EPTNewbie Mini Mafia III - Page 34
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
It really doesn't take much more then 12 hours for one of the games here to leave the random vote stage, and progress into actual behavioral analysis. The real analysis comes out on N1 or D2, since you also have D1's vote to work with, and possibly some night kills. | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:11 DoYouHas wrote: Strangely, it was zarepath's first post that made me think zelblade was mafia. For zarepath to go for a random lynch with a system that was anything but random made me think that they had planned a little exchange between them that would establish them both as contributors without raising too much suspicion. My biggest regret that whole game was holding back my opinions and waiting to make large, thought out posts. I realized I did it day 1 and thought I was dead because I was clearly acting like a blue (hi5 sl0osh). I really should have just put all my suspicions on the table as I had them. It would have made me look more green than blue and I think it would have kept me from tunneling as much. I still to this day have no idea why I kept missing you in my reads  It hurt me bad because I should have realised you were not a veteran and that it was making people suspicious of me. I agree with showing your suspicions in the thread and trying to avoid massive posts. That last bit is my biggest problem, I'm trying to find ways to avoid the wall of text. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:17 Probulous wrote: The problem wasn't the topic it was the "random lynching". He was advocating random lynches using a non-random method. In essence his plan was a cover for getting someone lynched that he had chosen. The fact that this was hardly mentioned really struck me when catching up on the thread. Here is the logic
Most people had issues with the odds and the lack of information that comes from random lynching but supporting those isn't exactly scummy. It is is just a difference of opinion and probably bad town play. The fact that he suggested "reverse alphabetical" means the process is not random and he was trying to get someone lynched. Then when he flipped people should have realised that he was zarepath's day 1 target (in his first post no less) and so was highly unlikely to be mafia. I didn't push this because I actually wanted zelblade lynched  Ohhhh ... I thought it was some intricate bussing that wouldn't go through but set up a good failsafe dynamic of giving the surviving mafias town cred ... Would it be good for me to apply Occam's razor more often? | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Now, the blue meta is to look as pro-town as possible, draw medic protection, and the scum will be forced to leave you alone, else they run into a medic prot. Being loud and aggressive is a great way to display how 'fearless' you are, and obviously you're only this fearless because you've got nothing to lose (ie green), when really you're blue. Take this game for example. The Scum avoided Sloosh like he had the plague, for fear of having another shot blocked. If they'd just blown him away N1, as they'd discussed in the QT, this game would have gone down a VERY different path. | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:12 slOosh wrote: I could see a confident townie doing that and explain themselves by saying it is for generating discussion. Mafia could pretend to be that and it would throw off people's reads. I've actually been thinking about day 1s in general, and wondered how to get talking started (assuming normal game without mayor elections). For this game it was FakePromise's innocent but misunderstood/exaggerated 30% statement but how would you do that in other games? For me Day 1 is all about how you start. I think your first post is probably the only time that setup discussions are alright and only then if they are about specifics to the game. Everyone is going to have to understand how the unique aspects of the setup affect the play so that is normally a safe bet I think. I also think pressuring lurkers to post and keeping on them helps. I don't know, I don't really find starting difficult. | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:18 slOosh wrote: Should blues try to look as green as possible (to deter blue snipes)? You played one hell of a blue game. Personally I think the harder it is for mafia to work out who is the blue and who is green the better. They have more information so denying them anything is of upmost importance. Hence I play blue roles exactly how I play green roles. The problem is when you are a DT and you check someone red who wasn't your prime target before the night. I had that issue when I checked Sheth in Newbie II. I even straight up admitted that my argument made no sense | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Id have dawdled on that information for probably a good 12-24 hours, milled around like I was confused a bit, then launched into an all out attack on sheth. | ||
|
MidnightGladius
