ZzFifthElementzZ wrote:The idea is great.
BUT,
If the Concealer can change messages in the chat-log, could this potentially damage any in-game reports?. For example, a player from the mafia team begins to spam "JOHN PROCTOR IS GODFATHER, I AM MAFIOSO, MARY IS JANITOR AND WILLIAM IS CONCEALER!" .. the concealer most likely is going to edit/delete the message quickly. Once the reports are in, are the moderators going to get the edited/deleted message, or will the original text be there?.
Why? Why shouldn’t you make a role that manipulates? Maybe that’ll make players pay more attention to what’s going on. Like, why you gotta immediately discard an idea when you see the slightest inconvenience in it?BasicFourLife wrote:The idea is horrible.
It messes with information such as SRing and information by posts and manipulates with the most important part of the game. The game should be based around that, you shouldn’t make a role which manipulates. Also as in mentioned, messes with the reports system.
AfroMonkey010 wrote:I like this idea, I just think it needs very clear boundaries.
Concealer - Night Ability
Erase one player's messages from chat history permanently.
Villagerlover wrote:I like this a lot.
It touches a subject that I haven't seen touched yet.
I am not all up for the idea of non-mafia members being notified when a mafia members checks /m though....it should just remain completely anonymous and force people to pay attention. Mafia should just have an ability to know what the original messages were versus the fake ones without any interference from town. (1)
Anyways, yeh! I like it a lot.
My only issue I can see is maybe the chat messages could get spammed to make the job of the Concealer harder....like. A sheriff accuses someone of being mafia. So to help get around the concealer, they will try to spam their results many times and give the concealer more work. (2)
But anyways, it's a really great Mafia Deception role, and should be added because it punishes people who don't pay attention to the chatbox. Way to go for thinking outside the box! (3)
/Support
KingArmaan wrote:Nice idea, but I think its too OP, maybe you can create a limit to how many messages can they delete and/or how many times they use their ability and/or how long their ability lasts.
sunbird1002 wrote:A pretty decent idea, overall. I havent been on these forums in a while but I love to come back to see an unique idea like this. Now, there is one thing I can see. I have tried to play the game, with my chat log visible the whole game, without closing it.
It was HARD. I couldnt use my day abilities, nor vote. I could access my own will, but no one else's without closing it.
However, if 1 town wants to become the fall guy, then they could combat against it well. For example, roles like Sheriffs or Investigators still have access to their will, chat and night abilities. Playing with it up is a nuisance, but not impossible. Spamming chat is an easier, but less foolproof technique. I am just suggesting a way for people to counter this role. The idea is good, but I am just considering how this idea can be countered.
sunbird1002 wrote:A pretty decent idea, overall. I havent been on these forums in a while but I love to come back to see an unique idea like this. Now, there is one thing I can see. I have tried to play the game, with my chat log visible the whole game, without closing it.
It was HARD. I couldnt use my day abilities, nor vote. I could access my own will, but no one else's without closing it.
However, if 1 town wants to become the fall guy, then they could combat against it well. For example, roles like Sheriffs or Investigators still have access to their will, chat and night abilities. Playing with it up is a nuisance, but not impossible. Spamming chat is an easier, but less foolproof technique. I am just suggesting a way for people to counter this role. The idea is good, but I am just considering how this idea can be countered.
BasicFourLife wrote:Why do we need a role which manipulates with speaking. No role should EVER do this. Ranked is supposed to be based around scum-reading and good plays, not night actions, RNG and luck.
DestroyerR225 wrote:Abilities: At any time, you may edit or delete messages in the chat log, as long as that message is not in the recent chat box.
sunbird1002 wrote:So, time for some constructive criticism, I guess? People are more inclined to spam their message to get their point across, with this role in game. I think to solve this is that, if a Concealer conceals/edits one bit of chat, then all identical pieces of that chat posted by the same person will be deleted too. This will stop identical copying and pasting. Of course, they may simply add punctuation, every time, but it stops the most spammy techniques.(1)
This role, to be used much at all usefully, can have one large effect. They could simply delete huge swathes of chat, meaning that people have no log of it at all. This is extremely destructive for the game, as it means, if mafia just talk a lot, and spam the chat, then nothing will get across. For this, I recommend a small delay between each and every time you edit one line, to stop this technique, or at least, make it harder to edit lots of text at once. Currently, how I see it, this role has a large scope to edit large swathes of text. This change makes editing text the preferred play, not the destruction of it.(2)
The mafia whispering during the day I'm fine with. The mafia may have got more things to say than they get time with during the night, though this is less essential since the chat liberation (from le Spy). Seems to be just an extra ability filed on top of the role's main unique ability, but it doesn't stop it being a decent one.(3)
Schultz128 wrote:Everything about this role besides the Mafia day chat is busted honestly.
Message editing/deleting isn't just punishment for lack of attention, because no one could theoretically keep up with everything being said in the game and be able to remember what everyone said. It's just an unfair mechanic. (1)
It doesn't help that it can perform the ability with no cooldown or cap. (2)
/no support
Flake wrote:The issue I have with this role is that it directly removes/alters opinion, and thus removes a player's potential to make skilful plays by way of their opinion. This role effectively causes a trade-off; it encourages tactical and active play whilst simultaneously removing tactical and active play. Whether the trade-off is worth it or not is arguable, but I wouldn't say it is, mainly due to the fast pace of the game; the potential to make tactical plays is very situational as it would only really make a difference in cases of crucial information, of which will usually be memorable anyway. As such, the role effectively thrives on Town not paying attention. While the positive effect of this is obvious (Town is encouraged to pay more attention), there is also an overwhelmingly negative effect as a result of this; the Concealer is overly reliant on the skill/attention levels of other players, and not reliant enough on the skill level of the Concealer them self.
Flake wrote:DestroyerR225 wrote:The Concealer is MEANT to be a punishing role, having much more power when the concentration of his opponents slip up. I don’t think it’s bad design; playing it safe until your opponent makes a small mistake to exploit it is a very valid strategy IMO.
There's a significant difference between punishing some after knowing they have already slipped up, and punishing someone for slipping up when you don't know if they will or not in the future. This role uses the latter method, not the former.
Flake wrote:DestroyerR225 wrote:The only thing that changes is that the opponent may not make the mistake, and in that case the former method is also useless.
No idea what I was writing before lol, think I was tired. Both methods are equally awful when a role (like Concealer) is overly reliant on it.
This role places far too much emphasis on the skill level of other players in order for it to be effective; your utility in a game shouldn't be largely decided by factors outside of your own control.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests