Mafia Championship Season 6 Setup - Suggestion/Discussion Thread

[Aquilla]

I don't see why d6 isn't a good structure for champs, more of the roles inside it are unpreferable.

[Arapocalypse]

Might be a bit useless since I guess that Soahs setup is most likely going to be picked, but I tried to scramble together a 3x3 Matrix for a 13p setup:

Tracker, Roleblocker, Mafia Tracker

Vigilante (even), Mafia RB, Bodyguard

Mafia Role cop, Bulletproofx1, JOAT (watch, jail, poison x1 each)

Most likely not balanced, but that's what you guys are here for.

Assuming you mean rows/columns would be used as setups?

Seems semi-similar to last year's; personally I'm not really that much of a balancer, but some seem like they're a bit more PR-centered than others - for instance, ones with the vig/JOAT! Some are nearly mountainous, like the roleblocker/mafia roleblocker/bulletproof one, for instance!

Actually now that I think about it, that setup is definitely a bit ??? with the bulletproof and two roleblockers like that?

[ladd]

The problem with d6 is that it has a risk(not matter how small) that an extremely single role centric setup rands but if the top end roles are changed (which should be easy) it s probably fine

Making it into a 17er may not be as easy though

What would be the idea? Keep 3 villa prs maximum and brong dpwn the number of wolves prs?

Or add max number of villa prs?

[Aquilla]

a 17'er is actually pretty easy. I think 3 roles is fine, just have some of the 6's be 3 roles instead of 2. So like 6 on invest could be tracker/rolecop/alignment oracle or something like that

[Jackofhearts2005]

Let’s just do one hundred player multi ball mash with itas and 168/12 phases.

I’m sorry. I don’t know how to be helpful.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Last player standing gets GH’s account password.

[Arapocalypse]

Will get back to you on D6; it was discussed a lot previously, with a lot of reasons brought up that I've since forgotten!

Personally, I think the setup is fine with a few tweaks, but wouldn't work well as a champs setup; it's not particularly intuitive to people seeing it for the first time and people often don't ask questions about it when they don't understand it until later days, if they do at all!!

[Lissa]

Wrt scaling d6 up: I’ve made some attempts to do so before, as has visor. It doesn’t scale super well.

[Aquilla]

Will get back to you on D6; it was discussed a lot previously, with a lot of reasons brought up that I've since forgotten!

Personally, I think the setup is fine with a few tweaks, but wouldn't work well as a champs setup; it's not particularly intuitive to people seeing it for the first time and people often don't ask questions about it when they don't understand it until later days, if they do at all!!

and how is this different than any matrix setup ever? I think the previous scale up of d6 failed because we were trying to increase the number of rands in comparison to just changing the rands. I think changing the rands and then simply adding 3 vts and a goon actually can work

[Aquilla]

Investigative:

1: Alignment Oracle
2: Tracker
3: Role Cop
4: Alignment Oracle + Tracker
5: Alignment Oracle + Rolecop
6: Tracker + Rolecop


Protective:

1: Bodyguard
2: Doctor
3: Roleblocker
4: Jailkeeper
5: Jailkeeper + Bodyguard
6: Roleblocker + Doctor


Killing:

1: 1x Vigilante
2: 2x Vigilante
3: Even night Vigilante
4: Odd Night Vigilante
5: Even night Vigilante + 1-shot Vigi
6: Odd Night Vigi + Even night Vigi


Something like this could work for townside. It's strong but not game defining overall. This would make a V++ setup always, which I think works super well for champs.

[Disquieted]

Would D6 work? Can someone link me to the details on this setup and maybe give me cliffs on what advantages/disadvantages you think the setup has?

Would D6 work? Can someone link me to the details on this setup and maybe give me cliffs on what advantages/disadvantages you think the setup has?

i'm new to this site and i'm definitely not gonna participate in the tournament but i wanna post my impression of d6 i guess

i think d6 setup is townsided for a few reasons, its pretty much impossible for scum to fakeclaim any roles in it because town can deduce which pr is real quite easily with a mass at any point in the game, and scum has no possibility of role cop so it's impossible for them to find which PRs are in the setup for a safe claim. this means that you can take PR claims at face value and it's basically random luck how many free clears town rolls at the start of the game. it feels kind of like mountainous but with town having bonus cop peeks and/or the ability to confirm 2 to 4 people as town at any time by just using logic to find out if the roles fit together

i also think think vigilante rolls are redundant in d6 and dont understand why vigilante is included in the rand for a setup with an odd number of people. vigilante rarely has any utility whatsoever in a setup with an odd player count, but if doctor happens to save then vigilante's presence nets town a free ML which means that the setup can swing based on RNG pretty hard

most semi-closed setups have similar problems, i don't even know how to begin to suggest fixing these except to start off by saying that scum should have a guaranteed role cop, or maybe that scum should be given more information at the start of the game, they seem relatively uninformed

for something super competitive mountainous is more awesomer, or maybe just a cop 13 or 17er

EDIT: i guess scum can deduce which PRs are in-setup if they kill a PR but this still requires some guess work and a fortuitious kill in the first place

