The [Jury] System

[Daniel Blackworth]

Reborn Mafia Club has used a cummulative percentage-based system for both Seasons 1 and 2 to establish a semi-competitive leaderboard for its players. However, observing this system, it has been deemed outdated and somewhat imperfect in different aspects. With this, after a level of discussion and deliberation with core individuals, The [Jury] System has been developed as a means to improve the competitive aspect in playing Mafia and recognize the efforts of hardworking, skilled players.

 

I. Issues with the Current Winrate System

Spoiler

A huge percentage of the problem with the current system lies in how it hinges largely towards luck. In some instances,  it is possible for a player to earn a good winrate because of the effort they place in to working with their teammates, but in other cases, some players obtain good winrates simply because they happened to be at the right place at the right time. In other instances, players who perform well, but fail at the end for some unfortunate reason, do not get some level of consolation for the effort they placed in to fighting for a win. This problem can be addressed by not limiting the MVP award to a single player, but by giving due to a number of people.

 

Another problem with the winrates system as it is is the concept of how "percentages" are used. Percentages take into account the number of games won and the total number of games played. However, this only works completely if the number of games played is equal across the board or if there is a method to equate or level the differences in the number of games played. To address this issue, I believe that assigning points instead of having percentages is better because it puts everyone on a level field. However, one problem to this is that players may simply join a game for the sake of participation and possibly getting at least lucky enough to win without much effort. A way to counter this kind of behavior is by putting a penalty to inactivty to discourage a lack of activity from players.

 

Another issue, albeit minor, is that the host isn't always the perfect judge because by nature, humans are imperfect while opinions are always subjective. The problem that lies therein is that players may not necessarily agree with the results of a certain game (such as the assignment of MVP) because they have a different opinion with valid points. One of the ways to further judgement is by having more people to present their views and talk about how the game progressed. By doing so, better judgement is created. Exactly how would this work? The different judges will assign points to specific players and this will be accumulated. This portion will be expounded in a later section.

 

II. Gripes to the Most Ideal Solution

Spoiler

Based from the survey and from observation, players may be grouped in three camps: (1) players who continue to read the game even after dying, (2) players who continue to read the game after dying, but only pay attention to phase changes and such, and (3) players who only return once a game ends. This means that not all players show interest in how a game progresses when they die, especially if this is an early death. 

 

The most ideal solution to improving winrates is by having a collaboration of hosts and players in deciding the best players of the game. In this system, players and hosts alike will select the top 4 players in the game. 5 points will be given to the top player, 4 points to the 2nd, 3 points to the 3rd, and 2 points to the 4th. Players who exhibit great skill in either alignment may be given points. On top of this, those from the winning faction receives 3 points.

 

The major gripes of this system is that not everyone pays attention to the game post-death or at times, even in-game. This kind of system works best in important matches like championships as there is a sense of urgency and importance guaranteed to be placed into coming up with points.

 

Thus, a less ideal, but practical and good solution would be to have a collaboration between the host and some outside spectators to observe the actions of the players and select who among these players performed best.

 

III. The [Jury] System

Spoiler

The [Jury] System is a system based on an actual Jury wherein a group of people convene and make an impartial decision. In the Mafia scene, the Jury is composed of 3 people. The Head Juror is the Host and he/she will be assisted by two Jurors who volunteer to be a part of the Jury before a game starts.

 

Important Questions:

How does one become a member of the Jury in a Mafia game?

 

There are two methods possible to become a member of the Jury in a Mafia game.

 

The first method is by becoming a Host or a Co-Host of the game. These individuals automatically become Jurors because they have the best grasp of the game from their perspective.

 

The second method is by volunteering to become a Juror. One must show their intention to become a Juror by stating that they want to become a Juror once a game goes live. There may be one or two Jurors depending on the number of hosts.

 

What does it mean to be a member of the Jury?

