|
On March 31 2013 11:09 Ace wrote:Well then you've got to give the Scum team credit for claiming Scum and avoiding the lynch wagon. Then scream at the Townies who let it happen 
Yes. It was towns fault for not reading or caring and it was my fault for not being convincing enough or having enough thread presence to push two really obvious scum to get lynched.
|
On March 31 2013 11:19 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2013 11:09 Ace wrote:Well then you've got to give the Scum team credit for claiming Scum and avoiding the lynch wagon. Then scream at the Townies who let it happen Yes. It was towns fault for not reading or caring and it was my fault for not being convincing enough or having enough thread presence to push two really obvious scum to get lynched.
That I agree with.
Scum could be found with just some critical reading; and prejudice removed - which of course is easier said than done.
|
with RE to the third party, Ace is right. You can't trust the 3P to not have KP, you can't trust the 3P to be telling the truth, and you can never trust your reads well enough to know that instead of killing the 3P you will definitely kill scum.
The only situation in which I might consider not killing the 3P when it's known there is one, is if there was a red check on someone and we were certain it was real.
Considering the fact that killing a scum on that day would not have pushed lylo any further back, killing 3rd party was the absolute best option in that situation. (this is because the 3P would have gained a member)
It's only if you will lose unless you kill scum that you should ever ignore a 3p, and those types of situations are so rare, I do not think I've ever seen one on TL.
e: most importantly, in this situation the 3P recruiter is indistinguishable from a scum recruiter.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Was anyone actually recruited on day three?
|
On March 31 2013 11:03 Ace wrote:DP then you'd have to prove that Kita and Ryu are Scum. Based on the state of the game - that seemed to be a mountainous task. Scum played it well and made it difficult to happen. Can't complain about it. Sure there are situations where you've got to play the odds and try to get help - but once again let's be realistic here. All the Town players are posting in public. Even if you somehow got to the situation where "ok guys, CC is on our side for now, let's lynch our top collective Scum reads and buy time" isn't going to work. The Scum team has perfect information and can easily screw with this. The 3rd party recruiter CC is only going to help you as far as he needs to live another day: he'll recruit the most protown player/confirmed town the next night and screw you. Both factions can see your moves and you have no way of stopping them from doing their actions. To top it all off yes reducing Scum KP is an admirable goal but the Town has no clue of the KP formula, the possible roles (as 3rd party Recruiter pops out of nowhere), nor does it know the total number of Scum in the game. Your plan isn't a bad idea on the surface but that is a lot of information missing if you want to take a long shot. Also DoctorH in the future if you're going to mess with converting roles, don't allow them to recruit Mafia. There are ways around it but this is one of the reasons we try not to deal with recruiters. Show nested quote +On March 31 2013 10:56 layabout wrote:The mechanic worked around being masoned for a certain length of time* and whoever was masoned could end it whenever they choose. + Show Spoiler [*] +Does anybody else think it's funny that Dr.h uses cylce to mean a day or night and everyone else uses it too mean day and night cycle? So what was the difference between you and VE? Just you got recruited by being masoned longer and VE gets to "dodge" recruitment? Well i was recruited because i had no idea it would happen since i thought CC was a town mason so after a day and night i got a pm. But that's the only way for it to happen by leaving VE doesn't get recruited and remains town. What he said in the qt didn't matter.
|
oh god that's all kinds of bad :/
|
do you realize how funny this game was for me?
|
On March 30 2013 22:53 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 17:22 ThePeashooter wrote:
Even if you are scum, if you are winning purely because you spammed the thread that's not a real win. That would be equivalent to me trying to get you modkilled because I think you are scum. Winning the game through illegitimate methods defeats the point in playing the game.
And I don't believe you will try. I told you how to not triple post, how to not keep posting on your BlazingHand account and you ignored me multiple times and proceeded to triple post. Im catching up and had to stop here. I assume its already been questioned but whatever, I complete abhor and detest this type of mentality. Let me remind you of your reaction to the Ace mislynch. Show nested quote +On March 22 2013 10:25 ThePeashooter wrote:
Do we get the alignment/role of the mod kill? Truthfully I'm a bit happy. Between Wade, VE, and Mocsta they comprised nearly a third of all the posts and I just don't have the patience to to an analysis on someone with a 300 post filter. It took me around 1.5 hours to throw together that case on Ace and write it up when I only had to read 2 pages of content. I can't bring myself to spend a whole day on these people.
If someone wants to kill Wade tonight I'd be the happiest person. I'm a bit tired from work and have to get up early so I probably won't be around much until tomorrow night which is about 20 hours from now. I feel bad for my inactivity and inability to get more reads so tomorrow I will bring forth at least one scum case during the day for a lynch and another for a vigilante/the next day. We are in bad shape right now, but we need to pull together, consolidate posts and do some fucking analysis and we can right our little townie ship and pull through. I don't see a single point in that read where you show any remorse for securing a mislynch. All i see is a person who cares about having spent 1.5hours writing a bogus case. Get off your high horse. You did not lead a lynch on a single scum candidate. Your play this game was woeful and rarely achieved any of the detailed analysis you berated others for not distributing..
you are one of the last people I am going to listen to in regards to what can be considered "optimal play."
I like how you quoted "optimal play" as if I ever said something was optimal, or that I somehow represented optimal play. I never made such a claim.
Mistakes happen. I'm not going to focus on apologizing for fucking something up. It wasn't just me, we all did it. Apologizing does nothing. If I remember correctly I was specifically responding on the issue of spam. It wasn't a brag, it was a statement of fact and a reiteration of my previous points about spam. If most people put a few thoughtful posts into getting someone lynched and spammed a little less it would make the game better by increasing thread readability and therefore allowing more posts to be thoroughly analyzed by town. In contrast scum couldn't just write anything without repercussion because they would be more heavily scrutinized due to minimized post count. Thus I'd imagine both plays would elevate. What I have observed playing here for many years is that both the town and mafia skill has seemingly decreased as post counts increased.
I think you abhor what I said simply because it was focused at people like you who ruin this game.
|
On March 31 2013 09:41 Ace wrote:
Do I need to explain the VE case again? Because I think some of you are overthinking the situation when it's really simple. Stop being results oriented and be process oriented. There is no difference between 3rd party recruiter and Scum: they are both Anti-Town factions.
I think the main point was that no one thought it significantly likely that VE was scum or 3P. Not that we didn't think they were bad. Where VE supposedly joined 3P it would of been really odd for him to ever say anything about it regardless of what his actual posts in the QT said.
|
I think ... a lot of the differing opinion is because we all have different understandings of what the Mirror role actually was.
Here is what it actually was: a 3rd party that could recruit people by masoning them for a certain period of time (I think it is 1 full cycle, or 1 day + 1 night), either in name or anonymously. The masonee are told that they may look away from the Mirror at any time. 2 recruit maximum.
From a town perspective, if you think that the recruiter could not be rejected, then yes lynching cosmic as soon as you found out was the correct decision. The true win condition is hidden. You take out the 3rd party regardless of what he says.
But the question would then become why did VE out the 3rd party as 3rd party? What motivation is there? I don't understand what happened with that. Doesn't make sense. If you think VE would play strange enough to do that, I guess lynching him makes sense.
VE said he could reject the offer. So if you believe that, then 3rd party is totally benign to both parties (never saw any KP that indicated anything). At the endgame juncture, if 3rd party is offering to help, then I don't see why town shouldn't go after someone else.
Scum have KP. Fact. 3rd party may or may not have KP.
Town needs to eliminate scum to win. Fact. Town may need to eliminate 3rd party.
Scum KP reduces with numbers. Maybe.
Seems like you should go after scum.
However, given that town was so lost almost the whole game, wouldn't have mattered if the host announced my role in detail. I wrote my kita case long before claiming, but didn't have any clout to push it (plus I don't get teammates to back me up  ). No scum member was close to being caught and any actual efforts were totally shut down by scum. Good job by them. Doesn't matter if I (and by extension town players) can figure out who scum is if I can't get them lynched / killed. Mafia is a collective game and town need to work on 1) getting the right reads & 2) getting the right reads lynched / killed.
In closing, I don't think this game is [N], but I don't know much about the recruiter role so I can't really say much. I didn't bother trying to mason anyone 3rd cycle because I planned on laying low until endgame. Probably would have worked much better if scum didn't make it their specific goal to get me lynched.
|
Oh yea, given a closed setup, my role / existence in the game really favored scum agenda more than towns. Probably explains what I perceive as a strong town blue line up (vet, 2 vigs, 1 mason vig, 1 DT).
|
On March 31 2013 10:52 Ace wrote:
Then there's a problem with the game if that is allowed. Players don't get to turn down recruitment. VE "being" Town after being talked to/recruited by 3rd party recruiter should be impossible.