EDIT2: for people saying no cops, i'm pretty sure that d6 is even more townsided than a cop 13er, roles confirming eachother in-setup are basically inno reports, and if town only has 1 role it's a cop anyway. u could probably reduce how townsided a cop (X)'er is by giving scum a rolecop with an n0 peek

the problem with the d6 format in general is that you basically aren't even playing a semi-closed setup, it's essentially an open setup (with the caveat that town has MUCH more information than scum on PRs, disadvantaging them and putting them in a position where they can't claim unless the stars align) as soon as the first claim drops b/c massclaim can be initiated at pretty much any time and scum will likely die if they try to mix in with the PR claims

if you wanna do semi-closed right the roles shouldn't be able to confirm eachother with "role sudoku"

(i don't know how many times i have to say this)

but dont use D6. its intended purely as a replacement for C9++ in offering a more balanced experience. (both of which should not be used in a situation where you want fine tuned balance)

hence limiting PRs to 3 max (which is already too many for most setups but it kinda works anyway).

some D6 setups are townsided, and some would consider to be scumsided, all are relatively in the bounds of playability (with some being more painful than others)

in any event, there should definitely not be a 13er setup run

i could go into more detail on remembers posts (its semi open not semi closed, fakeclaiming is really $#@!ing hard to implement in small setup/modular setup, PRs scale based on strength, etc)

but I don't think it should be played so its moot.

IMPO, host a 17 player setup. its the best size for spectating from a jury perspective at least and gives you far more freedom when designing roles.

On creating a setup for it? Well, thats harder unless you want to go full closed setup.

The problem with open/semi open setups is that anyone who knows vaguely how a setup is created knows there is no possible way there will be more than 4 town PRs (and 4 is cutting it, as 3 is in a 13er)

Most of the time you'll get something like 3 Prs and 2 mafia prs. And straying too far further (reducing town prs forces them to be stronger and reducing mafia prs, and same the other way) has problems of introducing more and more variance and role interactions, and being generally less fun for people to play in either alignment.

all semi open type setups have fake claiming as a problem. matrix 12 had that too, and so will any open game if you want to create a setup that allows fake claiming it either has to have enough variability that claiming a role in every setup case will not backfire for mafia, but also that multiple mafia can get away with claiming and that town still has enough power that they feel they can achieve something

then it also comes down to what people find fun

a lot of people enjoy open setups a lot more than closed setups

so you need to decide closed or open/semi open (or semi closed if you can come up with a good design)

closed offers fake claiming, but its incredibly dull to watch from a spectator point of view considering the nature of the setups anyway

might post more on this later.

[Mistyx]

On first glance, a problem with it is that town can roll 4 PRs. Is that intentional?

[Aquilla]

On first glance, a problem with it is that town can roll 4 PRs. Is that intentional?

on my end there shouldn't be a single scenario of 4 town prs.

[Aquilla]

I think most of those problems SB are literally also shown in matrix setups which no-one's protesting, or solved by making the setup larger, but keeping the pr count small.

[Mistyx]

On first glance, a problem with it is that town can roll 4 PRs. Is that intentional?

on my end there shouldn't be a single scenario of 4 town prs.

4-1-1

[Aquilla]

On first glance, a problem with it is that town can roll 4 PRs. Is that intentional?

on my end there shouldn't be a single scenario of 4 town prs.

4-1-1

ah ok, I mean still needs tweaking.

[Aquilla]

a fully open setup can work too potentially.

[Zack]

doesn't alignment oracle have the same problem as alignment cop? it also has a particular and weird dynamic in that the wolves are going to avoid killing the player with that role if they can help it. I wouldn't use it. I didn't remember d6 very well when I initially brought it up, and I don't know that it's really viable. Any version for champs would be so heavily altered from the original version that it's basically a different setup entirely anyways.

Smartbomb quoting last year's thread made me realize we're going through a repeat of the same problem, where the thread starts with basically "make a new setup" and not much more direction than that.

There's ten different conversations going on here, think we should probably focus on banging out these issues first:

- How many communities are going to be represented?

- How many games?

- How many players in each game?

- How is the whole jury system going to work?

Some of these are intertwined, but they need to be dealt with fairly definitively before a setup can really be decided.

Regardless of the above, I believe the following should hold true:

1. Use open or semi-open setups.
2. Use the same setup across all games.
3. Setup should be relatively simple and easy to understand.
4. Stay as close to "standard" rules as possible. (This means full role flips too.)

The OP is more detailed, but basically: Those things are indeed all intertwined, so the priority for me is FIRST getting a good setup decided. Then the rest is decided from that.

rn people have given suggestions, now just choose a starting point

I think the only concrete suggestions I've seen are expanding D6 or using the All-Stars setup. I don't think the latter is a good idea, and I can't speak to the first before actually seeing the new D6 setup. But to be clear, if there is a good D6 expanded to be made, I'm very onboard for that.

I don't feel like I want to limit people's suggestions. To be clear, I'm not looking for people to suggest "15'er open" or "17'er closed". I'm looking for specific setup suggestions.

