I felt like this game was really town favored thanks to the triggers. Even the knowledge of some of the triggers, I felt, would not have stopped the shots.
I also think it interfered too much with normal play. This game was very abnormal and even though town played relatively badly, the vigis helped them come back to win. Night 1 the traitor gets shot (right as I saw he was the traitor cause he said something retarded) and we chose a stupid roleblock because we didn't think the lynch through enough and were scared GM would shoot kita.
While it's easier for townies to influence lynches than vig shots, it's also easier for mafia to influence the lynch than the vig shots. You can't dodge both the lynch AND vig shots; that's asking the impossible. My play as scum, for example, involves manipulating the lynch over and over, on anyone but me. I use whatever tactics possible to do so. A lot of these tactics are just pulled out of the game when you have to worry about getting shot over them.
In addition, I completely disagree over having qualified for spam vig, and for syllo qualifying for the acronym vig. There's an inherent bias in the host allowing a person to shoot someone else on certain grounds because the host already knows the alignment of the player in question. Thus, there's already a subconscious bias that will cause a tendency toward the host allowing the player to take a shot on a mafia player, whereas on a town player it's less likely.
Sure, I might have had X percent of the posts by day 2 or whatever, but that's not to say I was spamming. Likewise, I don't understand how it even fits the theme for syllo to be shot based on him saying "scummy" several times.
|
I made the mistake of not dayvigging Foolishness.
That snowballed into me getting shot and the game was over for me.
I didn't really follow the game much after that, but for me that was really what it came down to.
Honestly the inactivity screwed me because it made it look as if I had more posts than I should've. Also, by day 3 I actually did not have 10% of the posts; I had less. VE had more posts than I did, even.
By the daypost I died in, I had 60 game-relevant posts, and the game had lasted 38 pages, or around 760 posts. (the first 10 pages of the thread were signups and stuff). That amounted to 8% of the total posts. That was actually rather close to average, if a little bit high, since five people had died by that point.
EDIT:
On January 08 2012 22:16 L wrote:
I really don't see how this setup was town favored in the least. The mafia team derped out and skipped out on being on IRC during day 3 then bussed me by mistake when we had an easy 5v2 vote advantage. Syllo completely dropped the ball that day and made himself SUPER suspicious by posting 2 lines on an already stacked train, and kita blundered later.
So basically we had 3 chances to win and we threw all of them, and that's not including the 3 times we saved the town by RBing a townie shot.
In retrospect I should have pushed to have no one RB'd day 1, but oh well.
The shot on Syllo had pretty much all of us going ??? on IRC when we heard the grounds for it, but honestly the game shouldn't have even gotten to that point.
I was hoping my day 1 analysis would be a REALLLLLLY big tip-off to the traitor. Looks like it worked, but I didn't expect it to be Palmar. Nuts.
TL;DR GJ town. Our team blundered horrendously.
I disagree completely with this assessment.
You were, if I remember correctly, the person who told us to RB GM. I remember arguing that we shouldn't RB GM because he would very likely shoot a townie. I even tried changing the night action, but it was too late because we didn't discuss anything until a couple minutes after the deadline.
Discussion was difficult and often sporadic in IRC from what I recall, but to be honest our activity levels directly reflected those of town; i.e, they were bad.
Overall I don't think this game saw very good play by either side. For the longest time I wanted to just claim apathy vig and shoot Foolishness during day 2, but I didn't want to piss you guys off if I got vigged afterward, since it would have seemed like a direct result of that action.
In hindsight I should've just done it, but oh well. Learned something, I suppose.
|
On January 08 2012 22:56 prplhz wrote:
Just want to say that I sent in my hit at a point where wherebugsgo had 9.84% of all posts in the thread. 10% is a lot in a 20 player game I think.
no, not when 5 are dead and the thread was completely inactive.
Also, I counted myself, I believe it was 8%. 60 posts of 760 is 7.8, not 9.84 (unless I've miscounted)
On January 08 2012 23:50 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2012 22:58 syllogism wrote:
I didn't really mean to imply that you played poorly, I don't really pay attention to that as scum, especially when the person in question isn't getting us lynched. I just think that there were enough townies suspicious of you for you to be a realistic lynch candidate and your inactivity could have made defending difficult. Unfortunately you shooting a townie at night apparently confirmed you as town to some. Yeah, this is where I think WBG erred. You thought your ##Hit on foolishness would of gotten you way more heat then I think it did. Generally if you killed someone the town was accepting you as a real vigilante and since you put heat on foolishness I don't think it would of been seen as bad as you think it would of been.
I was ready to shoot him, but I received some disagreement from my team so I chose not to. Normally as scum I'm not afraid of doing bold things, simply because the unknown is unknown and I feel like I can manipulate things to the way I want them to be.
That's what I did in the minis where I was lone scum, and that's how I would've played it here had I shot Foolishness as well. The setup gave me some pause, though, I have to admit.
If I had to do it over I'd definitely just ignore the setup and do whatever the hell I wanted to do, because if the setup punishes my play, it would happen no matter how cautious I could try to be. Either I'd get lynched on meta grounds or I'd get shot because the setup allows townies to shoot disruptive people.
|
On January 09 2012 17:21 L wrote:Show nested quote +I just want to ask L what the point of his "GM was lying" topic about? It made me go from ok he's pretty townie to hmm...scummy... Because our original plan was to have our RB stay up until the deadline, f5 the shit out of the page as the time came up, then stay on GM till he crumbed he was shooting a townie, then switch off onto someone else with a pre-written pm message to save time. Then we didn't. So I operated most of that day thinking that someone was lying through their ass about who hit who.
