion for all the internet mafia people and not a Championshio to make MU happy, I feel it is important that we also try to represent those people here.
But Mountainous overall has a 25% town winrate, based on a 30 game sample size.
It is not a good idea to run back Mountainous, at least not with 12v3 numbers.
If I asked you which you think would do better: A qualifier town or a regular MU town, every MU regular would say a regular MU town, and I would agree. However, yes, in season 4 they managed to produce a 36% town winrate. Statistically, stuff like that just happens sometimes. You can flip a coin to go heads 3 times in a row, and you'd think the coin is unbalanced.
@mansnicks I know you disagree that the town winrate in season 4 was an anomaly; On what basis do you think that?
People are always massively underestimating how difficult it is for town to win a Mountainous, and I guess it might be because of season 4's relative success seen in comparison with other seasons where town struggled massively?
On top of all that, Mountainous was by far the most divisive setup that we've ever run. In terms of what games people play on their home forums, Mountainous is basically never run.
Also, the setup last year worked very well. It was the best success we've had. It produced a fair playing experience, the results seemed to support that, we received the lowest number of complaints ever, and people understood the setup.
I don't know why there is now opposition to learning from success, and suddenly a move to repeat an unbalanced setup (Mountainous).
Also, there seems to be a notion that the standard roles such as Tracker, Jailkeeper, etc. are "boring", "named townies" and are "weak roles that you might as well just cut to have no roles instead". Why is that? The alternative is stronger roles that will dominate the game too much. It's no fun having a setup where the outcome is just entirely determined by one person's actions or skills. So of course the alternative is to have the medium strength roles that can make a difference, just like JOAT's last year.
What are the current stats on Mountainous Desperado? Can anyone link to all games (including off-site ones) and summarize the results?
I see that one of my original concerns is not valid - that the mafia doesn't necessarily want to target weak town spots with their pick, or that even if they do it's still beneficial for town. So with that out of the way, I "only" have three concerns with the setup:
1) Is it balanced? I'll wait to make a call on this until I see the linked games. In any case, I'd want us to run a test game or two, especially if the "mafia picking the shooter" thing isn't already tested.
2) It's not standard mafia. Sure, the introduced mechanic is a variant on something familiar, but so is most things you can think to introduce - variants on something familiar. What I would prefer to have is just something actually familiar. I haven't said that I think people will have a hard time understanding the setup. I think that a not insignificant portion of people will not immediately view it as a mafia game the way they're used to understanding mafia. And this is the Mafia Championship, not a Championship of "let's play innovative setups for the sake of newness". I've played hundreds of games, and even I think it falls slightly somewhere out of standard mafia.
3) It warps the game around a single thing. This was the issue many people had with the Cop setup, although a secondary issue with that was of course also the heavy variance that that role introduced. In a game where we would prefer many people to have the opportunity to shine, I do worry about having a KILLING role placed on someone who can immediately eliminate someone from probable advancement, I worry that it will introduce a "let's all talk and then have the person shoot consensus target" thing that is unfun for several reasons, and I worry that it will impact votes greatly.
Also, it doesn't strictly make sense to call the setup Mountainous Desperado, or to talk of "Mountainous variants", since as soon as you add roles or mechanics to the game it is no longer a Mountainous game, but we all know what we're talking about, so whatever :P
For as long as MU has existed, people have insisted that Champ towns (at least, qualifier towns) are worse than general MU towns. So the fact that the town in this one season seemed to fare better is not an argument to repeat the experiment, especially when we saw last season that the same setup with TWO ROLES for town produced the same winrate: 36%.
I'm not a statistician, so someone can correct me here, but with the sample size that we do have, it seems indefensible to run a 12vs3 mountainous setup again.
No matter how you slice it, you are 1) taking a setup that had a 36% town winrate and REMOVING the two only roles that town have, hoping for better results (???), and 2) taking a setup that has a 25% town winrate on MU in general, hoping for better results because town in season 4 had a 36% winrate.
I'm not opposed to Mountainous, but the ratio and numbers need to change. Maybe a 13'er with just two mafia. That's like starting a JOAT^2 game and the mafia losing one of their members while the town loses both their roles (though only one town member). I'm certainly not mad in that spot as a mafia, and the town can't really complain either - they "just" have to catch 2 mafia.
I think I'm mostly inclined to just work out a new 13 or 15-man open setup akin to JOAT^2 that seems to be balanced.
