|
United States2186 Posts
I don't think it is an unreasonable statement that if someone reads through the stickied thread, applies most of the ideas methodically, and reads past games for both history they can become a decent player in a little bit of time. It's definitely not easy to override newbie instincts but it can be done with some effort and thinking. Going beyond that level gets a lot trickier but if everyone could reach a level where they could reliably contribute positively that would be more than ideal.
Obviously that happens quite rarely. So we have to improve it somehow. It's pretty obvious with the same characters around and limited influx of new players (we should try for another batch soon) that things stagnate. Every so often we need a MBH to come in and shake things up with new ideas and approaches. And we could use games where half the struggle isn't against your own team.
Here are some possibilities:
-Post game reviews by skilled hosts/observers on individual/team performance and how to improve.
-Regular strategy discussions on various subjects (like Ace's hypothetical situation )
-PM'ing players post-game to ask for help (seriously do this)
-Newbie NON CLUE games with a few players there to teach (known players; unknown doesn't work). This might backfire though into the newbies relying on their 'instructors.'
-?
So everyone who is interested in improving, what would help you the most? And to those who haven't been interested in improving, what would get you interested?
|
One thing that i think can help
is some tips specifically on playing as a blue
since many players are like "OH SHIT IM BLUE" and their posting style changes dramatically. a good example was meeple in WAW, if you read his posts you can easily see why the mafia chose to hit him as a possible blue.
so a collection of thoughts from some of us on the finer points of playing medic, dt, vigi, any of the common blue roles, might be helpful for that person who lands on a blue role for the first or second time.
I've only been blue 2-3 times so I don't have much helpful advice in that department. However when I am a medic my method is to 'think like a mafia' and ask myself "If i was red, who would i hit?" and that's who i protect. pretty sure that's standard practice though.
|
I think this is really 2 problems, not just 1 as you have presented it:
1. The newer players think that all they have to do is sign up for the game and they will be immediately competitive with the other players just because they are smart. The problem is that everyone here is pretty smart and experience tends to win out because people tend to have the same basic tendencies when they first start playing (like lurking with a blue role and hoping the mafia don't find you).
So really the onus is on the new players to get themselves up to speed before they start playing games. The problem with this is it involves a few hours worth of work, which most people won't put into their game. I don't really know what the substitute is for this though. I mean, you can have an experienced player play with newer people, but that still results in players being "thrown to the wolves" when they start playing with the general forum and encourages them to read other games/ the tips thread even less because they think they can get by just by playing with an experienced player.
The only real solution that I can see is to have people read through previous games. One way to do it is to possibly set up a streamlined series of games/ posts for people to read when they first show up on the forum. Pick games that are representative of how the experience will be and tell them what they should be looking for. Then tell people that they should read those games if they are serious about playing.
2. Other players are not improving from game to game. I think this can be resolved by more extensive postgame discussion, possibly on the part of the host, but really it can be done by any experienced player who has some input to give. The problem with this idea is it devolves very quickly into a flamewar and people just stop paying attention.
Maybe have a requirement that everyone give some input on how they thought the person immediately below them on the signups list played after the game has ended? (Last person obviously comments on the first.) At the very least, then everyone gets SOME sort of feedback after the game that they can keep in mind going into the next game.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
On April 12 2010 02:28 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
One thing that i think can help
is some tips specifically on playing as a blue
since many players are like "OH SHIT IM BLUE" and their posting style changes dramatically. a good example was meeple in WAW, if you read his posts you can easily see why the mafia chose to hit him as a possible blue.
so a collection of thoughts from some of us on the finer points of playing medic, dt, vigi, any of the common blue roles, might be helpful for that person who lands on a blue role for the first or second time.
I've only been blue 2-3 times so I don't have much helpful advice in that department. However when I am a medic my method is to 'think like a mafia' and ask myself "If i was red, who would i hit?" and that's who i protect. pretty sure that's standard practice though.
I agree with this method. While the basic thing to do is "step up, play natural and don't lurk" the finer points do need to be addressed. I remember there being a debate (can't remember in which thread and too lazy to look) over how to "claim" vigilante. Other things to take into consideration would be more general, such as DTs checking people (and in the case of no PMs), how to work to make a circle without PMs.
On April 12 2010 04:18 Qatol wrote:
I think this is really 2 problems, not just 1 as you have presented it:
1. The newer players think that all they have to do is sign up for the game and they will be immediately competitive with the other players just because they are smart. The problem is that everyone here is pretty smart and experience tends to win out because people tend to have the same basic tendencies when they first start playing (like lurking with a blue role and hoping the mafia don't find you).
So really the onus is on the new players to get themselves up to speed before they start playing games. The problem with this is it involves a few hours worth of work, which most people won't put into their game. I don't really know what the substitute is for this though. I mean, you can have an experienced player play with newer people, but that still results in players being "thrown to the wolves" when they start playing with the general forum and encourages them to read other games/ the tips thread even less because they think they can get by just by playing with an experienced player.
The only real solution that I can see is to have people read through previous games. One way to do it is to possibly set up a streamlined series of games/ posts for people to read when they first show up on the forum. Pick games that are representative of how the experience will be and tell them what they should be looking for. Then tell people that they should read those games if they are serious about playing.
I enjoy this, but you're not going to get many people who do read through previous games in an attempt to gain knowledge, since humankind is lazy >.>
While I read through XV (somebody pointed it toward me) before XVI was started, I can't assume that'd be the majority case. Still though, it'd be nice to have, say, links right at the top of the OP saying "here are some good games to read for new players..."
Incidentally, what games would those be? I haven't had the time to read through all of them yet.
On April 12 2010 04:18 Qatol wrote:
2. Other players are not improving from game to game. I think this can be resolved by more extensive postgame discussion, possibly on the part of the host, but really it can be done by any experienced player who has some input to give. The problem with this idea is it devolves very quickly into a flamewar and people just stop paying attention.
Maybe have a requirement that everyone give some input on how they thought the person immediately below them on the signups list played after the game has ended? (Last person obviously comments on the first.) At the very least, then everyone gets SOME sort of feedback after the game that they can keep in mind going into the next game.
I agree with the post analysis part of the host, and it should be theoretically easier for the host to make such feedback if there are no outside-of-the-thread communications. If PMs are banned in some future games (my next one will have no PMs for most roles) then it's easier for all people and the hosts to read, learn, and give feedback. In XX the game was played mostly in PM land, and for the townies that are just sitting outside I know that's an annoying and deterring thing that would probably prevent them for coming back for more games.
I like the thing about input, but what about the people that die early? If, say, I were to comment on L but I died the first night and L lived the whole time, there wouldn't be much I could say other than what was based in the thread. Once again though, this would be alleviated through the banning of PMs, so I'm for that. Also, would the dead be given the role lists? From modding/observing these last few games with a role list on hand, I can see bull shit going down in "real time," which helps me make my player analyses.
As for the 'noobie non-clue games', yeah the unknown wouldn't help, (or at least didn't help me through XVI >.>, but maybe that's just me...) though without PMs, it'd be more difficult to "instruct" the new guys?
And for the new guys, PM vets or mods after you die / after the game is over and discuss with them what went on. It definitely will help.
So given that most of the people [that would benefit most from this] probably won't be reading this thread, I guess link it as well for future games?
|
Well the whole point of this thread is to figure out what to do for future games. I don't think it matters too much that most people who will benefit from this won't see this thread. We just need to put together a cohesive policy.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
I am fully in favor of the person-above-giving-feedback-to-the-person-below policy (hereby known as... nvm). And if you die, if you would like request a role list? That way you can both discuss the game as it's ongoing with the host and give your feedback to the person below you at the end, as long as you don't talk to them while they're still in the game (code of honour).
And for those that don't/won't improve, I do think something more hardliner such as a warning stating "for those of you that don't make an earnest effort to play this game, you will be given less preference in sign-ups for future games (by the same host)" or something to that extent. It's one thing to go about at the end and try to improve people afterward, and if people are giving their 100% during the game that can only help them. Take into example BM, he went through his first few games... spamming, and in Micro-Mafia II he curbed that down a lot.
|
Heads up: No one's going to do any of this without wanting to improve, and no one's going to want to improve until there's an incentive, positive or negative, to do so.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
On April 12 2010 05:43 L wrote:
Heads up: No one's going to do any of this without wanting to improve, and no one's going to want to improve until there's an incentive, positive or negative, to do so.
Negative: lower priority when selecting for games? / Can't host games (meh?)
Postivie: warm and fuzzy feeling inside? Betterment of useful skills such as character analysis, speaking skills, etc.? Cookies?
|
One thing that still keeps me from being interested in improving -- or playing, for that matter --- is the rather unfriendly atmosphere of many Mafia games here. This has vastly improved in recent games, especially once the hosts decided to enforce good posting etiquette with the threat of modkills. Still, I for one am still uncomfortable with the amount of name-calling and flaming that goes on in games, especially as they seem so unnecessary. Mafia is a game of accusations, to be sure, and I know how people can get worked up during the game. But there's no need to act rude or contemptuous toward other players, continually tell others how you're so much better than they are, or swear excessively and call people names like "moron" or "loser." None of the above contribute anything positive to the game and often cause people to lose interest in playing further. On the other hand, games where everyone tries their best and act civil towards each other are both fun to play in and to watch. So, if the latter became the norm, I'd be more interested in playing and improving.
I also like the idea of the host sharing their perspective of which players did well and which did poorly after the game is over. Not only does the host have a good view of how both sides played, but they're also a good neutral judge of the game. Hopefully, this won't end up piling more work on the host, though.
|
On April 12 2010 05:43 L wrote:
Heads up: No one's going to do any of this without wanting to improve, and no one's going to want to improve until there's an incentive, positive or negative, to do so.
town MVPs get a special icon next to their name
don't you want a special icon??? all the cool kids have one!
edit: this is a terrible idea, please don't listen to me
|
On April 12 2010 07:41 dreamflower wrote:
One thing that still keeps me from being interested in improving -- or playing, for that matter --- is the rather unfriendly atmosphere of many Mafia games here. This has vastly improved in recent games, especially once the hosts decided to enforce good posting etiquette with the threat of modkills. Still, I for one am still uncomfortable with the amount of name-calling and flaming that goes on in games, especially as they seem so unnecessary. Mafia is a game of accusations, to be sure, and I know how people can get worked up during the game. But there's no need to act rude or contemptuous toward other players, continually tell others how you're so much better than they are, or swear excessively and call people names like "moron" or "loser." None of the above contribute anything positive to the game and often cause people to lose interest in playing further. On the other hand, games where everyone tries their best and act civil towards each other are both fun to play in and to watch. So, if the latter became the norm, I'd be more interested in playing and improving.
I also like the idea of the host sharing their perspective of which players did well and which did poorly after the game is over. Not only does the host have a good view of how both sides played, but they're also a good neutral judge of the game. Hopefully, this won't end up piling more work on the host, though.
Social pressure has redeemed far more shitty players in our games than anything else.
Mafia is a game that is partially about reading people and partially about credibility. If you can't manage public perceptions of your own play, then an element of your game is off.
|
We need a noob-only game :O
|
On April 12 2010 01:59 Ver wrote:I don't think it is an unreasonable statement that if someone reads through the stickied thread, applies most of the ideas methodically, and reads past games for both history they can become a decent player in a little bit of time. It's definitely not easy to override newbie instincts but it can be done with some effort and thinking. Going beyond that level gets a lot trickier but if everyone could reach a level where they could reliably contribute positively that would be more than ideal. Obviously that happens quite rarely. So we have to improve it somehow. It's pretty obvious with the same characters around and limited influx of new players (we should try for another batch soon) that things stagnate. Every so often we need a MBH to come in and shake things up with new ideas and approaches. And we could use games where half the struggle isn't against your own team. Here are some possibilities: -Post game reviews by skilled hosts/observers on individual/team performance and how to improve. -Regular strategy discussions on various subjects (like Ace's hypothetical situation ) -PM'ing players post-game to ask for help (seriously do this) -Newbie NON CLUE games with a few players there to teach (known players; unknown doesn't work). This might backfire though into the newbies relying on their 'instructors.' -? So everyone who is interested in improving, what would help you the most? And to those who haven't been interested in improving, what would get you interested?