The only hard limit is: I want the games to be automated, and to be for between 9 to 17 players. I PREFER 13, 15 or 17 players, but if there are no good suggestions for any of those and only a good suggestion for 9 or 11 players, then so be it. I PREFER open or semi-open, but if we don't get any good suggestions, then I guess we have to roll with closed.

Thingy... my experience is that if you give no direction and a vague request to do something to no one in particular, it's not going to get done.

Is there a specific reason we can't do 2x5 with some slight tweaks? As someone who played in champs, it seemed pretty much fine. Does there really need to be a new format every year?

[Zack]

Regardless, I'll try to come up with some ideas for automated 17ers with normal kill and lynch mechanics soon™

[Disquieted]

I think most of those problems SB are literally also shown in matrix setups which no-one's protesting, or solved by making the setup larger, but keeping the pr count small.

Think you need to reread remember's posts.

In a matrix setup you can claim your role and be aware thst someone is likely to cc you, and you have to operate on a claim battle.

In D6 you claim first and you are immediately accepted as town, because scum can't generate a fakeclaim without knowing the die roll. Claiming a PR automatically townfirms players in D6 on a level no other semi-open or even open replicates.

[Aquilla]

doesn't alignment oracle have the same problem as alignment cop? it also has a particular and weird dynamic in that the wolves are going to avoid killing the player with that role if they can help it. I wouldn't use it. I didn't remember d6 very well when I initially brought it up, and I don't know that it's really viable. Any version for champs would be so heavily altered from the original version that it's basically a different setup entirely anyways.

Smartbomb quoting last year's thread made me realize we're going through a repeat of the same problem, where the thread starts with basically "make a new setup" and not much more direction than that.

There's ten different conversations going on here, think we should probably focus on banging out these issues first:

- How many communities are going to be represented?

- How many games?

- How many players in each game?

- How is the whole jury system going to work?

Some of these are intertwined, but they need to be dealt with fairly definitively before a setup can really be decided.

Regardless of the above, I believe the following should hold true:

1. Use open or semi-open setups.
2. Use the same setup across all games.
3. Setup should be relatively simple and easy to understand.
4. Stay as close to "standard" rules as possible. (This means full role flips too.)

The OP is more detailed, but basically: Those things are indeed all intertwined, so the priority for me is FIRST getting a good setup decided. Then the rest is decided from that.

rn people have given suggestions, now just choose a starting point

I think the only concrete suggestions I've seen are expanding D6 or using the All-Stars setup. I don't think the latter is a good idea, and I can't speak to the first before actually seeing the new D6 setup. But to be clear, if there is a good D6 expanded to be made, I'm very onboard for that.

I don't feel like I want to limit people's suggestions. To be clear, I'm not looking for people to suggest "15'er open" or "17'er closed". I'm looking for specific setup suggestions.

The only hard limit is: I want the games to be automated, and to be for between 9 to 17 players. I PREFER 13, 15 or 17 players, but if there are no good suggestions for any of those and only a good suggestion for 9 or 11 players, then so be it. I PREFER open or semi-open, but if we don't get any good suggestions, then I guess we have to roll with closed.

Thingy... my experience is that if you give no direction and a vague request to do something to no one in particular, it's not going to get done.

Is there a specific reason we can't do 2x5 with some slight tweaks? As someone who played in champs, it seemed pretty much fine. Does there really need to be a new format every year?

ye alignment oracle has it's issues as well, but there's not a different investigative role in modbot that I thought would've been better.

I don't think anyone said a different format was necessary, but there's definitely some things about 2x5 that weren't super popular, specifically motion detector and voyeur. I'm all for trying 2x5 again (or some different AxB number, and swapping roles.

[Aquilla]

I think most of those problems SB are literally also shown in matrix setups which no-one's protesting, or solved by making the setup larger, but keeping the pr count small.

Think you need to reread remember's posts.

In a matrix setup you can claim your role and be aware thst someone is likely to cc you, and you have to operate on a claim battle.

In D6 you claim first and you are immediately accepted as town, because scum can't generate a fakeclaim without knowing the die roll. Claiming a PR automatically townfirms players in D6 on a level no other semi-open or even open replicates.

on paper, yes but in actuality no. Mafia Fakeclaiming in semi-open setups is ALWAYS a short-lived thing. and in a semi-open setup there is ALWAYS at least 1 person who can cc.

[Aquilla]

those problems might be Slightly amplified in d6, but if you think about it enough, you can still tread around it as mafia. Less options =/= 0 options

[Aquilla]

regardless though, I think I like a rehash of 2x5 better

[Aquilla]

regardless though, I think I like a rehash of 2x5 better

and it'd be easier to make/play.

[JohnCarter]

All of these roles just add to much swing based on the rand tho

[LanMisa]

Can't we just let them all play EIMM until only a single person is left standing?

[Aquilla]

Can't we just let them all play EIMM until only a single person is left standing?

as fun as that would be, that's definitely not a mafia championship.