 

Members of the Jury (volunteers) decide before the game starts on whether they want to be fully informed of inside-game information such as the players' alginment and whom they perform their respective actions on

 

The members of the Jury will have a specified Discord chat, where they will discuss about the game and the players. Their main responsibility is to pay keen attention to the game, most especially on the performance of the players. Similarly, they shall discuss their findings with the others Jurors.

 

At the end of the game, Jurors will each assign points to the best players in the game from their respective perspectives. 

 

How does the voting procedure work?

 

The 3 members of the Jury (the host and the two other members; alternatively, two hosts and one member works too) will give points to the best 4 players of the game. Being a best player is not being the most valuable player in the game nor is it being the most positive contributor; instead, being the best or at least, one of the best, means that they are a player who performed exceptionally well as a Mafia player in their respective alignment.

 

The members of the Jury will submit their points to a private chat that can only be seen by moderators. They shall not discuss on how many points they will be giving a certain player, although vague notions are permissible to a certain extent.

 

How are points assigned?

 

Each Juror will give a ranked Top Four from the game. These are the assigned number of points:

 

* 5 points - Top 1 Player

* 4 points - Top 2 Player

* 3 points - Top 3 Player

* 2 points - Top 4 Player

 

Additionally, players may receive points based on the following:

 

* 5 points for being a Juror

* 3 points for being a member of the winning faction/s

* 2 points for dying on Night Zero

* 1 point for dying on Day One

 

Players may also receive demerits:

 

* - 2 points for failing to meet post and vote requirements for two day phases (player)

* - 2 points for failing to show activity and interest in the game for two day phases (juror)

 

The total amount of points a player garners from a game will be added to their amount of points in the Leaderboard.

 

What is the basis for a Juror's decision-making process?

 

Jurors have to be impartial and be devoid of biases. They must also be tactical and critical in giving points to players. Jurors will be guided by this rubric:

 

50% Skill Employed (This refers to the individual skill shown by a player in terms of different aspects such as scumhunting, versatility, persuasion, developing reads, and other factors)

30% Coordination (This refers to how they collaborate with other players, especially of their own faction, to come up with the best course of action to achieve their goal)

20% Use of Role (This refers to how a player utilizes their role and given ability and how they employ it to benefit their own faction)

 

In some instances, Jurors may place less or more value in a specific criteria based on their personal opinion. In these cases, Jurors may make their own decisions; however, they should be ready to take responsibility for it.

 

If you have any inquiries and questions, feel free to ask in the thread, so that these may be addressed as soon as possible.

[Daniel Blackworth]

I give my thanks to @Alistair @Alaris @Corso @sailboat @Venus @Amine Chankey3ft7 @LykosHand for their opinions and suggestions in shaping and making the Jury System possible.

[Daniel Blackworth]

We're looking for another Juror for WitchCourt! Please respond in this thread if you'd like to be a Juror. (The main requirements only are that you're not in the current player list and that you're willing to read everything that has transpired and will transpire)

[Anime]

@mazino i cant ping tfw, :angryEyes: anw what games do you need juries for? im up

[Finalbeta]

I would like to apply as a Juror if it's possible. I have always been good at reading games and a new experience can be definitely fascinating.

[Chickens]

@Finalbetayou apply to be a juror for a game when it is in signup

i think

 

 

dont  let that stop you from harassing the hosts tho

[Daniel Blackworth]

@Finalbeta Thank you for volunteering! As Bean answered, applying for a Juror is done once a game opens sign-ups. If you wish to be a Juror for a particular game, please do so in its official thread. Stay tuned!

[ZeroPassion]

When the points are finally revealed, could the jurors also have a sort of write-up as to why they chose the certain players with their reasoning in it? 

 

It seems to me that after the game ends, there really was no discussion of how people did outside of random talk in the game server and could highlight what was good to notice in a specific game (playstyle, strategy, etc) 

[NickCrash]

The jurors have their own chat while the game takes place. They discuss the good and bad plays of each player, usually after the day phases.