Post game reviews are good. If done by people not playing the game. If its made by a player in the game, then people immediately get defensive when criticized even if the critique is well-meaning or relatively objective.
Strategy discussions. May be good, but may also start massive flame wars. We all know Ace and L won't agree even on strategy.
PMing players post-game...well, it depends who you ask, again. It works better if you ask someone outside the game who doesn't have a vested interest in preserving their ego.
I feel that newbie non-clue games wouldn't work because everything would revolve around the instructors. Mafia would probably be wanting to target them (if they're not mafia) while the townies would be relying on them.
On April 12 2010 02:28 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
One thing that i think can help
is some tips specifically on playing as a blue
since many players are like "OH SHIT IM BLUE" and their posting style changes dramatically. a good example was meeple in WAW, if you read his posts you can easily see why the mafia chose to hit him as a possible blue.
so a collection of thoughts from some of us on the finer points of playing medic, dt, vigi, any of the common blue roles, might be helpful for that person who lands on a blue role for the first or second time.
I've only been blue 2-3 times so I don't have much helpful advice in that department. However when I am a medic my method is to 'think like a mafia' and ask myself "If i was red, who would i hit?" and that's who i protect. pretty sure that's standard practice though.
Yes people need tips on playing as blue. There are a lot of terrible blue plays. I guess we can post them here. General tips on playing blue:
1. Don't lurk. Just act how you normally act. Blues think that they can avoid getting killed by being quiet and not drawing attention to themselves. In fact, its completely the opposite. Mafia knows the blues like to do this, so they'll take shots at inactives sometimes to hope for a blue kill.
2. Don't leak people your role in pms unless you know for sure what you're doing. People always get owned doing this.
3. Don't hint at your role. If you're going to do this, might as well openly roleclaim. Exception: if you know what you're doing of course. But this only applies to very few people.
On April 12 2010 04:18 Qatol wrote:
I think this is really 2 problems, not just 1 as you have presented it:
1. The newer players think that all they have to do is sign up for the game and they will be immediately competitive with the other players just because they are smart. The problem is that everyone here is pretty smart and experience tends to win out because people tend to have the same basic tendencies when they first start playing (like lurking with a blue role and hoping the mafia don't find you).
So really the onus is on the new players to get themselves up to speed before they start playing games. The problem with this is it involves a few hours worth of work, which most people won't put into their game. I don't really know what the substitute is for this though. I mean, you can have an experienced player play with newer people, but that still results in players being "thrown to the wolves" when they start playing with the general forum and encourages them to read other games/ the tips thread even less because they think they can get by just by playing with an experienced player.
The only real solution that I can see is to have people read through previous games. One way to do it is to possibly set up a streamlined series of games/ posts for people to read when they first show up on the forum. Pick games that are representative of how the experience will be and tell them what they should be looking for. Then tell people that they should read those games if they are serious about playing.
2. Other players are not improving from game to game. I think this can be resolved by more extensive postgame discussion, possibly on the part of the host, but really it can be done by any experienced player who has some input to give. The problem with this idea is it devolves very quickly into a flamewar and people just stop paying attention.
Maybe have a requirement that everyone give some input on how they thought the person immediately below them on the signups list played after the game has ended? (Last person obviously comments on the first.) At the very least, then everyone gets SOME sort of feedback after the game that they can keep in mind going into the next game.
1. Yes. Really. Vets can be scary and intimidating, but most of them are willing to help. But you're not going to help anything by just sitting there and waiting for someone to notice you. You have to work to make yourself get noticed. PM them and let them know you want to get better. Talk to them about suspects and ask them about how they reach their conclusions. Keep the discussion suspect based. Remember that mafia is a game about finding the mafia, not seeing what you can do with as many blue roles as you know. Don't expect the vets to spill all their knowledge about the blue roles. They won't. But they can and will help you with tips on finding mafia. Ask them about their thought processes. After a game, go through cases or certain posts throughout the game and ask them what they thought about the posts and why.
After the game, you can be sure they will give you a straight answer  . Which brings me to the point...sometimes its good to sit out a game as a neutral observer so you can be sure that the people you are discussing the game with aren't being biased. As a player, theres always the chance that you're talking to a mafioso who has a conflict of interest in helping you get better at the game. And even if they are really a townie trying to help, you as a player may be paranoid and may doubt the sincerity of their advice. Being an observer, you will be less paranoid and can actually take their advice objectively. Personally, I think I learned the most after modding a few games and asking vet opinions on certain cases both while the game was going on, as well as after the game was over. The benefit of this (as opposed to going through an older game with a vet) is that the game is fresh in both player's minds, and the outcome is also unknown. In contrast, going through older games may result in hindsight bias.
2. already addressed above
***
Overall, I'd say pick someone who you trust and whose style you like. Get to know how they think and how they do things. There is more than one good play style out there. Pick one and stick to it. You don't need to master all of them. Just pick a core group of people you trust and learn from them. Show an interest in learning and the vets will see that and will respect your interest and help you to the best of their ability. I know it worked for me.
There is no way we can really institutionalize a system of helping people improve. I know at first I was intimidated by these secret blue circles and whatnot. They're not really blue circles. They're trust circles. Show that you want to learn and don't expect or ask for who is a blue role. Keep it suspect based and you'll succeed. Mafia is a fun game, but you have to put some effort into it.
|
about insider PM circles.. tbh we should really stop that. i hope the no-PMs rule gets put into every mafia game.. >.< too much of the game is missed out otherwise. plus it can unnecessarily make it much easier for one side or the other. plus if you're reading over the game some of the decisions make no friggin' sense so you cannot use them to learn either.
i dunno, i just don't like it.
|
On April 12 2010 13:31 JeeJee wrote:
about insider PM circles.. tbh we should really stop that. i hope the no-PMs rule gets put into every mafia game.. >.< too much of the game is missed out otherwise. plus it can unnecessarily make it much easier for one side or the other. plus if you're reading over the game some of the decisions make no friggin' sense so you cannot use them to learn either.
i dunno, i just don't like it.