[Mantichora]

I'm reiterating that I'm very much against a role madness or quasi-role madness setup.

ime the d6 setup is extremely oppressive for the mafia alignment. Not necessarily town sided, but very much a hard setup for the mafia to win in.

I think a heavily modified d6 would be a good idea.

[Mantichora]

Would D6 work? Can someone link me to the details on this setup and maybe give me cliffs on what advantages/disadvantages you think the setup has?

Would D6 work? Can someone link me to the details on this setup and maybe give me cliffs on what advantages/disadvantages you think the setup has?

i'm new to this site and i'm definitely not gonna participate in the tournament but i wanna post my impression of d6 i guess

i think d6 setup is townsided for a few reasons, its pretty much impossible for scum to fakeclaim any roles in it because town can deduce which pr is real quite easily with a mass at any point in the game, and scum has no possibility of role cop so it's impossible for them to find which PRs are in the setup for a safe claim. this means that you can take PR claims at face value and it's basically random luck how many free clears town rolls at the start of the game. it feels kind of like mountainous but with town having bonus cop peeks and/or the ability to confirm 2 to 4 people as town at any time by just using logic to find out if the roles fit together

i also think think vigilante rolls are redundant in d6 and dont understand why vigilante is included in the rand for a setup with an odd number of people. vigilante rarely has any utility whatsoever in a setup with an odd player count, but if doctor happens to save then vigilante's presence nets town a free ML which means that the setup can swing based on RNG pretty hard

most semi-closed setups have similar problems, i don't even know how to begin to suggest fixing these except to start off by saying that scum should have a guaranteed role cop, or maybe that scum should be given more information at the start of the game, they seem relatively uninformed

for something super competitive mountainous is more awesomer, or maybe just a cop 13 or 17er

EDIT: i guess scum can deduce which PRs are in-setup if they kill a PR but this still requires some guess work and a fortuitious kill in the first place

EDIT2: for people saying no cops, i'm pretty sure that d6 is even more townsided than a cop 13er, roles confirming eachother in-setup are basically inno reports, and if town only has 1 role it's a cop anyway. u could probably reduce how townsided a cop (X)'er is by giving scum a rolecop with an n0 peek

the problem with the d6 format in general is that you basically aren't even playing a semi-closed setup, it's essentially an open setup (with the caveat that town has MUCH more information than scum on PRs, disadvantaging them and putting them in a position where they can't claim unless the stars align) as soon as the first claim drops b/c massclaim can be initiated at pretty much any time and scum will likely die if they try to mix in with the PR claims

if you wanna do semi-closed right the roles shouldn't be able to confirm eachother with "role sudoku"

(i don't know how many times i have to say this)

but dont use D6. its intended purely as a replacement for C9++ in offering a more balanced experience. (both of which should not be used in a situation where you want fine tuned balance)

hence limiting PRs to 3 max (which is already too many for most setups but it kinda works anyway).

some D6 setups are townsided, and some would consider to be scumsided, all are relatively in the bounds of playability (with some being more painful than others)

in any event, there should definitely not be a 13er setup run

i could go into more detail on remembers posts (its semi open not semi closed, fakeclaiming is really $#@!ing hard to implement in small setup/modular setup, PRs scale based on strength, etc)

but I don't think it should be played so its moot.

IMPO, host a 17 player setup. its the best size for spectating from a jury perspective at least and gives you far more freedom when designing roles.

On creating a setup for it? Well, thats harder unless you want to go full closed setup.

The problem with open/semi open setups is that anyone who knows vaguely how a setup is created knows there is no possible way there will be more than 4 town PRs (and 4 is cutting it, as 3 is in a 13er)

Most of the time you'll get something like 3 Prs and 2 mafia prs. And straying too far further (reducing town prs forces them to be stronger and reducing mafia prs, and same the other way) has problems of introducing more and more variance and role interactions, and being generally less fun for people to play in either alignment.

all semi open type setups have fake claiming as a problem. matrix 12 had that too, and so will any open game if you want to create a setup that allows fake claiming it either has to have enough variability that claiming a role in every setup case will not backfire for mafia, but also that multiple mafia can get away with claiming and that town still has enough power that they feel they can achieve something

then it also comes down to what people find fun

a lot of people enjoy open setups a lot more than closed setups

so you need to decide closed or open/semi open (or semi closed if you can come up with a good design)

closed offers fake claiming, but its incredibly dull to watch from a spectator point of view considering the nature of the setups anyway

might post more on this later.

This quote chain express the issue with d6 nicely.

On that note, I don't think a setup with town Oracles/Vengeful is a great idea just because, much like alignment cop, these roles warp a game and are oppressive to play against.

Those three roles require relatively little skill to play as, but a lot of skill to properly play against. That just doesn't seem fair in the tournament format.

[Mantichora]

Would D6 work? Can someone link me to the details on this setup and maybe give me cliffs on what advantages/disadvantages you think the setup has?