China1214 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:21 slOosh wrote: Ohhhh ... I thought it was some intricate bussing that wouldn't go through but set up a good failsafe dynamic of giving the surviving mafias town cred ... Would it be good for me to apply Occam's razor more often? That would be quite a coup if they had planned and pulled it off properly. I think it might have been too much of a risk, though, especially if the votes do start to come in, and then you're suddenly forced to either back off, or let your partner die. Even if you do, you don't earn credibility by suggesting bad odds and just "randomly" happening to be right. I raised a hypothesis in the obs QT about a plan where the mafia team defer their first hit in order to have a member claim the hit on the subsequent day as a veteran. In the absence of having a clear blue target, what would be the downsides of such a feint? | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:22 Adam4167 wrote: Yeah, the blue meta has evolved somewhat here on TL. Originally, blues would look a lot like scum. They'd contribute only as often as required, largely keep their heads down and try to get as many night actions off as possible before death. Now, the blue meta is to look as pro-town as possible, draw medic protection, and the scum will be forced to leave you alone, else they run into a medic prot. Being loud and aggressive is a great way to display how 'fearless' you are, and obviously you're only this fearless because you've got nothing to lose (ie green), when really you're blue. Take this game for example. The Scum avoided Sloosh like he had the plague, for fear of having another shot blocked. If they'd just blown him away N1, as they'd discussed in the QT, this game would have gone down a VERY different path. That is exactly why playing a blue like a green is the best play in my mind. It makes you very hard to read as mafia. It isn't so much about drawing a medic save from being brazen, as not giving away clues about being blue/green. You can lurk as a medic aslong as you lurk as town as well. The problem is that lurking is normally not associated with town behaviour because you are not contributing, but if that is how you play vanilla, you should play the same way as blue. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
You can have 1 good thing on your resume (surviving a night hit), but if everything else says scum and/or useless, you're probably dead anyway. I wasn't 100% sold on DoYouHas' innocence until Zarepath flipped, then the idea of blocking a shot, to lead a wagon against a teammate became so convoluted... it had to be false. The opportunity cost of getting one of your members 'town cred' vs removing a possible blue + a loud townie and by default, giving you more voting power (4/12 instead of 4/13) in this game, is just too good to pass up. Its just really not worth it unless you're trying to get real fancy. | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:30 MidnightGladius wrote: That would be quite a coup if they had planned and pulled it off properly. I think it might have been too much of a risk, though, especially if the votes do start to come in, and then you're suddenly forced to either back off, or let your partner die. Even if you do, you don't earn credibility by suggesting bad odds and just "randomly" happening to be right. I raised a hypothesis in the obs QT about a plan where the mafia team defer their first hit in order to have a member claim the hit on the subsequent day as a veteran. In the absence of having a clear blue target, what would be the downsides of such a feint? It's risky in that you are letting town have a night off. You saw what missing two shots did us this game. Yes that person has town cred but in effect you had traded one townie for gaining trust. I guess in small games where mafia only have one kill point this could work. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
| ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
mmm hadn't thought about that. Thanks will keep that in mind. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:45 Adam4167 wrote: The sooner you get to Lylo the better. Its such a dangerous position, because if even ONE townie vote is in the wrong place, boom, game over. Every single townie needs to be on the same page heading into Lylo, otherwise mafia take it. Thus, getting there as fast as possible will give the town as little to work with as possible. This is why mafia almost never advocate a no-lynch, and if they are, its because one of their own is leading the vote count. Would it have been a good idea to no lynch D1 in this game? Or any game? | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Day 1 is almost universally a mislynch. That means you can be sure that 50-75% of the scum team are on the vote. I am perfectly fine with trading that townie (who obviously did something... not smart) to heavily narrow down the scum suspects. Id probably never try and force a no-lynch as a townie. It did cross my mind with Simberto, but what would that lead to? The next day, you'd all just want to kill him again, regardless of what he said with his additional 72 hours of life, and you'd also be less likely to listen to me, now that I've stalled the game for 72 hours and cost the town a townie. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:53 DoYouHas wrote: No lynch is a perfectly fine move if you get to the end of the day and are not confident in any of your reads, and the whole town feels similarly. I've never been in a situation where people aren't so polarized that they wanted at least one person dead on day one. Heck, I wanted like 3 people in this game dead the second i stepped into it. Bromancipate, Balt11t and SacredSystem were all people I would have thrown my vote on without a second thought. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 10 2012 15:00 Adam4167 wrote: Day 1 is almost universally a mislynch. That means you can be sure that 50-75% of the scum team are on the vote. I am perfectly fine with trading that townie (who obviously did something... not smart) to heavily narrow down the scum suspects. How do you look at voting lists? Do you try to match up who shows up on mislynches vs mafia lynches, or is it just a jumping point to have some suspects to analyze? | ||
| ||