As much as there are alot of con's of pm usage, I personally love the ability to use them. It adds an entire new level of playing to the game which I am in favour of. Much as the existence of clues I find enjoyable since it adds a new level to the game.
I do understand how frustrating PM's are for some players, but you can always opt to not use them period as a player. From that point you just play like it doesn't exist. If someone does shady play (that is or isn't from pming) call them on it, and push. You catch people just as easily
When it comes down to improvement. I reallly hope that people start talking to eachother more. Take a step back and think what abilities you believe you are lacking or a play style you like and talk to someone who has similar qualities. It may take a few games to notice a change, but it does happen. Hell, hosts could even ask for specific players to sit out and just observe the game, and do a detailed writeup of each player in the game as an idea of how they played.
I believe most of everything else has been said already :p
|
On April 12 2010 05:40 flamewheel91 wrote:
And if you die, if you would like request a role list? That way you can both discuss the game as it's ongoing with the host and give your feedback to the person below you at the end, as long as you don't talk to them while they're still in the game (code of honour).
Maybe it's just me being jaded from bad experiences in the past, but I don't want everyone not in the game having the role list. There is WAY too much potential for a game-ruining leak that way.
On April 12 2010 09:55 L wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2010 07:41 dreamflower wrote:
One thing that still keeps me from being interested in improving -- or playing, for that matter --- is the rather unfriendly atmosphere of many Mafia games here. This has vastly improved in recent games, especially once the hosts decided to enforce good posting etiquette with the threat of modkills. Still, I for one am still uncomfortable with the amount of name-calling and flaming that goes on in games, especially as they seem so unnecessary. Mafia is a game of accusations, to be sure, and I know how people can get worked up during the game. But there's no need to act rude or contemptuous toward other players, continually tell others how you're so much better than they are, or swear excessively and call people names like "moron" or "loser." None of the above contribute anything positive to the game and often cause people to lose interest in playing further. On the other hand, games where everyone tries their best and act civil towards each other are both fun to play in and to watch. So, if the latter became the norm, I'd be more interested in playing and improving.
I also like the idea of the host sharing their perspective of which players did well and which did poorly after the game is over. Not only does the host have a good view of how both sides played, but they're also a good neutral judge of the game. Hopefully, this won't end up piling more work on the host, though. Social pressure has redeemed far more shitty players in our games than anything else. Mafia is a game that is partially about reading people and partially about credibility. If you can't manage public perceptions of your own play, then an element of your game is off.
Social pressure has also caused more people to drop out of/ not participate in/ play poorly in (because they get worked up) these games than any other factor.
On April 12 2010 12:29 Incognito wrote:
Post game reviews are good. If done by people not playing the game. If its made by a player in the game, then people immediately get defensive when criticized even if the critique is well-meaning or relatively objective.
Who exactly is going to do this? It seems like a ton of work, and most of the players people want commenting on their play are either playing or are too busy to be playing (and thus probably too busy to be going through the thread and commenting on everyone's play). Similarly, it is a ridiculous amount of extra work for the host who already has a thankless job. That was why I suggested the player-above-you thing. While people might think it is partisan or whatever, at least it is more likely to happen.
On April 12 2010 12:29 Incognito wrote:1. Yes. Really. Vets can be scary and intimidating, but most of them are willing to help. But you're not going to help anything by just sitting there and waiting for someone to notice you. You have to work to make yourself get noticed. PM them and let them know you want to get better. Talk to them about suspects and ask them about how they reach their conclusions. Keep the discussion suspect based. Remember that mafia is a game about finding the mafia, not seeing what you can do with as many blue roles as you know. Don't expect the vets to spill all their knowledge about the blue roles. They won't. But they can and will help you with tips on finding mafia. Ask them about their thought processes. After a game, go through cases or certain posts throughout the game and ask them what they thought about the posts and why. After the game, you can be sure they will give you a straight answer . Which brings me to the point...sometimes its good to sit out a game as a neutral observer so you can be sure that the people you are discussing the game with aren't being biased. As a player, theres always the chance that you're talking to a mafioso who has a conflict of interest in helping you get better at the game. And even if they are really a townie trying to help, you as a player may be paranoid and may doubt the sincerity of their advice. Being an observer, you will be less paranoid and can actually take their advice objectively. Personally, I think I learned the most after modding a few games and asking vet opinions on certain cases both while the game was going on, as well as after the game was over. The benefit of this (as opposed to going through an older game with a vet) is that the game is fresh in both player's minds, and the outcome is also unknown. In contrast, going through older games may result in hindsight bias. Overall, I'd say pick someone who you trust and whose style you like. Get to know how they think and how they do things. There is more than one good play style out there. Pick one and stick to it. You don't need to master all of them. Just pick a core group of people you trust and learn from them. Show an interest in learning and the vets will see that and will respect your interest and help you to the best of their ability. I know it worked for me.
This is basically true. As someone who basically learned to play by PMing other people both inside of and outside of games, I can say that it definitely helped me a ton. Most players really won't bite outside of the game, no matter how much they yell at you in game. Ace is actually a pretty nice guy as long as you aren't playing in a game with him and roleclaim a blue role day 1 for no reason. 
|
Social pressure has also caused more people to drop out of/ not participate in/ play poorly in (because they get worked up) these games than any other factor. The people who drop out aren't really that interested in getting better, nor are the players who get worked up interested in getting better; they admit as much when they fly off the handle. If we need new people its as simple as advertising this forum to the outside population and getting them access to the forum.
I think you're under the impression that the people who consistently get the shit stick thrown at them are new players. You'd be wrong except in extreme cases (ie. Bill Murray literally throwing down 6 posts in a row repeatedly). The people who take the majority of the evil eye stare are players like vivi who have been here for a long time and should know better, or people like abenson who consistently do nothing and stay afk in the majority of their games.
The counter example is haster and flamewheel. Both popped up, played very well. No one reacted poorly to them in the least. KF91 returned after months of inactivity, played an unremarkable, but not terrible game. No one threw any shit his way. Why? Because he didn't go out of his way to fuck his team over.
