|
On August 07 2010 08:09 citi.zen wrote:
I feel you've made up your mind a log time ago without looking at the specifics and we're just going in circles for the sake of it.
Simple question: if you, Incognito, are a the real hatter in this game, and a red (myself for example) claims to be the real hatter, asking for PM role claims. The town seems to trust him. Do you, Incognito, come clean immediately, or stay quiet waiting to place your bomb, at the risk that the DTs and other blue roles will be exposed?What play do you think helps and/or hurts the town more?
I adamantly argue against your plan and tell the DTs NOT to claim to you because of the logic I outlined before. Any sensible DT will refrain from claiming to you, as they'll know its not foolproof. I claim the next day, and you die, along with maybe one of your scumbuddies. As long as the DTs aren't dumb, town should come out clean and ahead.
And no, I'm not talking past you. I've seen your logic before many of times. I also didn't see the harm in having 90% plans, but now I do. Town needs more sincere analysis rather than running around finding and organizing blue roles.
|
If you think all people will refrain, you've been watching a different game. Given how everyone had played up to that point in time, a 90% plan was actually pretty good, and I will take it every time, unless someone shows me the 100% alternative.
Edit: and no, I don't view your other points as valid, I am just tired of going around in circles: we started with you telling me that you're surprised nobody had thought of this huge hole: a single mafia posing as a DT mouth would screw up up for 3 days. We went over that. You also said that Ace had exposed the other holes (read Ace's posts on the usefulness of a hatter vs. circle + red leads). We then went through issue after more unlikely issue, including claims that were factually untrue, and ended up with this:
I also didn't see the harm in having 90% plans, but now I do. Town needs more sincere analysis rather than running around finding and organizing blue roles.
Yeah, ok, should have waited for the sincere analysis.
+ Show Spoiler +FINALLY: I never thought BC was GF because he was high profile so your criticism based on choosing BM as a GF isn't applicable. I thought he was red because he was playing out of character, being totally unhelpful and posting "canned" stuff about how roles are picked without actual attempts to link it to the game. He also told the DTs to check him on day one when he made a list with 4-5 people, putting himself at the top of it. I specifically told the DT NOT to check him since if he was red he'd was the GF. When he finally became active he started making bad arguments, cementing my belief he was red. Of course, this was all probably 95% stuff (and even that only in my warped mind)... so perhaps I should have done more sincere analysis.
|
Although I've been told a few times by a (not so inside) voice (i.e. a few players) that its useless arguing against you, I just can't resist the urge. Oh well. Keeps me young...
On August 07 2010 10:17 citi.zen wrote:If you think all people will refrain, you've been watching a different game. Given how everyone had played up to that point in time, a 90% plan was actually pretty good, and I will take it every time, unless someone shows me the 100% alternative ( confused here, a 100% alternative to...your plan? Like a replacement plan? None exists. But then again, I don't think I want to trust the 90% the plan works to gain a modest advantage when the other 10% will lose us the game. I'd go with good old fashioned analysis here. Really, if you think there was nothing to analyze, you probably just need to look harder. Theres 180~ pages of in-game posts. Finding a plan that revolves around roles/role claiming seems fun, new, exciting, and enticing. Sadly, it usually takes so much time to make/debate/fix holes in a plan that everyone forgets to do what mafia is meant to be about: behavioral analysis!) Yeah, not everyone will listen to logic, but then again, you don't see that since you know you were green. From your point of view, you have 1 green death for the downside scenario, and a blue circle setup with one fakeclaiming DT/DT mouth for the upside scenario. Correct (Question 1)? From the town's point of view, they have losing the entire blue circle for the downside, and securing a blue circle with one fakeclaiming DT/DT mouth for the upside scenario. You say you will enact the plan 100% of the time, which will allow mafia the opportunity to beat you to it and use the exact same play in another game. I assume you will follow the same plan wholeheartedly even if fielded by a mafia, will you not(Question 2)? Or I guess you could do the plan when you're mafia too. That would work.