I tried to change the RB but I was informed by Ver like a day later when I asked that the action had not been changed because it had been sent in too late.
Honestly we should've never roleblocked GM to begin with, the chance of him shooting kita was so low it was not worth considering. That was our biggest mistake.
Beyond that, I made the mistake of not day vigging Foolishness. I don't know what you guys did after that, but I'm sure there are things we could've done differently outside those two things as well.
On January 09 2012 18:36 Palmar wrote:
My own experience:
I think playing the traitor in this setup is basically impossible. My plan was to argue about useless stuff and try to derail town, while making myself known to the mafia. Both L and Syllogism were very obvious scum on day 1, calling syllogism town repeatedly was actually my way of trying to communicate to the mafia team that I was the traitor. I later heard they still thought about shooting me night one, I guess for the strawman argument against L.
But seriously, as traitor I HAVE to play scummy, because otherwise the mafia will kill me (they almost did), and yet I have to dodge the lynch, at least until day 2-3. I was going to claim cop this game (I was going to claim an innocent check on L), which would have given the mafia a perfect opportunity to get me into their team, as they knew there were no cops (I did not know this, just calling a scum town with a cop check should be good enough to tell them I'm traitor). However, with a ton of vigilantes in the game, one of them is bound to just shoot someone who is forced to play scummy, which is what happened.
I seriously think the change to chaoser's role is really bad addition to the original Ace role. The thing about misrepresenting is just complete and utter bullshit, because it's punishing good scum play. I successfully created a shit side-track discussion and got punished for it.
About the setup:
Town has waaaayyyy too much KP. For those that don't get this, a vigilante shot is the best kill town has, assuming it's held by a competent player. In a normal 20 player game, that has maybe... one vigilante, town controls 2kp (lynch and shot), and mafia controls 2kp per cycle. In the end, the vigilante usually will have claimed (and gotten blocked) or died, and mafia probably ends up with more than half the kills in the game on their behalf
In this game, Town killed like 10 players or something? That's simply way too high. I only managed to figure out two mafia on day one (I almost sent in a list with syllo, L, foolishness and prplhz), but it's still enough so a bunch of gung-ho vigilantes should've chosen their shots better. L was painfully obvious as scum.
I mean, in a game that punishes bad play, it's weird town can get away with so many bad vigilante shots and still win the game. Vigilantes are stupidly powerful roles, and mafia can only counterclaim hits so long. I am a big fan of vigilantes because they put responsibility into the hands of town, but not to the point where they help town immensely.
Don't get me wrong, I liked the game and I would certainly play again. however, I would just get rid of all the damn triggers, all they do is infuriate people, and most of them are very dependent on how people play. I would argue that normal setups punish bad play much more than this one, and certainly incognito's setup in XLVIII did much more to punish bad play than this setup.
The only reason mafia came even close to winning was because town shots were really, really bad for the most part. Credit should go where it's due. Chaoser did a good job, prplhz, foolishness and meapak too.
I don't like it when people forget there are two teams in mafia, one of those teams is mafia, and this game really fucked mafia over. With triggers that stopped mafia from playing well (sidetracking town, destroying discussion, spamming, and in general being dicks), and a bunch of vigilantes mafia would've had to start counterclaiming from day 2, it pushed mafia into a corner.
I love the concept of creating a game specifically designed to counter bad play, I just don't think this was quite it. Some parts were cool (vigilantes, despite being op, are such a great role).
Mafia fucked up, and if you read this and think "man Palmar thinks mafia didn't stand a chance", then you're misunderstanding me. I'm pointing out a slight flaw in an otherwise good game, mafia just had less chance to win than usual.
funny story: syllo wanted to shoot you. Based on what you said about prpl's post on BC I deduced you had to be a third party, and so I called the shot on you off.
ofc it's too bad chaoser shot you in the face. Otherwise, I was ready to guess you were the traitor the next day.
Bolded is true. "Bad play" is very subjective and this game did not really punish it anyway. Some of the vigis (I'm lookin at you, Foolishness) were subject to their own triggers.
On that note, maybe this is controversial, but I personally don't actually think Foolishness played all that well (no offense). Imagine a setup without vigis. Would people have listened to him? Would he have been able to successfully push a lynch on someone with the type of play he was putting up? I seriously doubt it. His reads were excellent, but he had very little influence over the votes. Vigis create a lot of interruption in the flow of the scum game because the shots are almost always unexpected. There is no way to predict when a shot will occur or who will be on the receiving end, and in a game with 17 some vigis it becomes really crazy.
Something like 10 vigis missed and 3 hit their mark. Statistically that's barely above what you would get by just RNGing the shots. Not particularly stellar, IMO.
The setup is designed to punish bad play but I don't think it succeeded in that regard. Bad play was still abound in (probably unexpected) ways and there was nothing to do about it. I agree with Palmar that XLVIII's setup was actually better in this regard, because of the way the roles were aligned so that bad play was punished. The same role on both sides thing made claiming delicate and allowed for a lot of different types of play. In this game, I don't think that was the case. I felt pigeonholed just by the fact that I knew there were a lot of vigis.
As I've said before, controlling the lynch is possible, because you can influence the masses with whatever you want. That's the whole aim of the scumteam; you create distraction and implant ideas that are "bad" for townies. If you "punish" this type of play, you punish the scumteam for doing what they're supposed to be doing.
|
EPT