New players don't get hateraid thrown at them. Consistently bad players who churn out anti-town bullshit in games one after the other do. Players who attempt to reform themselves lose their cloak of stigma after 1-2 games. Players who don't are put up for lynch day 1 repeatedly.
That was why I suggested the player-above-you thing. While people might think it is partisan or whatever, at least it is more likely to happen. It will not happen. The majority of players aren't at the level where they can provide detailed criticism and its been asked for by me before during games with literally zero takers.
If players want to get better, find a player that you think does well and ask basic question.
|
On April 12 2010 14:57 L wrote:Show nested quote +Social pressure has also caused more people to drop out of/ not participate in/ play poorly in (because they get worked up) these games than any other factor. The people who drop out aren't really that interested in getting better, nor are the players who get worked up interested in getting better; they admit as much when they fly off the handle. If we need new people its as simple as advertising this forum to the outside population and getting them access to the forum. I think you're under the impression that the people who consistently get the shit stick thrown at them are new players. You'd be wrong except in extreme cases (ie. Bill Murray literally throwing down 6 posts in a row repeatedly). The people who take the majority of the evil eye stare are players like vivi who have been here for a long time and should know better, or people like abenson who consistently do nothing and stay afk in the majority of their games. The counter example is haster and flamewheel. Both popped up, played very well. No one reacted poorly to them in the least. KF91 returned after months of inactivity, played an unremarkable, but not terrible game. No one threw any shit his way. Why? Because he didn't go out of his way to fuck his team over. New players don't get hateraid thrown at them. Consistently bad players who churn out anti-town bullshit in games one after the other do. Players who attempt to reform themselves lose their cloak of stigma after 1-2 games. Players who don't are put up for lynch day 1 repeatedly.
Actually, I'm assuming nothing. I never said I was referring to newer players. Hell, I never even said I was talking about the people who were having shit thrown directly at them. Do you think it is much fun for everyone else to watch you pick on vivi every game? I know for a fact that people like Midori, dreamflower, LTT, Ver, and myself (who were trying to improve) have sat out games at some point because of the in-game atmosphere. I've also had other people come to me and say that they are absolutely disgusted at the way some people choose to play.
But if you want to talk about decent players who definitely didn't deserve the crap sent at them because they WERE improving, chezinu, malongo, foolishness, and 0cz3c come to mind. How many of them have played consistently in recent games? I know some of that is probably due to other factors, but I'll bet the egos/flames had at least some part in their decision not to play.
I seriously think that attitude is one that these games can do without.
|
I agree with L even in relation to my ill-advised post style, but I also agree with Qatol here. What you two are arguing doesn't necessarily mean that the other option doesn't exist... L is correct in that if someone who is awful (i'm a great example) wants to keep working at it, it's completely up to them if they want to actually do it or not and focus on the task at hand. Qatol is correct in that it CAN take away someone's overall will to play as it may reduce the fun factor for 'veteran' players... it has also taken away the fun from me playing, as i've been on the wrong end of L's wraith. Qatol u appear to be listing people who I would consider veterans, but you may not consider them to be, who are against playing as a result of being flamed; however, that doesn't mean that we can't play mafia. L is correct in us being able to find new blood through the external part of these forums... I would definitely love to get in on a game with a lot of people who are more newbie than I am.
that's how you all got me 
that's also how you all got citi.zen
it's hit or miss
This being said, I actually feel that the proverbial "shit stick" is a positive influence
|
I'm not saying there should be no criticizing, just that there should be no bullying. There is a definite line between the two and I think we cross that line far too often.
|
You mean not light-hearted bullying like Ace making fun of RoL/Vivi/myself for being terrible?
Depends on the circumstances. Sometimes people deserve it. It's not life or death, well, only death in a thread
|
Hell, I never even said I was talking about the people who were having shit thrown directly at them. If they aren't playing we aren't worried about their skill level.
This thread is about how to improve the level of play in the game, because the last two games weren't mafia masterpieces, and yet both ended flawlessly because people don't know how to play from the town side. If people are too afraid to play; so be it. We can recruit more players.
This is a pretty simple situation; if you want to get better you will. The onus is on YOU to step your shit up. Given that the game is largely team oriented, you are going to get flak thrown your way if you consistently refuse to up your game. Period. You are hurting other players if you are making yourself an easy lynch target as a townie and you will get called on it. We actually have a number of players doing that without social pressure for them to change, and they're gradually getting WORSE.
The social pressure that we had in earlier games was far higher than we have now, and its not surprising that the rate of improvement of players during those games was far higher.
|
A couple of quick comments on the tone/language issue:
1. Dealing with dismissive language is a big part of the game. I have no problem with JeeJee now for example, despite all that was said during the last day of the WoW mafia game (including the lying cunt bit). Same thing with people doing it on purpose in any other mafia game - I understand what they did and think it was a good strategy after the fact. This is a good area to improve for me personally - I've generally been quite good at catching reds but often got sidetracked unnecessarily.
2. If there is one area I think there is room for improvement, it's in what happens after games - when you can help others internalize what happened and why, and motivate them to do better in the future. Most people who are obnoxious in a particular game are pretty amenable after it's over, but there is always room for improvement. If you've said something nasty to a new player... write a PM to them. It could help retention and improvement rates.
|
i'm beyond hope when it comes to how bad my mafia play is
i will say don't overestimate people
especially me
overestimation is probably even worse than underestimation because they don't even have to Wifom for you to think of a Wifom.
|
I am new so I don't know what to say, but I'll try to give some advice when regarding suspects that will be helpful for most players:
First, be objective/flexible. It has been psychologically be proven that after one makes his decision he or she will be more convinced of the choice one made- do not very afraid of being proven wrong, stay willing to change your opinion when necessary, and never get provoked by words of other players. I know this is such an obvious fact yet it seems to be something some players miss.
