|
Furthermore If they would have contributed far more as town you also lose our contributions as town.
|
On April 12 2013 00:26 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 00:22 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 00:20 wherebugsgo wrote:On April 12 2013 00:10 DarthPunk wrote:On April 11 2013 23:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
The only players you can consider for balancing purposes are vets, because they are the only ones with enough games for it to matter.
The problem is that there are only a handful of them every game, so if you know a host balances teams, then simply by lynching into the vets your chances of hitting scum increase drastically.
marv's argument about how the teams could have been balanced by a host even by letting Ace/marv/Palmar be on town is laughable, given that there's almost no way to reliably differentiate the scum play of the remaining 9 players in this game (no offense to you all). Not only that, but the town arguably might benefit anyway from one of the (now scum) players being moved to town instead. Yeah I don't buy that argument. I am not in favor of 'balanced' set ups but I think that you can have a basic idea of who is more likely to play better as scum. Town not so much. But some players just don't try as hard as scum I think, and it is really obvious. so you're saying for sure at least one player outside of those 3 is definitely better than someone who was actually on the scumteam, and thus you could have balanced the team better? I doubt that, particularly as it would also result in one of those players being shifted over to town (where they almost CERTAINLY would have contributed more) Yep. Perfection and Myself. and Sciberbia, even though it totally wasn't balance reasons I caught him on in YAN
Wouldn't know. Never seen him play scum.
|
On April 12 2013 00:32 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 00:30 raynpelikoneet wrote:On April 12 2013 00:27 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:18 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 00:10 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:07 DarthPunk wrote:
To be fair. Ace/marv/palmar all being town wasn't even a major reason that town won this game. Vets often play badly just like everyone else. So if we are talking about balancing 'vets' I really don't see the point.
Just as a general point, it's more the idea that ace/marv/palmar can organise/direct a mafia team well, and can exert significant thread influence for the benefit of mafia. So could a whole bunch of non vets in this game. I still don't see the point. You're missing the point, because the only point I'm making there is that these players have *proven* their ability to regularly do what I mentioned. Whereas players who aren't them haven't. *shrug* So isn't the argument null in the first place because you can't know what other townies (this game) could/would have done as mafia? Only conclusion i can reach that this particular mafia team in this game couldn't push their agenda succesfully. You can make a decent stab at it. If I were told before the game as an observer who the mafia team were, I'd have fairly confidently told you they wouldn't be very successful at pushing their agenda over the course of the game...
You can't deny that Oats rose to the occasion though and played a really solid scum game. I mean. You were dancing to his tune. 
|
On April 12 2013 00:36 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 00:34 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 00:32 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:30 raynpelikoneet wrote:On April 12 2013 00:27 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:18 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 00:10 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:07 DarthPunk wrote:
To be fair. Ace/marv/palmar all being town wasn't even a major reason that town won this game. Vets often play badly just like everyone else. So if we are talking about balancing 'vets' I really don't see the point.
Just as a general point, it's more the idea that ace/marv/palmar can organise/direct a mafia team well, and can exert significant thread influence for the benefit of mafia. So could a whole bunch of non vets in this game. I still don't see the point. You're missing the point, because the only point I'm making there is that these players have *proven* their ability to regularly do what I mentioned. Whereas players who aren't them haven't. *shrug* So isn't the argument null in the first place because you can't know what other townies (this game) could/would have done as mafia? Only conclusion i can reach that this particular mafia team in this game couldn't push their agenda succesfully. You can make a decent stab at it. If I were told before the game as an observer who the mafia team were, I'd have fairly confidently told you they wouldn't be very successful at pushing their agenda over the course of the game... You can't deny that Oats rose to the occasion though and played a really solid scum game. I mean. You were dancing to his tune. Me reading him as town in the first cycle isn't dancing to his tune. He never convinced me of anything I wouldn't have believed otherwise in relation to everyone else, which is what that is.
If you hard defend scum and then defend another scum in order to form a wagon on town with the first scum then he is doing a pretty good job IMO.
|
On April 12 2013 00:39 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 00:38 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 00:36 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:34 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 00:32 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:30 raynpelikoneet wrote:On April 12 2013 00:27 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:18 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 00:10 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 00:07 DarthPunk wrote:
To be fair. Ace/marv/palmar all being town wasn't even a major reason that town won this game. Vets often play badly just like everyone else. So if we are talking about balancing 'vets' I really don't see the point.
Just as a general point, it's more the idea that ace/marv/palmar can organise/direct a mafia team well, and can exert significant thread influence for the benefit of mafia. So could a whole bunch of non vets in this game. I still don't see the point. You're missing the point, because the only point I'm making there is that these players have *proven* their ability to regularly do what I mentioned. Whereas players who aren't them haven't. *shrug* So isn't the argument null in the first place because you can't know what other townies (this game) could/would have done as mafia? Only conclusion i can reach that this particular mafia team in this game couldn't push their agenda succesfully. You can make a decent stab at it. If I were told before the game as an observer who the mafia team were, I'd have fairly confidently told you they wouldn't be very successful at pushing their agenda over the course of the game... You can't deny that Oats rose to the occasion though and played a really solid scum game. I mean. You were dancing to his tune. Me reading him as town in the first cycle isn't dancing to his tune. He never convinced me of anything I wouldn't have believed otherwise in relation to everyone else, which is what that is. If you hard defend scum and then defend another scum in order to form a wagon on town with the first scum then he is doing a pretty good job IMO. ? what oats did was irrelevant to me pushing Ace. what are you on about?