Would D6 work? Can someone link me to the details on this setup and maybe give me cliffs on what advantages/disadvantages you think the setup has?

i'm new to this site and i'm definitely not gonna participate in the tournament but i wanna post my impression of d6 i guess

i think d6 setup is townsided for a few reasons, its pretty much impossible for scum to fakeclaim any roles in it because town can deduce which pr is real quite easily with a mass at any point in the game, and scum has no possibility of role cop so it's impossible for them to find which PRs are in the setup for a safe claim. this means that you can take PR claims at face value and it's basically random luck how many free clears town rolls at the start of the game. it feels kind of like mountainous but with town having bonus cop peeks and/or the ability to confirm 2 to 4 people as town at any time by just using logic to find out if the roles fit together

i also think think vigilante rolls are redundant in d6 and dont understand why vigilante is included in the rand for a setup with an odd number of people. vigilante rarely has any utility whatsoever in a setup with an odd player count, but if doctor happens to save then vigilante's presence nets town a free ML which means that the setup can swing based on RNG pretty hard

most semi-closed setups have similar problems, i don't even know how to begin to suggest fixing these except to start off by saying that scum should have a guaranteed role cop, or maybe that scum should be given more information at the start of the game, they seem relatively uninformed

for something super competitive mountainous is more awesomer, or maybe just a cop 13 or 17er

EDIT: i guess scum can deduce which PRs are in-setup if they kill a PR but this still requires some guess work and a fortuitious kill in the first place

EDIT2: for people saying no cops, i'm pretty sure that d6 is even more townsided than a cop 13er, roles confirming eachother in-setup are basically inno reports, and if town only has 1 role it's a cop anyway. u could probably reduce how townsided a cop (X)'er is by giving scum a rolecop with an n0 peek

the problem with the d6 format in general is that you basically aren't even playing a semi-closed setup, it's essentially an open setup (with the caveat that town has MUCH more information than scum on PRs, disadvantaging them and putting them in a position where they can't claim unless the stars align) as soon as the first claim drops b/c massclaim can be initiated at pretty much any time and scum will likely die if they try to mix in with the PR claims

if you wanna do semi-closed right the roles shouldn't be able to confirm eachother with "role sudoku"

(i don't know how many times i have to say this)

but dont use D6. its intended purely as a replacement for C9++ in offering a more balanced experience. (both of which should not be used in a situation where you want fine tuned balance)

hence limiting PRs to 3 max (which is already too many for most setups but it kinda works anyway).

some D6 setups are townsided, and some would consider to be scumsided, all are relatively in the bounds of playability (with some being more painful than others)

in any event, there should definitely not be a 13er setup run

i could go into more detail on remembers posts (its semi open not semi closed, fakeclaiming is really $#@!ing hard to implement in small setup/modular setup, PRs scale based on strength, etc)

but I don't think it should be played so its moot.

IMPO, host a 17 player setup. its the best size for spectating from a jury perspective at least and gives you far more freedom when designing roles.

On creating a setup for it? Well, thats harder unless you want to go full closed setup.

The problem with open/semi open setups is that anyone who knows vaguely how a setup is created knows there is no possible way there will be more than 4 town PRs (and 4 is cutting it, as 3 is in a 13er)

Most of the time you'll get something like 3 Prs and 2 mafia prs. And straying too far further (reducing town prs forces them to be stronger and reducing mafia prs, and same the other way) has problems of introducing more and more variance and role interactions, and being generally less fun for people to play in either alignment.

all semi open type setups have fake claiming as a problem. matrix 12 had that too, and so will any open game if you want to create a setup that allows fake claiming it either has to have enough variability that claiming a role in every setup case will not backfire for mafia, but also that multiple mafia can get away with claiming and that town still has enough power that they feel they can achieve something

then it also comes down to what people find fun

a lot of people enjoy open setups a lot more than closed setups

so you need to decide closed or open/semi open (or semi closed if you can come up with a good design)

closed offers fake claiming, but its incredibly dull to watch from a spectator point of view considering the nature of the setups anyway

might post more on this later.

This quote chain express the issue with d6 nicely.

On that note, I don't think a setup with town Oracles/Vengeful is a great idea just because, much like alignment cop, these roles warp a game and are oppressive to play against.

Those three roles require relatively little skill to play as, but a lot of skill to properly play against. That just doesn't seem fair in the tournament format.

Just getting it out of the way, Watcher and PGO are both in a similar boat lol

[Jaleb]

Can someone explain why alignment checks are completely voodoo in champs anyway? Feels like if a cop needs to check a player, that player probably wasn't good enough to qual for the next round cause they were doing a poor job at their role.

[Zack]

My personal opinion on all the modbot roles for champs.

Sure

Town Doctor

Jack of All Trades - using abilities from "sure"

Jailkeeper

Neapolitan (each night targets a player and sees whether or not they are a VT) - I had to look up what this was but it seems fine. Don't use it in the same game as a role cop, obviously. Only caveat is if you want to avoid obscure roles people might not be familiar with.