Edit: and no, I don't view your other points as valid, I am just tired of going around in circles: ( not a circle. theres an entire post you didn't bother replying to. perhaps it will be easier if i started over again instead of resuming where the link was broken, but I thought you were actually taking this discussion seriously and were trying to put the pieces together.) we started with you telling me that you're surprised nobody had thought of this huge hole: a single mafia posing as a DT mouth would screw us up for 3 days. We went over that. Yeah, I went over that. And you replied correcting one of my factual inaccuracies. Thank you for that. Unfortunately, you went no further into analyzing my point because you probably thought that because I made one factual inaccuracy, the rest was wrong. So you just ignored me. Dismissing my posts with sweeping generalizations much? You also said that Ace had exposed the other holes (read Ace's posts on the usefulness of a hatter vs. circle + red leads) (read Ace's posts on the fact that your plan is bad but had good results). You're misinterpreting Ace's post. He said that yeah, it is legitimate to use hatters for creating a circle instead of solely for the bombs. But then he continued by saying your plan was bad, even if the result was good. Mafia played slightly suboptimally, and compounded with the fact that the town blindly trusted you, that helped bring a good result. I'll credit you for being able to exploit town sheepishness in this game. This still doesn't mean the plan is good and that you should use it every game. We then went through issue after more unlikely issue ( yay for vague and unsupported statements! Its not really unlikely that mafia could send out a GF to fake DT/DT mouth claim  ), including claims that were factually untrue ( ok, I fixed those. But you dismissed my entire argument completely, which I don't find to be fair, and ended up with this: Show nested quote +I also didn't see the harm in having 90% plans, but now I do. Town needs more sincere analysis rather than running around finding and organizing blue roles. Yeah, ok, should have waited for the sincere analysis. No, you shouldn't have waited for it, you should have done it. Making plans isn't the only way to win mafia.FINALLY: I never thought BC was GF because he was high profile so your criticism based on choosing BM as a GF isn't applicable. I thought he was red because he was playing out of character, being totally unhelpful and posting "canned" stuff about how roles are picked without actual attempts to link it to the game. He also told the DTs to check him on day one when he made a list with 4-5 people, putting himself at the top of it. I specifically told the DT NOT to check him since if he was red he'd was the GF ( Pure WIFOM). When he finally became active he started making bad arguments ( Yelling lynch all liars all the time, yes, is a bad argument, but the more important thing is how he went about making his arguments. His argument against your plan was not inherently scummy.), cementing my belief he was red. Of course, this was all probably 95% stuff (and even that only in my warped mind)... so perhaps I should have done more sincere analysis. Like I already stated, I can buy that you found BC to be red. So you don't really need to respond with the sarcasm bit at the end there. The thing I can't buy is that you knew he was GF. Either way, this wasn't even one of the foundations of my argument. I'm glad you feel obligated to reply in such depth to something so insignificant to my argument though  .
Note: What is interesting from your replies is not what you do say, but rather what you don't say. I'll leave it at that.
|
I think we need to have an All Stars mafia game lulz ^_^
and like Incognito said, I'd take behavior analysis over a plan based on town circles majority of the time. Most mods have scum roles in the game that just destroy town circles (Roleblockers). Add in the fact that imo town circles are only as good as the players in them and behavior analysis wins out because it's an actual scum hunt vs "waiting for confirmations before scum hunting".
|
Do you really think the town would have been in a better place if there was no hatter claim and BC succesfully sacrificed South that day? Even the mafia didn't think that, that is why they were doing it. But you disagree... I am impressed.
And do you not see the absurdity of telling me to do more behavior analysis, then dismissing it since I could not be "certain" bc was the GF? Fine, you're welcome to think it was luck, and wait in your games for 100% confirmation. I'd love to see a single case of behavior analysis that can't tautologically be called WIFOM, or one that is 100% certain.
|
???
I think the better scum hunters on this forum use behavior analysis to catch Mafia. Or did I misread what you meant?
|
On August 08 2010 01:16 citi.zen wrote:
Do you really think the town would have been in a better place if there was no hatter claim and BC succesfully sacrificed South that day? Even the mafia didn't think that, that is why they were doing it. But you disagree... I am impressed.
Here you're mentioning the results of the plan, not the plan itself. I'll agree with Ace here and say, bad plan, good results. The "ends justify the means" argument doesn't really work in mafia. Your question here really isn't relevant to the discussion.