Secondly, even if you are CERTAIN Player A is Mafia, when Town hold pro-town view of A and you have no conclusive evidence against him, do not focus your effort trying to lynch suspect A but your more scummier suspects unless necessary. Usually as time goes on some event will occur that will further advocate your case on player A. Trying to lynch player A prematurely may cause unnecessary Town division and you will most likely be isolated as Mafia can easily mix between other dissenting Townies. One Mafia dead is one Mafia dead, so I never found the need to be ambitious.
|
On April 13 2010 00:32 L wrote:Show nested quote +Hell, I never even said I was talking about the people who were having shit thrown directly at them. If they aren't playing we aren't worried about their skill level. This thread is about how to improve the level of play in the game, because the last two games weren't mafia masterpieces, and yet both ended flawlessly because people don't know how to play from the town side. If people are too afraid to play; so be it. We can recruit more players. This is a pretty simple situation; if you want to get better you will. The onus is on YOU to step your shit up. Given that the game is largely team oriented, you are going to get flak thrown your way if you consistently refuse to up your game. Period. You are hurting other players if you are making yourself an easy lynch target as a townie and you will get called on it. We actually have a number of players doing that without social pressure for them to change, and they're gradually getting WORSE. The social pressure that we had in earlier games was far higher than we have now, and its not surprising that the rate of improvement of players during those games was far higher.
If they're skilled but aren't playing because of that, it has a direct effect on the skill level of the game. Who is more likely to be skilled, Ver or ATeddyBear? (No offense to ATB, just a convenient recent example I can think of off the top of my head.)
Who says that these people are afraid of getting flak thrown at them? I included myself on that list. Trust me, I'm not afraid to play because of the shitstorms. Now having to read through bullying for the sake of bullying or absolutely moronic plays involving "let's lynch BM because he's a detriment to the town even though he's most likely innocent" 1. is a really shitty play that should get you lynched immediately because you're advocating lynching innocents, and 2. is just not fun to read because you're obviously just pushing your own agenda and not trying to play the game.
As far as overall skill level goes, it has increased a lot since the older games. I think you're perceiving people as getting worse because they just aren't improving as quickly as everyone else. Additionally, it was easier to get better faster back then because there was a lot bigger of a ceiling to get better within.
I think your "social pressure" policy is just a drain on the mafia games.
|
On April 13 2010 03:11 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2010 00:32 L wrote:Hell, I never even said I was talking about the people who were having shit thrown directly at them. If they aren't playing we aren't worried about their skill level. This thread is about how to improve the level of play in the game, because the last two games weren't mafia masterpieces, and yet both ended flawlessly because people don't know how to play from the town side. If people are too afraid to play; so be it. We can recruit more players. This is a pretty simple situation; if you want to get better you will. The onus is on YOU to step your shit up. Given that the game is largely team oriented, you are going to get flak thrown your way if you consistently refuse to up your game. Period. You are hurting other players if you are making yourself an easy lynch target as a townie and you will get called on it. We actually have a number of players doing that without social pressure for them to change, and they're gradually getting WORSE. The social pressure that we had in earlier games was far higher than we have now, and its not surprising that the rate of improvement of players during those games was far higher. If they're skilled but aren't playing because of that, it has a direct effect on the skill level of the game. Who is more likely to be skilled, Ver or ATeddyBear? (No offense to ATB, just a convenient recent example I can think of off the top of my head.) Who says that these people are afraid of getting flak thrown at them? I included myself on that list. Trust me, I'm not afraid to play because of the shitstorms. Now having to read through bullying for the sake of bullying or absolutely moronic plays involving "let's lynch BM because he's a detriment to the town even though he's most likely innocent" 1. is a really shitty play that should get you lynched immediately because you're advocating lynching innocents, and 2. is just not fun to read because you're obviously just pushing your own agenda and not trying to play the game. As far as overall skill level goes, it has increased a lot since the older games. I think you're perceiving people as getting worse because they just aren't improving as quickly as everyone else. Additionally, it was easier to get better faster back then because there was a lot bigger of a ceiling to get better within. I think your "social pressure" policy is just a drain on the mafia games.
Give ATB a few games and we'll see how it turns out. Truth be told I'd rather have haster or flamewheel on my team than Ver because of the massive activity disparity, especially in a no pm format. As for the relative worth of you and Ver not playing? Yeah, i'd rather that both of you play hence why I've bugged you about it in the past. That said, the majority of players that we've had drop out are very bad players or players who simply don't have the time to devote, both of which substantially hurt the town.
- I'm not perceiving people as getting worse because they aren't getting better as fast as everyone else. I'm looking at particular players and seeing them doing sequentially less and less in games. Mini mafia 2 is a fantastic example; a bunch of fairly decent players essentially did zero as mafia and all outed themselves asap. Micro mafia 2: exact same thing. A bunch of players essentially sat on their hands and did nothing which is by default far less than they've done in prior games. People are getting complacent and just cruise through games. Players who used to be high quality are now just cruising at the minimum required effort because their reputation shields them.
- It isn't bullying to suggest that we'd kill BM, for instance, because its simply one portion of the risk/reward calculus that players need to go through when deciding who to lynch. If we're on day one and have very little in the way of alternative leads, why would we lynch someone who has a track record of being decent or productive over someone who doesn't? You're trying to import some happy go lucky moral framework onto what amounts to a purely utilitarian set of decisions.
More importantly, from your Ace's portion in your summary:
It's not what you know, it's what you can convince people to believe. This is really where the Mafia game is won and lost and people just don't get it. In this game you are a mafia mayor and I know this because I read it correctly. Does it matter? Not really, because now I have to convince the town that you truly are. Likewise we all know quickstriker and JeeJee are innocent but in the grand scheme of things it means shit - people believe they are guilty. Once you get people to believe certain things about other players you can start either dividing the town and standing back silently watching them devour each other as mafia, or as a townie bring them all to focus on a few people. The idea is all the same - persuasion is much more powerful than outright facts. If you can lie skillfully or find a crucial mistake to exploit while keeping a straight story people will often trust you easily.
Managing perceptions is the most important facet of mafia play and a huge component as town. If you're getting killed repeatedly on day 1, that's not the fault of bullying; that's your complete failure to make yourself credible and demonstrate worth to the town. It isn't someone else's responsibility to lay off your shitty play; Its YOUR responsibility to get better. If you don't like the way town discourse is unfolding, CHANGE IT. You can't sit as a spectator and will something into effect, then get angry when it doesn't happen. Many of our better players meta-game extensively for that purpose.