I will say I was curious to how this role worked. I know it was spoken about a bit, but why didn't LayAbout just tell CC the whole scum team and then tell the town 3 of the scum team, and then let CC recruit another and give him the same mission for when the mafia killed LayAbout?
CC just needed to survive and his win was not mutually exclusive and could be achieved alongside the town/mafia. Furthermore, since LayAbout could be recruited and then turned back into scum if CC died he has incentive to not work to his "new" win condition. His win condition wasn't permanent and if scum was winning he just needed to kill CC and he would go back to his winning team. I would say he didn't have so much a new win condition as he did a temporary change in condition that gave him the option to switch if he wanted to.
The role seemed really poorly designed. Was there a rule against LayAbout telling CC the whole mafia scum team, and if there was such a rule then it's even dumber since now you force LayAbout to play unnaturally and avoid the easiest route to his win condition which was just outing the whole scum team to CC and having him just Mason random town players and have them lynch the remaining mafia team until end game.
Last thing I was curios about was if a recruited mafia still counts towards the mafia KP.
|
As for what thePeaShooter says, I really empathize with that.
I'm not saying that posting often and spamming away posts is an illegitimate strategy, but I share that desire to play a game with less clutter and spam and more focus on the deception / misinterpretations / lying etc.
I was mulling over in my head maybe a special setup that either restricted number of posts or allowed town to punish it or something ... especially for me who smurfed into the game to avoid potential meta abuse, would still like to play mafia but find 3~4 hours per day a bit of a tall order, as so much of it is invested in just catching up in thread (not analyzing, just reading).
|
On March 31 2013 12:06 ThePeashooter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2013 22:53 Mocsta wrote:On March 30 2013 17:22 ThePeashooter wrote:
Even if you are scum, if you are winning purely because you spammed the thread that's not a real win. That would be equivalent to me trying to get you modkilled because I think you are scum. Winning the game through illegitimate methods defeats the point in playing the game.
And I don't believe you will try. I told you how to not triple post, how to not keep posting on your BlazingHand account and you ignored me multiple times and proceeded to triple post. Im catching up and had to stop here. I assume its already been questioned but whatever, I complete abhor and detest this type of mentality. Let me remind you of your reaction to the Ace mislynch. On March 22 2013 10:25 ThePeashooter wrote:
Do we get the alignment/role of the mod kill? Truthfully I'm a bit happy. Between Wade, VE, and Mocsta they comprised nearly a third of all the posts and I just don't have the patience to to an analysis on someone with a 300 post filter. It took me around 1.5 hours to throw together that case on Ace and write it up when I only had to read 2 pages of content. I can't bring myself to spend a whole day on these people.
If someone wants to kill Wade tonight I'd be the happiest person. I'm a bit tired from work and have to get up early so I probably won't be around much until tomorrow night which is about 20 hours from now. I feel bad for my inactivity and inability to get more reads so tomorrow I will bring forth at least one scum case during the day for a lynch and another for a vigilante/the next day. We are in bad shape right now, but we need to pull together, consolidate posts and do some fucking analysis and we can right our little townie ship and pull through. I don't see a single point in that read where you show any remorse for securing a mislynch. All i see is a person who cares about having spent 1.5hours writing a bogus case. Get off your high horse. You did not lead a lynch on a single scum candidate. Your play this game was woeful and rarely achieved any of the detailed analysis you berated others for not distributing..
you are one of the last people I am going to listen to in regards to what can be considered "optimal play." I like how you quoted "optimal play" as if I ever said something was optimal, or that I somehow represented optimal play. I never made such a claim. Mistakes happen. I'm not going to focus on apologizing for fucking something up. It wasn't just me, we all did it. Apologizing does nothing. If I remember correctly I was specifically responding on the issue of spam. It wasn't a brag, it was a statement of fact and a reiteration of my previous points about spam. If most people put a few thoughtful posts into getting someone lynched and spammed a little less it would make the game better by increasing thread readability and therefore allowing more posts to be thoroughly analyzed by town. In contrast scum couldn't just write anything without repercussion because they would be more heavily scrutinized due to minimized post count. Thus I'd imagine both plays would elevate. What I have observed playing here for many years is that both the town and mafia skill has seemingly decreased as post counts increased. I think you abhor what I said simply because it was focused at people like you who ruin this game.