On August 08 2010 01:16 citi.zen wrote:
And do you not see the absurdity of telling me to do more behavior analysis, then dismissing it since I could not be "certain" bc was the GF? Fine, you're welcome to think it was luck, and wait in your games for 100% confirmation. I'd love to see a single case of behavior analysis that can't tautologically be called WIFOM, or one that is 100% certain.
Again, you miss the point. Maybe I'll quote myself.
Like I already stated, I can buy that you found BC to be red...The thing I can't buy is that you knew he was GF.
Its possible to find scum. Its not really possible to pin someone on the godfather though. Godfather is essentially mafia, and should behave like such. The only time you can claim to have caught the GF is if you Role check the GF, he flips town, and you still decide (by behavior) that he is scum. Any other time, you're just guessing that scummy player is the GF. Even I won't claim to be able to find the GF specifically. I'm not dismissing your behavior analysis finding that BloodyC0bbler was scum. I'm dismissing the claim that you knew he was the godfather. Seems like that part is just a boast/exaggeration/ego-boosting move to me.
|
On August 08 2010 04:15 Ace wrote:
???
I think the better scum hunters on this forum use behavior analysis to catch Mafia. Or did I misread what you meant?
Of course, I did the same when arguing BC was red/GF. My point is that it's not 100% certain, ever.
|
On August 08 2010 04:15 Ace wrote:
???
I think the better scum hunters on this forum use behavior analysis to catch Mafia. Or did I misread what you meant?
I think he's missing the point of the difference between plans and behavior analysis and is assuming that since we're saying plans should be 100%, that behavior analysis also needs to be 100%, which we know isn't true. Plans need to be 100% because bad plans have far more repercussions that can lead to say, losing entire blue circles, forced lynches, etc. But we don't have to wait for a 100% confirmation from behavior analysis because all that does is lead to one lynch, something that would be a normal course for the game anyway. No drastic backfire against town. But yes I agree. Ver/Qatol/you all get the results you do because of good behavior analysis.
|
In this game, at that point in time, behavior analysis was not going to yield better results. It was a choice between:
1. what went down,
2. letting BC sacrifice South, or
3. lynching a 3rd party.
I think option 2, the mafia option, would not have worked out better since it made BC much harder to lynch. Option 3 would yield an innocent. I don't want to name names, but the reds had given one player the nickname "mafia pet" for their play, there had been multiple leaks and multiple bad plays. I know I would not have been able to correctly pick a red in this situation at that point in time. Remember too that one medic was dead and a Dt was confirmed to the reds.
So you can lecture me about the general virtues of behavioral analysis, but in my view the game was over anyway if we went another route.
|
I can probably reply solely by quoting myself at this point.
I'll credit you for being able to exploit town sheepishness in this game. This still doesn't mean the plan is good and that you should use it every game.
I'll agree with Ace here and say, bad plan, good results.
The "ends justify the means" argument doesn't really work in mafia.
Funny how when Ace started his paragraph by saying he sees what you are saying, but..., you then seem to stop reading are happy and ignore the rest of what he has to say, but when I say something that acknowledges something you did, you ignore that part and start attacking other parts my argument. Wheeee.
|
It was never "the ends justified the means", but "this was the best option on the table". I have nothing against behavior analysis in general, this is after all why we play mafia. But it's not alway the best and only solution, by itsef. In this game I would have failed at it without some pressure on the reeds, something to reveal more information.
|
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
;;
I'm just glad I don't pay attention to mechanics and just read people.
|
On August 08 2010 05:08 citi.zen wrote:
It was never "the ends justified the means", but "this was the best option on the table". I have nothing against behavior analysis in general, this is after all why we play mafia. But it's not alway the best and only solution, by itsef. In this game I would have failed at it without some pressure on the reeds, something to reveal more information.
"This was the best option on the table". It would seem so in retrospect. Would you agree that this statement is saying that there was no good information to analyze?
