It makes very little impact in the long run. Literally every sport you play has luck involved. Yet the good players don't whine about it.
Only idiots like you who have to cheat to be sure about who is mafia needs to worry about such things. Because they get mad when even after cheating they score less points than someone who wins in harder setups. Cheaters like you have to play easier setups so that you can get a player in gy to cheat.
That is quite true and a natural consequence by the nature of the game. I'd argue that large victory point differentials only makes this fact worse however.
So yes, your role is an inherently random variable but no need to make that random variable even more impactful.
scumsided setups are a crapshoot gamble bc most of the time you are at the mercy of the role you get at the start, bc the majority of the time town arent going to be able to change the result to a town win
Player A can roll mafia 13/30 times while player B rolls mafia 7/30 times. Such variances are expected by statistics. In this case, why should Player B get this advantage?
High town payout setups provide chance to chasers to take a risk and get ahead of others.
I believe that at least one high payout setup should be there in a round. It gives you the chance to recover after losses. It isnt like you are getting it for free. The risk is higher. You have to work harder to win it.
The new admins and mods have no idea what a competition is. Rerards keep complaining that they won same number of games and still behind others. That's because you played easy setups. You didnt have the courage to play harder setups. Manhunt was a comp setup in earlier times and we faced no problems. Poeple got 120 points for sk wins. Cry babies cried about it and mods banned it.
If you say it was dependent on luck then you are wrong. You can't get lucky for 30 games in a row.
The setup variance almost always determines at least a few trophy postings every round. Players are tied in wins all the time by the round's end, and who gets the tiebreaker is determined exclusively by these imbalances.
I think the biggest problem is that you can't control the alignment you roll. So even if a player is really good, if they keep rolling as mafia on a 70/50 setup, a player of equal skill who keeps rolling town and winning will be far ahead of them because they'd be getting 20 points more per game. Best to have the payouts fairly even for comp, imo.
I don't get the point of banning 70 point setups. The players that can run on 70 point are better than the ones that play D1 ml setups and are dependant on the ml to make it past the first lynch. They're also so heavily skewed BECAUSE it takes effort to play them.
Punishing good players for how destructive point farming is to competitive play is the ultimate injustice. The 70 point setups aren't even unbalanced if you you remove player skill from the equation. If a D1 ml setup can't compete with with a D1 mylo setup that's also good.
deleteddeletedabout 9 years ago
honestly there are many balanced setups that can still be comped, like vdlt, stbs, and ddp. but other scumsided setups like tsibasnbp and frontier justice 2.0, maybe even armed and dangerous and armed and redacted should also be acceptable