If you've got a better plan for setting up day 1 lynches, join games and push for them. No one's stopping you.
Bottom line: If you want help, it is on YOU. People aren't going to critique your game neutrally without you asking for help because people are lazy and have other shit to do. If you want help, ask for it; We're actually nice people!
|
Damn I can't wait to respond to a couple of points raised in this thread. L has said some things that actually point out the decisions I make in some games especially meta-gaming AHEAD of the curve so you can play effectively with bad players. That all ties into convincing people/persuasive ability and just trying to force "the Town"(Town+Mafia) to behave according to the way I want.
And offing BM whether he is innocent or not isn't a bad move depending on what alternatives the town has. Some people believe a no lynch is the correct option, some people believe the town has to lynch 1 person per day and mislynches can be fixed, others see it as BM being so bad that leaving him alive is literally adding +1 to the Mafia side. BM is much better than before so this doesn't apply to him as hard as before. However the point still stands and I actually agree with L on this: Bad players WILL cost you the game. If all your active decent players get killed off and it comes down to a bunch of players who have a history of lurking, afking out and making ridiculously bad decisions you are often better off getting rid of them through lynches or Vigilante shots if you can. It hurts because if they flip innocent that's 1 less vote the Mafia have to worry about going against them but as Town you probably weren't going to see that vote get put to good use anyway. Either way this is just my personal preference and I don't think there is a right answer to this situation because it can change depending on the game format. Either way I think most people will agree if you really want to go down the path of lynching people because they aren't that good then it's best to do this as a last resort and NOT as a regular play. L, this is where I heavily disagree with your play style. You do have a habit of just killing people for the sake of information when it actually screws over the Town in the end. So you end up being a liability as Town and pretty much unstoppable as Scum. I mean hey if that is the way you want it I don't mind, just letting you know that is the reason people argue with you so much in game ^_^.
In terms of the skill level I think reading through the past Micro Mafia games hosted by Zona show a major improvement of some players. Like seriously reading those games you can actually make a case and formulate some thought as to why some people did what they did where as in the past you were just left scratching your head as to how things happened. That said I still think calling people bad and pretty much telling them "prove you are good/worth keeping around or else you will be lynched Day 1 as a last resort" is a good way to getting people to cooperate. If you want to fool around and do nonsense then don't cry when some Vigilante pops you Night 2 or you are immediately sitting on 5 votes to be lynched.
As for the behavior some people display in game such as yelling and stuff at each other I still think most things people say aren't even out of line. If you can make someone get emotional and lose their heads that's cool. I'm completely fine with it however you should not break the TL.net guidelines and ALWAYS defer to the mod. If Flamewheel or Qatol mod a game and say they don't want any kind of flaming then play by their rules or ask for replacement. If you think you might say something that crosses the line then PM the mod first and see if it is ok. Where I may think something is cool they may not and as a player in the game make sure you know where to draw the line or just to be on the safe side - don't cross it. Regardless of what happens I just hope no one takes anything personal after the game is over. Once it's over wash your hands of the situation and keep it moving till the next game.
Ok back to managing perception. I probably shouldn't be telling people this but I'm feeling extra nice today. All that talk about me calling myself a great player in the past, while true, was also part of me making people believe it once we enter a game. If I can successfully have someone say "Ace if your so good then help us catch scum" I'm exactly where I want to be: everyone is paying attention to me and will listen to what I have to say. This is partially why Micro Mafia 1 went down the way it did and why some people are never up for lynches. If people perceive you as being useful even when you are literally doing NOTHING you can escape the noose a bunch of times. Whether I'm town or Mafia I get center stage which some of the time is good for me. Part of this also comes from the fact that I know with some players in the game if I don't take control and force the town to do something said players will do something and screw us all. The image you throw out during games influences a lot on what you can and won't get away with.
|
BM is much better than before so this doesn't apply to him as hard.
thanks
|
Yup, many people will ignore pretty much any proof based on this perception of "good players" - which isn't even that correct. I find someone like Zona to be a fantastic pro-town player, but he doesn't have the same mystique/following for some reason. If he played more, Ng5 would be a phenomenal mafia player as well. + Show Spoiler +Was he the 2nd smurf in XVI maybe?!?
|
On April 13 2010 05:56 citi.zen wrote:Yup, many people will ignore pretty much any proof based on this perception of "good players" - which isn't even that correct. I find someone like Zona to be a fantastic pro-town player, but he doesn't have the same mystique/following for some reason. If he played more, Ng5 would be a phenomenal mafia player as well. + Show Spoiler +Was he the 2nd smurf in XVI maybe?!?
Fail guess
|
Okay, so - got back from Italy, saw this thread in the airport, didn't quite have time to respond then but will now! As a newer player I'm pretty happy with all of the games I've played so far given that my work likes to restrict my access to TL depending on if it's raining or if I'm wearing a blue shirt or some other arbitrary reason.
Seems that most of this discussion is focused on the player-side of things, i.e. taking responsibility for your own improvement - which I entirely agree with. The main issue I see/have experienced is that as a newer player it is difficult to play aggressively, with conviction in your decision-making. I remember in the first game I played there was huge focus on consensus-building and democratic "we should all decide together" kind of stuff - which is really not the way the game works at all.
Post analysis is kind of intimidating and confusing at first, because it's hard to know what to look for. One of the things I've been careful to note in recent games is where the attention ISN'T (so long as people are active and posting). Outside of that it can be kind of difficult to follow and digest the attacks thrown back and forth in the thread if it's your first game or if your activity is restricted. A more formalized structure to games so they take on a debate-ish character might encourage more streamlined might be interesting to experiment with for a little bit, as far as hosting games goes.
Here's what I think we can actually do together:
1) Host more, smaller games so people can get solid experience without committing to a huge game; Mafia is already pretty time-intensive and having a larger game can seriously complicate that. Zona's been doing an excellent job so far with Micro Mafia, and I think it's the right way to go as far as bringing more people up to speed will be.