Role Cop - assuming this gives the same result for VT and goon

Roleblocker

Tracker - remember the power level scales significantly depending on the number of roles and wolves in the game

Vanilla / Goon

Town Vigilante - in a 1-shot, 2-shot, or odd/even night form. Both games I played in Season 5 had a n1 kill and it was fine, but n1 vigs do leave the possibility of a benneh getting bimps'd. A full vig puts too much impact and role power in one player's hands.

Wolf Watcher

I'd rather not

Bodyguard - dying for someone else feels weird for a champs game. A wolf bodyguard is silly.

Wolf Doctor - feels lame in a game where any vigs will be limited

Healer + Poisoner - these are cool roles but probably too fancy and swingy

Motion Detector + Voyeur - I don't know why these were in 2x5, but they're obscure and $%#!ty and pointless.

Town Watcher - oppressive role that takes little skill

Wolf Vigilante - this wolf role is going to be 1000x more important than any other no matter how limited it is

No

Alignment Cop - other people have already done a good job of covering the problems with this in a champs format

Alignment Oracle - oppressive and peeks are meh in champs

Arsonist + Firefighter - lol

Day Vigilante - too jarring and impactful

Full Cop - it's like an alignment cop, but worse

Innocent Child + Masons - I'm against champs having roles with free peeks and/or that significantly alter how someone randing it might play

Lover - lol

Miller + Godfather + Framer - no

Neighbor - I guess this is more debatable but I don't think it belongs

Parity Cop - Not as bad as alignment cop but still

Role Oracle - why does this exist?

Suicide Bomber - lol

Treestump - lol

Universal Backup - no

Serial Killer, Third Party / Neutrals, Multiball - get tarred and feathered

Modifiers

Backup - nah

Bulletproof - nah

Flipless - lol

Macho - why?

Ninja + Strongman - as a 1-shot maybe?

Recluse - no

Vengeful - nah

[Lissa]

Can someone explain why alignment checks are completely voodoo in champs anyway? Feels like if a cop needs to check a player, that player probably wasn't good enough to qual for the next round cause they were doing a poor job at their role.

disagree

cops particularly in cop setups can be played aiming for villagers, for one

also it’s not something that can really be played the way out of very much

[Lissa]

also they’re gameplay warping as a full role

[Arapocalypse]

Turbo's up, come play: https://www.mafiauniverse.com/forums...ntial-Setup%21

[Arapocalypse]

doesn't alignment oracle have the same problem as alignment cop? it also has a particular and weird dynamic in that the wolves are going to avoid killing the player with that role if they can help it. I wouldn't use it. I didn't remember d6 very well when I initially brought it up, and I don't know that it's really viable. Any version for champs would be so heavily altered from the original version that it's basically a different setup entirely anyways.

Smartbomb quoting last year's thread made me realize we're going through a repeat of the same problem, where the thread starts with basically "make a new setup" and not much more direction than that.

There's ten different conversations going on here, think we should probably focus on banging out these issues first:

- How many communities are going to be represented?

- How many games?

- How many players in each game?

- How is the whole jury system going to work?

Some of these are intertwined, but they need to be dealt with fairly definitively before a setup can really be decided.

Regardless of the above, I believe the following should hold true:

1. Use open or semi-open setups.
2. Use the same setup across all games.
3. Setup should be relatively simple and easy to understand.
4. Stay as close to "standard" rules as possible. (This means full role flips too.)

The OP is more detailed, but basically: Those things are indeed all intertwined, so the priority for me is FIRST getting a good setup decided. Then the rest is decided from that.

rn people have given suggestions, now just choose a starting point

I think the only concrete suggestions I've seen are expanding D6 or using the All-Stars setup. I don't think the latter is a good idea, and I can't speak to the first before actually seeing the new D6 setup. But to be clear, if there is a good D6 expanded to be made, I'm very onboard for that.

I don't feel like I want to limit people's suggestions. To be clear, I'm not looking for people to suggest "15'er open" or "17'er closed". I'm looking for specific setup suggestions.

The only hard limit is: I want the games to be automated, and to be for between 9 to 17 players. I PREFER 13, 15 or 17 players, but if there are no good suggestions for any of those and only a good suggestion for 9 or 11 players, then so be it. I PREFER open or semi-open, but if we don't get any good suggestions, then I guess we have to roll with closed.

Thingy... my experience is that if you give no direction and a vague request to do something to no one in particular, it's not going to get done.

Is there a specific reason we can't do 2x5 with some slight tweaks? As someone who played in champs, it seemed pretty much fine. Does there really need to be a new format every year?

What sort of slight tweaks are you thinking? Would probably count as a new setup, I think!!

[Aquilla]

i'm overall in agreement with Zack's assessment of the roles.

[Aquilla]

if we're gonna rework 2x5 suggestions for the mafia side of things, either change the full goons to have 1 roleblocker, or add an extra setup with 1 roleblocker and 3 goons. A column with a mafia role cop feels good still.

[Aquilla]

N/A	4 Mafia Goons	3 Mafia Goons and 1 Mafia Rolecop	3 Mafia Goons and 1 Mafia Roleblocker
Row 1	tbd	tbd	tbd
Row 2	tbd	tbd	tbd
Row 3	tbd	tbd	tbd
Row 4	tbd	tbd	tbd
Row 5	tbd	tbd	tbd

[Mantichora]

My personal opinion on all the modbot roles for champs.