Maybe something like 12vs3 with the town having a Jailkeeper and a Tracker? The balance of each of those roles shouldn't be too dissimilar to a JOAT having Track, Doc and Motion Detect. They're slightly stronger, I guess, so maybe one of them first begins having actions Night 2? Or you could limit them on the other end like with JOAT^2.
You could also make it 10vs3, and I'd be curious to see how that actually changes balance. Trackers and Jailkeepers are worth more with less players, but at the same time you of course lose that one mislynch.
It may be simple for MU'ers, but it's still less simple, and more importantly unfamiliar, to non-MU'ers, than just using a standard type setup.
Some of these communities will hopefully even be completely new ones, and I don't want them to think of the Mafia Championship as some alien thing. I want to increase the odds of them feeling like it's a somewhat meaningful event with a setup that isn't foreign to what constitutes mafia for them. If they happen to do poorly, combined with the setup being a Desperado setup, I can already imagine the talk on their home communities - I've seen this personally many, many times before, which is maybe why I'm so passionate about not steering too far away from a normal mafia setup.
Also, balance-wise, I'm unsure how Desperado would work if you have the Mafia give away the gun. The player lists are very unpredictable for a Championship season, and I fear that the mafia would have too easy of a time picking at least one "weak spot" in the game to give the gun to.
The most important thing, in my opinion, is a balanced setup. And I know that we've failed on that several times.
As for Mountainous
12 VT's vs 3 goons = 25 % town win rate, over a 30 game sample size abouts (and this is massively overperforming according to rand, but that's hopefully to be expected)
Interestingly, I believe town did do slightly better than 25% in the Mountainous season, so it is actually the other MU games dragging down the stats further, but they still didn't do 50%.
And more importantly, we just ran JOAT^2, which was Mountainous but with Town having 2 roles. And that still didn't produce a 50% town winrate (but to be clear, I do consider that setup to be balanced, and I think the less than 50% town winrate is entirely attributable to Champs being inherently wolf-sided).
If we were to run a Mountainous setup, it certainly shouldn't be 12 vs 3. There is nothing to show that we can expect a balanced season that way, and we would just be repeating a previous season instead of looking to do better.
So @ everyone suggesting Mountainous, if we were to run Mountainous, what should the exact ratio between mafia to town be?
Mr. Turtle - always exciting to see new faces
I hope you'll like it here. If you ever have any questions, be sure to ask one of the users with a colored username and they can usually help you.
Out of curiosity, on which forums have you played before?
Daymn, a very shocking ranking, GH
I'll have to get mine in soon.
A Thingy Review #2: Dominion
9½ out of 10.
I tried this a decade ago online without even knowing that it was apparently a groundbreaking game that invented the whole deckbuilding genre. I remember liking it back then, and playing it with real cards hasn't changed my mind! This will for sure be one of our most played games this year.
Even with just the core box we feel the game has a lot of replayability as there are so many combinations and strategies to try out. It's just a very satisfying game to play as you feel your engine growing mixed with the tension of actually getting points into your deck in time.
However, we will admit to having introduced a house rule: The bandit seems too disruptive, so we've chosen to not play with that card in future games :P
And I mean, the fact that this game has gotten so popular that it's spawned communities with mafia subforums is pretty telling. I think this will prove to be a timeless classic.
I actually just ordered Clank! (non-legacy one) home, so very excited to play that with the wifey. She and I have gotten really into deckbuilders. And we also just bought My City which will be our soft entry into legacy games. So we'll probably get Clank! Legacy at some point :P
What is your full top 5 list of legacy games?
At first, it felt like an impossible game... Until we realized that we'd read the win condition wrong. We thought you needed to find the cure AND eradicate all the tokens. After "losing" 4 games in a row, we were so close to giving up :P
In reality, we'd won 3 of the games, and we were actually one turn away from winning the last one even with the harder rules we imposed on ourselves.
I'll wait to give a verdict until we've played it again without a feeling of the game being impossible :P
It's funny how one can change with regards to board games. Because I remember a group of us trying to learn and play Pandemic in a board game cafe like 4 years ago, and after looking at the rules for 20 minutes we gave up and chose another game that we could more quickly learn and play.
But now I'm used to playing more complicated games, so I'm curious to know how the experience of opening the rulebook to Pandemic this time.