I'm just teasing. 
|
On April 12 2013 00:41 marvellosity wrote:
^^
So what's your overall record now, DP?
12-2 or something. Maybe 13-2
|
The heart melts at such lavish compliments.
|
On April 12 2013 00:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
DP have you ever been lynched in a game?
Yeah. Twice. The first time was my first newbie. The second time it was marvs fault but Bugs yelled at him a lot and pm'd me apologising for letting me get lynched. So that made me feel better.
|
Incidentally the second time I got lynched it was after pushing scum all day one. LOL.
|
On April 12 2013 00:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
DP have you ever been lynched in a game?
OH and I have never been lynched outside of a game. :D
|
On April 12 2013 01:00 marvellosity wrote:
I just like lynching people, what can I say :<
what game did I lynch you in?
Paranoia.
|
On April 12 2013 01:04 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 01:02 DarthPunk wrote:On April 12 2013 01:00 marvellosity wrote:
I just like lynching people, what can I say :<
what game did I lynch you in? Paranoia. Oh, well then. I was under retarded pressure all day, my pushes in those situations are always diabolical. Collateral damage babe <3 P.S your jokes were different
OMG SO MAD RIGHT NOW
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On April 12 2013 01:13 marvellosity wrote:
Bears a remarkable resemblance to you, oddly.
Funny.
|
On April 12 2013 01:47 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 01:37 Oatsmaster wrote:On April 12 2013 01:36 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 01:29 wherebugsgo wrote:
I disagree still.
There is nothing that indicates a scumteam of sciberbia/DP/whoever would necessarily have been better than what we had.
You know why? Cause people like Axle, who play very differently dependent on alignment, are unlikely to get lynched as town.
It's all just conjecture, saying that you would have been able to balance the game better on that basis without considering those 3 vets. The argument is based on seeing the results, but there is no empirical evidence that it actually holds in practice (also there's no evidence that the reason the scumteam lost was because of player imbalance either!)
And to top it all off there's no measure of skill that says the scumteam you proposed is better than the one that was in this game, or that the change would have kept town level the same.
E: this was @ DP and whomever else was talking about the teams I'm kinda tempted, in a completely arbitrary manner, to do some kind of ELO rating for players with both a town and a mafia ELO, with results in games averaged across the team's ELO. Just for curiosity of how it looks. On a speculative note, you could say that you'd expect games with a higher proportion of players with large disparity between town and mafia ELOs to have more positive town results, regardless of 'objective' rating. For example a game of 12 iamperfections would more often result in a town win than a game of 12 wbgs. 12 Iamps. Hilarious I'm 3 and 1 as scum and I blame my teammate for the 1 
Blame marv. New rule.
|
On April 12 2013 02:01 AxleGreaser wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 01:37 Oatsmaster wrote:On April 12 2013 01:36 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 01:29 wherebugsgo wrote:
I disagree still.
There is nothing that indicates a scumteam of sciberbia/DP/whoever would necessarily have been better than what we had.
You know why? Cause people like Axle, who play very differently dependent on alignment, are unlikely to get lynched as town.
It's all just conjecture, saying that you would have been able to balance the game better on that basis without considering those 3 vets. The argument is based on seeing the results, but there is no empirical evidence that it actually holds in practice (also there's no evidence that the reason the scumteam lost was because of player imbalance either!)
And to top it all off there's no measure of skill that says the scumteam you proposed is better than the one that was in this game, or that the change would have kept town level the same.
E: this was @ DP and whomever else was talking about the teams I'm kinda tempted, in a completely arbitrary manner, to do some kind of ELO rating for players with both a town and a mafia ELO, with results in games averaged across the team's ELO. Just for curiosity of how it looks. On a speculative note, you could say that you'd expect games with a higher proportion of players with large disparity between town and mafia ELOs to have more positive town results, regardless of 'objective' rating. For example a game of 12 iamperfections would more often result in a town win than a game of 12 wbgs. 12 Iamps. Hilarious I thought it was very bright Idea.
HAHAHAHAHA good one.
|
On April 12 2013 02:04 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2013 02:00 marvellosity wrote:On April 12 2013 01:58 syllogism wrote:
While you are doing arbitrary math, can you factor in the advantage town gets from knowing that teams aren't RNGed Well the thing is, it becomes much less arbitrary if I go back many games and factor in results of each game, because ELO by its nature is self-correcting. So if I make a guess that's originally too high, if they lose games then their rating would fall quite quickly. Yes but the point I'm making is, there is no REAL mathematical way of estimating skill like this. Any numbers you come up with or what a win or loss does to this arbitrary number is still just that, arbitrary. As a player plays more and more games in a team setting, elo becomes more accurate supposedly, but with a sample size like TL Mafia, there is absolutely no way a skill rating like elo would come close to being an accurate representation. There are WAY too many mitigating factors such as the hosts, style of game (mini/normal/themed/whatever), roles available, who is playing in said game, etc. Theoretically this would matter less if people could play hundreds of games but that doesn't happen here.
Yeah. No one is saying this is correct at all.
|
On April 12 2013 02:59 iamperfection wrote:
its almost like a game is still going on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oKMNaYl.jpg)