2) Encouraging more observation/discussion. I know most players here won't bite, but I think it would be nice to have a high-level game where all of the players are shadowed by outside observers. It might also be fun to have these pairs be playing in a simultaneous or successive game with the exact same setup (if the person you're shadowing is Medic in their game, you are Medic in your own game, etc.)
3) If we get more smaller/faster games and more discussion, I think we should hold a few exercises/scenarios in seeing why doing stupid action X is bad. Examples of what not to do are sometimes better than examples of what TO do.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
On April 13 2010 05:04 Ace wrote:
In terms of the skill level I think reading through the past Micro Mafia games hosted by Zona show a major improvement of some players. Like seriously reading those games you can actually make a case and formulate some thought as to why some people did what they did where as in the past you were just left scratching your head as to how things happened. That said I still think calling people bad and pretty much telling them "prove you are good/worth keeping around or else you will be lynched Day 1 as a last resort" is a good way to getting people to cooperate. If you want to fool around and do nonsense then don't cry when some Vigilante pops you Night 2 or you are immediately sitting on 5 votes to be lynched.
I like Zona's games, and they should be kept up. People just need to start making more serious of an effort to play them, since these kinds of games are the best ones to learn from. No gimmicks, very little "randomness" as compared to the larger games, and player-on-player-on-player-on... (no homo) action that allows you both to develop the conviction and rhetoric you need to be an aggressive, insightful mafia player.
As for the behavior some people display in game such as yelling and stuff at each other I still think most things people say aren't even out of line. If you can make someone get emotional and lose their heads that's cool. I'm completely fine with it however you should not break the TL.net guidelines and ALWAYS defer to the mod. If Flamewheel or Qatol mod a game and say they don't want any kind of flaming then play by their rules or ask for replacement. If you think you might say something that crosses the line then PM the mod first and see if it is ok. Where I may think something is cool they may not and as a player in the game make sure you know where to draw the line or just to be on the safe side - don't cross it. Regardless of what happens I just hope no one takes anything personal after the game is over. Once it's over wash your hands of the situation and keep it moving till the next game.
I personally am very tired of the flaming. I know some people use it as a strategy and some people are just naturally... abrasive, but it's excessive and people don't want to read that. With complaints of spam being as high as they are already, just don't flame. If you do transgress and become hostile, I agree with Ace here: send the Mod a PM apologizing in advance, or even better, just tell them beforehand and ask if it's okay. If ~OpZ~ doesn't mind me using him as an example, he's a good example of how one can still technically "get away" with flaming, but he keeps it cool with the mod. I can remember a few times both before and after when he has apologized to me for getting into a heated argument.
Ok back to managing perception. I probably shouldn't be telling people this but I'm feeling extra nice today. All that talk about me calling myself a great player in the past, while true, was also part of me making people believe it once we enter a game. If I can successfully have someone say "Ace if your so good then help us catch scum" I'm exactly where I want to be: everyone is paying attention to me and will listen to what I have to say. This is partially why Micro Mafia 1 went down the way it did and why some people are never up for lynches. If people perceive you as being useful even when you are literally doing NOTHING you can escape the noose a bunch of times. Whether I'm town or Mafia I get center stage which some of the time is good for me. Part of this also comes from the fact that I know with some players in the game if I don't take control and force the town to do something said players will do something and screw us all. The image you throw out during games influences a lot on what you can and won't get away with.
Ace catch me a mafioso please??? I will listen to your every word~
|
On April 13 2010 02:08 Caller wrote:
i'm beyond hope when it comes to how bad my mafia play is
i will say don't overestimate people
especially me
overestimation is probably even worse than underestimation because they don't even have to Wifom for you to think of a Wifom.
yo tambien, and i've been playing since the first game lol
|
As a noob who wants to improve, if I'm not lazy and I put some effort into analyzing the current game that's starting soon (which I'm not playing in), would any veteran (or whatever term you like) player who also isn't playing be willing to give me feedback on it?
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
On April 15 2010 12:16 Iaaan wrote:
As a noob who wants to improve, if I'm not lazy and I put some effort into analyzing the current game that's starting soon (which I'm not playing in), would any veteran (or whatever term you like) player who also isn't playing be willing to give me feedback on it?
I'm not a vet, but I am the host
If you want, I'll talk with you about it.
|
On April 15 2010 12:16 Iaaan wrote:
As a noob who wants to improve, if I'm not lazy and I put some effort into analyzing the current game that's starting soon (which I'm not playing in), would any veteran (or whatever term you like) player who also isn't playing be willing to give me feedback on it?
I really wish I had the time because this mentality is exactly what you want to be doing. I'll ask around and see if I can't get someone to help.
If not, I have a little exercise which I think helped me improve at least a little during Caller's first (successful) game:
One thing I would recommend doing is just trying to pick out special roles. It doesn't matter if they're red or blue. Just try to figure out who has a role (they usually play differently from earlier games, and it's usually by getting quieter). Once you do that, talk to flamewheel and see if you can explain to him WHY you think X has a role (this forces you to think logically and think through your reads). Then confirm if you are correct with flamewheel (note: this means you shouldn't know who has what role until this point). If you start to see consistent results, you can move into alignments and then specific roles.
The thing I like about this exercise is that it teaches you which instincts/rationales to trust and which ones are just impulses. You should find that you can read people better than you think. After that, it's just a matter of practicing making a good argument, which sadly can't really be done without playing. But it's a lot easier to do so when you are 99% sure that someone has a role.
Oh and before the game starts, read through the tips and tricks thread. That should give you a head start on things you should be looking for.
|
It would help to have longer time periods for when the games get to smaller numbers of people in order to make up for the slower pace.
|
On April 15 2010 15:22 Bill Murray wrote:
It would help to have longer time periods for when the games get to smaller numbers of people in order to make up for the slower pace.
Pace is something you need to control on both sides of the mafia/town fence.
|
I would just like to voice my support for mutual self improvement of mafia game play. The more advanced the skill level of players, the more interesting the game is - at least to me.
If anyone ever wants to comment on my own game play, feel free to PM/post where I'll see it. I'm always willing to accept critique.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