Sure

Town Doctor

Jack of All Trades - using abilities from "sure"

Jailkeeper

Neapolitan (each night targets a player and sees whether or not they are a VT) - I had to look up what this was but it seems fine. Don't use it in the same game as a role cop, obviously. Only caveat is if you want to avoid obscure roles people might not be familiar with.

Role Cop - assuming this gives the same result for VT and goon

Roleblocker

Tracker - remember the power level scales significantly depending on the number of roles and wolves in the game

Vanilla / Goon

Town Vigilante - in a 1-shot, 2-shot, or odd/even night form. Both games I played in Season 5 had a n1 kill and it was fine, but n1 vigs do leave the possibility of a benneh getting bimps'd. A full vig puts too much impact and role power in one player's hands.

Wolf Watcher

I'd rather not

Bodyguard - dying for someone else feels weird for a champs game. A wolf bodyguard is silly.

Wolf Doctor - feels lame in a game where any vigs will be limited

Healer + Poisoner - these are cool roles but probably too fancy and swingy

Motion Detector + Voyeur - I don't know why these were in 2x5, but they're obscure and $%#!ty and pointless.

Town Watcher - oppressive role that takes little skill

Wolf Vigilante - this wolf role is going to be 1000x more important than any other no matter how limited it is

No

Alignment Cop - other people have already done a good job of covering the problems with this in a champs format

Alignment Oracle - oppressive and peeks are meh in champs

Arsonist + Firefighter - lol

Day Vigilante - too jarring and impactful

Full Cop - it's like an alignment cop, but worse

Innocent Child + Masons - I'm against champs having roles with free peeks and/or that significantly alter how someone randing it might play

Lover - lol

Miller + Godfather + Framer - no

Neighbor - I guess this is more debatable but I don't think it belongs

Parity Cop - Not as bad as alignment cop but still

Role Oracle - why does this exist?

Suicide Bomber - lol

Treestump - lol

Universal Backup - no

Serial Killer, Third Party / Neutrals, Multiball - get tarred and feathered

Modifiers

Backup - nah

Bulletproof - nah

Flipless - lol

Macho - why?

Ninja + Strongman - as a 1-shot maybe?

Recluse - no

Vengeful - nah

A couple notes: I think JK>Medic basically always because mechanical depth + less info on early wave w/ better outplay potential from either alignment.

I can understand why suicide bomber would be no, but mafia suicide bomber actually adds a tonne of depth to a game where mafia use it right. It basically hard counters some of the more oppressive roles. Still down to say no to it in this format + it's utility being niche and requiring a grasp of weird mechanics.

Tracker is the gold standard for investigative roles imo.

[Geo]

Is it possible to run two types of setup alongside each other? A role madness setup for those who want to play with PRs, and a Mountainous setup for those who prefer no PRs? Keep in mind I've never seen a champs game and have no idea how the series works. I'm not Champs material but I know I would prefer to play Mountainous if given the choice, so there's gotta be (maybe... possibly... hopefully...) others out there who feel the same. Right?

Along with this, what about the possibility of running one setup for the qualifiers and then a different setup (potentially mountainous or a variant thereof) for the wildcards/finale? Justification being that the community-pleasing, role madness aspect is used for the more social, "get to know you" type rounds that encourage community building, and then for the business end of champs later on we go with a more tournament-friendly setup.

While I see the logic behind this, I think it'd be problematic in the sense that ... Some of these communities are not at all used to mountainous games, and they would feel handicapped - rightfully so - in a wildcard/finale game if they are going into that never having tried it before. So it doesn't feel right to have a format that would probably never allow someone new to mountainous to win, whereas if we have mountainous during the qualifiers where more players advance from each game and the average player quality should be lower, you still have a chance to adapt and learn the setup without being overwhelmed by other top tier players with plenty of mountainous experience.

Yeah I think Mountainous in wildcard and finale game with qualifiers having a lot of diversity would be a good idea.

At the end of the season last year I was definitely on the side of not having post limits but having been on this site a little longer and realizing why ridiculous post quantity affects games I think qualifiers should have something like a two hundred ppp limit with the last hour open and then wildcard and finale has no limits.

Perception of highposters has a bit of influence on the game and a game with a lot of them ends up being overwhelming to anyone who has any IRL obligations that limits access to catching up on a cell or computer and then there's communities who produce players who trend on length over quantity and in not just mafia but in general, the more presence someone has the more influential they are, meaning certain playstyle earn more influence than they deserve. The validity of highposters comes mostly from interaction and you could still keep that playstyle while posting under 200 ppp so long as your interactions are focused.

I know this is mostly a setup discussion though, just wanted to throw that out there. And maybe I'm just arguing that because I have found the site's meta to be overwhelming due to postcount.

[Angrypotato]

Not sure if it was mentioned, but I am highly against having a cop of any faction to be in the game. Too rng.It is not fun to be redpeeked by cop.