Pressure is different from continuing to claim that your plan is awesome and that you'd use it 100% of the time! Completely different things. Using the plan and saying that it was useful to draw out information is different than using the plan in a serious effort to create a town circle. If your main intention was truly to pressure the reds, you wouldn't be adamantly defending your plan's superiority and claiming that you will use it every single time. Pressure comes from new situations which cause mafia to panic. Continuing to use the same strategy over and over will let the mafia know how to deal with the situation easier next time. Combined with other evidence through your play and post-game comments, I don't believe that your intention was simply to gather information. Have you dropped your claim that the plan is excellent and you will use it 100% of the time?
Although yes, more information is always good, there was plenty of information out there. I don't buy that there wasn't enough information to analyze. I know four people who pinned BC as mafia by day 1. His day 2 play was also shaky and scummy (BrownBear claims to have found BC by day 2). Moreover, Pyrr's blatant bandwagon of DarthThienAn wasn't questioned by ANYONE, and he got away with it, even though he should not have. Town didn't do a thorough job at analysis, apparently. There definitely was enough information to go on in the first two days of posting. I just don't know if anyone gave any serious effort at analyzing it (this is before your claim, btw).
|
On August 08 2010 08:29 flamewheel wrote:
;;
I'm just glad I don't pay attention to mechanics and just read people.
I'm not glad that you pay attention and read people from the sidelines when you could be playing in mafia games!
|
What did BC do during Day 1 that was so scummy? I wasn't really trying to pick out who was scum but I surely didn't notice anything that gave off signals.
|
On August 08 2010 15:30 Ace wrote:
What did BC do during Day 1 that was so scummy? I wasn't really trying to pick out who was scum but I surely didn't notice anything that gave off signals.
He seemed a little high on the "don't trust me" to me but I dunno I think he does that as innocent too.
|
I can tell you factually that I did not know any of the reds at the time. I had a suspicion of BC, but it was not strong enough to push for his immediate lynch. I was pretty sure that if he was red he'd be the GF based on the "DT, check me!" post, but that was a big if. I did suspect more strongly a few people who were not red based on their play (the "mafia pet" and another player), but even this wasn't strong enough to make me feel like I "had" a red.
|
I think that the plan was outr best opinion at the moment. It was not optimal but the town was going in circles and at least this generated information.
I realize that I should have stayed more clear of citi.zen in order to be more undercover DT. This is my first game as that role and I made my mistakes.
It would also have helped if he played more activly that day.
Still the plan gor the GF and another mafia killed and plenty of suspicious posts. The town should have been able to sort out who was mafia. It was hard though with town people playing very distubingly and spamming.
The mafia got EXTREMELY lucky on the night after that I still believe that the town could have taken this.
|
On August 09 2010 02:40 lakrismamma wrote:
I think that the plan was outr best opinion at the moment. It was not optimal but the town was going in circles and at least this generated information.
I realize that I should have stayed more clear of citi.zen in order to be more undercover DT. This is my first game as that role and I made my mistakes.
It would also have helped if he played more activly that day.
Still the plan gor the GF and another mafia killed and plenty of suspicious posts. The town should have been able to sort out who was mafia. It was hard though with town people playing very distubingly and spamming.
The mafia got EXTREMELY lucky on the night after that I still believe that the town could have taken this.
The only luck involved was taking the med with you guys. You got read as part of citizens circle, no luck involved. When 3 people are flagged almost instantly for this the second dt (you) were good as dead the moment we put hits there. Xelin's suicide getting the hatter + netting the last med was the luck. You, zeks and by association of loving citizens plan bumatlarge were hit based on a read. You can say "you got lucky" but realistically the town played horrifically in a town favoured setup. Citizen's plan did "net" me, however, I would have argued against that plan as town.
The days I was most scummy were day 1 and 2, and well very obviously so. First real time I've had the role so I expected to be bad at it. However, for those who have said we got lucky or our blue sniping sucked etc.... keep in mind that a blue died or was hit every night.
d3, roffles, subversion, zeks/siniquity/lakris, two confirmed greens (so not blue but blue checked) and then tricode.
Siniquity had already been read as a potential blue and with div's claim we had him on medic. The luckiest thing that happened all game for my side was tricode's shot being blocked.
Also, for those saying you had caught alot of the reds before dying etc... cut it out, if you had read us as well as you have said we would have lost, not won.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
