It's the kind of offense that deserves a permaban. It's not like it's something you can do as a mistake - a permaban is the punishment for explicitly saying "fuck the rules, I bet I can win this game if I cheat, even if it gets me modkilled."

 

I'm not having Krogan or Evan Tide in future games I host because of blatant disrespect for the host and other players.

 

I just say we should put offending players on a publicly available blacklist, with the nature of their offense detailed on the list itself. Prospective game runners would then be able to make informed decisions about whether they want to allow those players into their games.

Maybe have these blacklists be updated every game, with names being struck off the list every 3 completed games.

I actually quite like this system.

 

This. There is no real authority on these games and attempting a blanket ban is a bit much.

 

Deliberate game ruining (outside the scope of the game) is just not on as far as I'm concerned and puts the effort of 15++ people (game size pending) to waste.

 

Personally I feel a blanket permaban on games is too much for the first offence. Blatantly ruining games twice, however, should be punishable with a VERY long game ban or a permaban from games.

For the one-time offenders I support a, maybe a month long ban, instead of by number of games and such. This is because a few games can be running concurrently. Of course, game hosts make the final decision whether to allow players to play in the event of a blacklist, but i don't think many hosts would allow it.

That said, stupid posts are stupid and I feel should be judged according to case-by-case. So a blacklist could show the recommended punishment and such for hosts' and players' reference.

 

Outta thumbs, but I agree with Lutris. That sounds like a pretty even system.

I'd also like to point out that I have a Lord of the Rings mafia in the works. Not sure at what point a mafia is added to the list of on-the-way games, but putting it out there so a slot can be saved somewhere in the coming month(and a half?).

 

I plead a No-Contest entry in the records for Dresden2 in line with BatMafia.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who would advocate this.

 

Why? It's basically going through the same spiral of death as Dresden 1, and that counted.

 

Yes, but god-only-knows why.

 

Well, even with the screwups in Dres 1 the town would have won.

Dres 2 is still more even, even with the screw ups.

 

I'm not blind. I know what I did.

 

As much as I hate saying it...

KaiDASH, you were right about Dresden2 and I'm sorry for being antagonistic.

You've won this round, you crazy Filipino fembot. D8

 

not really necessary, but ok

 

Nothing about balance was what happened with this game.

Well, I suppose you could be talking about something else but it seems like his bet was it would fail.

Heyyyyy!

 

Smile, you know what else was really well balanced?

FNK. I counted on everyone to do exactly what they should have done, and... like clockwork, it failed. Anything that you "count" on, just know that human nature skews all probabilities. I can also say that I probably spent 10-20 times as much time just going over the possible scenarios in that game, etc.

But FNK failed - I didn't think of several factors which were exacerbated by people just... existing.

The thing is - Kai DID think of factors that would end up being bad for the game, and they were never corrected. Jon thought of factors, I remember telling you "oh hey, you should probably change this or that mechanic" once or twice, even.

Bitterness aside, damn it, Smile. It didn't have to be ruined. You actively posted in ways that seemed to be designed to be inflammatory.

We need like, a gamemodding 101 thread. :\

 

Okay, I was content with leaving the Dresdenmafia bullshitarama untouched.

Smile, the point of being a game host is NOT to run around, make mistakes, cover them up, and claim that it was all in the interest of a quote-un-quote 'balanced game'. The game host is to follow their own rules to the letter- this is why we spend hours and hours slaving over our rulesets and take any valid advice we receive as gospel.

I admit, I don't quite fit my own criteria for perfect game host (reference HoT1, Silens' endgame Azor Ahai ability use), but that was truly a mistake in wording on my part, and did not result in any unfair bias to any party. Silens still had ample chance to win (he was still top contender for the win even with the adjustments), despite derping it up and allowing Palindrome the upper hand in the end.

Regardless, I disagreed with the idea of taking an inherently flawed game design (read: Dresden 1) and making a few tweaks to remarket it as an entirely new game. Still, it appeared that you took precautions to mitigate the failures of the previous games, so I didn't say anything or get involved. I'm not much into Dresden anyway.

The current outcry about your failings as a game host however, combined with the horrible track record of game hosting that we've had for the past several games, is disheartening.

To that end, here are some tenets of being a good game host.

1. Make a good ruleset.

2. Obsess for weeks and months on the ruleset to make it fucking perfect.

3. Show your 'perfect' ruleset to a fucking horde of intelligent people. Take any fucking advice that makes any fucking sense to heart, and adjust the game accordingly. Because it's not fucking perfect before it's been chewed up, digested, and shat out by experienced, analytical minds, then mashed up and regurgitated as a better product.

4. Make a good ruleset.

5. Follow your own fucking ruleset like it's gospel. The rules are God. Don't fuck things up (I point my finger here at Lungs, Fiat, Ashaya, Riley, and Smile) and go nuts after you do.

6. Criticism is a good thing.

7. FOR GOD'S SAKES MAKE YOUR POSTS EASILY READABLE AND DISCERNABLE AND FUCKING GOOD TO LOOK AT.


I'm about done here.