[Jackofhearts2005]

My personal opinion on all the modbot roles for champs.

Sure

Town Doctor

Jack of All Trades - using abilities from "sure"

Jailkeeper

Neapolitan (each night targets a player and sees whether or not they are a VT) - I had to look up what this was but it seems fine. Don't use it in the same game as a role cop, obviously. Only caveat is if you want to avoid obscure roles people might not be familiar with.

Role Cop - assuming this gives the same result for VT and goon

Roleblocker

Tracker - remember the power level scales significantly depending on the number of roles and wolves in the game

Vanilla / Goon

Town Vigilante - in a 1-shot, 2-shot, or odd/even night form. Both games I played in Season 5 had a n1 kill and it was fine, but n1 vigs do leave the possibility of a benneh getting bimps'd. A full vig puts too much impact and role power in one player's hands.

Wolf Watcher

I'd rather not

Bodyguard - dying for someone else feels weird for a champs game. A wolf bodyguard is silly.

Wolf Doctor - feels lame in a game where any vigs will be limited

Healer + Poisoner - these are cool roles but probably too fancy and swingy

Motion Detector + Voyeur - I don't know why these were in 2x5, but they're obscure and $#@!ty and pointless.

Town Watcher - oppressive role that takes little skill

Wolf Vigilante - this wolf role is going to be 1000x more important than any other no matter how limited it is

No

Alignment Cop - other people have already done a good job of covering the problems with this in a champs format

Alignment Oracle - oppressive and peeks are meh in champs

Arsonist + Firefighter - lol

Day Vigilante - too jarring and impactful

Full Cop - it's like an alignment cop, but worse

Innocent Child + Masons - I'm against champs having roles with free peeks and/or that significantly alter how someone randing it might play

Lover - lol

Miller + Godfather + Framer - no

Neighbor - I guess this is more debatable but I don't think it belongs

Parity Cop - Not as bad as alignment cop but still

Role Oracle - why does this exist?

Suicide Bomber - lol

Treestump - lol

Universal Backup - no

Serial Killer, Third Party / Neutrals, Multiball - get tarred and feathered

Modifiers

Backup - nah

Bulletproof - nah

Flipless - lol

Macho - why?

Ninja + Strongman - as a 1-shot maybe?

Recluse - no

Vengeful - nah

This is my actual opinion except bring on motion detectors and voyeurs.

The fear is players don’t want mountainous and we don’t want swingy or OP roles. So “not mountainous” with weak prs is perfectly fine.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I’d be perfectly happy with all $%#! super weak prs. “It’s not mountainous.” ?

[Zack]

The weak PRs like that are functionally not much different from an innocent child, and so end up as a get-out-of-a-mislynch-free card and not much else. I'd rather have a VT then adjust the rest of the setup to compensate.

[mhsmith0]

Can someone explain why alignment checks are completely voodoo in champs anyway? Feels like if a cop needs to check a player, that player probably wasn't good enough to qual for the next round cause they were doing a poor job at their role.

disagree

cops particularly in cop setups can be played aiming for villagers, for one

also it’s not something that can really be played the way out of very much

Also, at some point if you're a wolf you're going to need to play in a way that will piss SOME people off. If the rando you got into a fight with happened to be the cop, that sucks for you in a pretty heavy bad luck way that doens't really have a whole lot to do with player skill on your end.

[Distorted]

I haven't read the thread, but will post my thoughts and opinions on it anyways; like a good mafia player.

I think the OP linked game is too PR heavy. RNG will play a huge factor in the outcome of the games and a lot of players will either get carried by night actions, or be depending on night actions. I think the championship games should stick as close to the standard, original mafia as possible. That is a better way to see players skill as well. You could have an awful player who carries the game because they got lucky night actions and nobody really needed to do much else.

I will try to think/post a few ideas/setups when I have some time (and not just being lazy) to do so.

I understand trying to keep the setups exciting, but in the end, what it boils down to is Mafia is a social, community game. We play it because we enjoy the communities we play with and the atmosphere that our unique player-bases provide. I think focusing on trying to get more people to spectate and be involved within each of the communities is the most important part.

So, i'm voting for a standard, generic setup. since anyone who plays FM will be able to understand the basics and it is much easier and accurate to measure player abilities that way

[Distorted]

Unrelated to the current discussion, but something I don't want to get lost in the shuffle:

Please keep in mind that this thread, taking place on MU and being predominantly if not entirely populated by MU regulars, will shape our perception of setups that are and are not acceptable/fun. We need to keep in mind that the goal of this is something that the communities will respond to, not simply one that's MU-sanctioned.

Obvious scum trying to derail the conversation.
##Vote generalhankerchief

[Mantichora]

The weak PRs like that are functionally not much different from an innocent child, and so end up as a get-out-of-a-mislynch-free card and not much else. I'd rather have a VT then adjust the rest of the setup to compensate.

Just adding to this, sometimes the entire point of the PRs being added is innochild lite. Expanding on that, I think Visitor would be the way to go. Visitor in a symetrical tracker setup or something.