Where not games more PM-centric back in those days?
If so, the "rules" of play should/would have evolved for better or worse.
I am not going to contest/comment about skill level deviations, as I have no background to the past.
Regardless, I did over spam this game;
but I actually didnt realise this until I was digging up something in my filter for the ObsQT. I can admit that freely.
Fact is, what I thought I was achieving at the time.. I simply was not.
Frankly, your comments about spam, then suggesting decreasing levels of play all points in addition to pointing out "ruining the game for others": all points toward your opinion of "optimal play".
If you had delivered on the analysis that you berated others for not producing; then I would not think of you as a hypocrite.
I stand by you needing to get off your high horse.
All town played a part in the failures this game. Myself included.
My two biggest regrets this game was letting go of BH because I hadn't read the thread completely;
and whilst I was close to stopping the Ace lynch, I had too much spam to secure a viable alternative.
In fact IIRC all alternatives were town (Wiggles/GK/VE).
|
On March 31 2013 12:31 ThePeashooter wrote:
CC just needed to survive and his win was not mutually exclusive and could be achieved alongside the town/mafia. Furthermore, since LayAbout could be recruited and then turned back into scum if CC died he has incentive to not work to his "new" win condition. His win condition wasn't permanent and if scum was winning he just needed to kill CC and he would go back to his winning team. I would say he didn't have so much a new win condition as he did a temporary change in condition that gave him the option to switch if he wanted to.
Yea that threw me off. I assumed his win con was fixed and that he would play to it, and that he was also under the impression that if I died then he too would die. Therefore he would even be willing to die (and get mislynched) before me if needed to.
However I don't know what he was told, you would have to ask him.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
I remember there was once an 80-person game (that I was only in briefly before it fell apart) and there were several roles called "lurker vigis" which could fire a bullet to shoot a lurker. It worked pretty poorly, but it was a fine idea.
I don't think posting restrictions are the best of ideas, just because it changes the way the game works. That being said, I think the real way to stop spam is the same as the real way to stop lurking: consider it a scumtell and lynch people who do it. Obviously it's not possible for a single person to enforce this, but if enough people believe it, it will become true. And FWIW a certain level of spam probably IS a scumtell. It is anti-town to get into long arguments with everyone for no reason and derail all the useful lynches. Calling players out for this and threatening to lynch them will 1) discourage scum from doing it and 2) discourage town from doing it which could be good.
|
Cosmic, did you ever know the whole scum team? Like could LayAbout tell you who his whole scum team was?
|
I'm gonna call out RoL on the spamming = illegitimate strategy bullshit because his go-to strategy as scum is to lurk and not post until absolutely necessary to avoid a modkill.
If anything, THAT is an illegitimate strategy, given that you purposely only post to avoid a modkill. I myself would strongly consider replacing or modkilling you for that type of strategy in one of my games, because my rules explicitly state that trying to skirt an inactivity modkill will result in one.
Clearly the host this game did not have a problem with spam, otherwise people would have been warned for it. (and if they were, I am not aware of it). Calling it an illegitimate strategy is honestly self-deceptive, almost like a cop-out for not playing well.
|
On March 31 2013 12:37 Blazinghand wrote:
I remember there was once an 80-person game (that I was only in briefly before it fell apart) and there were several roles called "lurker vigis" which could fire a bullet to shoot a lurker. It worked pretty poorly, but it was a fine idea.
I don't think posting restrictions are the best of ideas, just because it changes the way the game works. That being said, I think the real way to stop spam is the same as the real way to stop lurking: consider it a scumtell and lynch people who do it. Obviously it's not possible for a single person to enforce this, but if enough people believe it, it will become true. And FWIW a certain level of spam probably IS a scumtell. It is anti-town to get into long arguments with everyone for no reason and derail all the useful lynches. Calling players out for this and threatening to lynch them will 1) discourage scum from doing it and 2) discourage town from doing it which could be good.
That was Real Time Mafia and it was hilarious. The mafia got GG'd day 2 or 3 due to the obscene KP I gave to town. I really expected the town to kill themselves with it but they hit mafia almost every time.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
I'm not sure if I was warned specifically for spamming, but I was warned that my spamming was bothering other players to the point that they wanted to quit. When I received this warning, I stopped posting for some time so that the players would simmer down a bit, and did my best to spam less while still disrupting the thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
