EPTEgo Mini Mafia - Page 90
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
| ||
|
DarthPunk
Australia10847 Posts
On April 11 2013 21:47 Tunkeg wrote: If a host think I am so bad compared to the rest that I need a vet babysitter I'd rather have him tell me to piss off out of his game. LMAO <3 | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
Look at dwarf mini. we had you, me, keirathi, hiro.pro, some vet smurf and i forget who else. DoYouHas stomped us all. Would you have predicted that? Look at yanmm. town had palmar bugs toad iamp prom and i won as first time scum. and im not a particularly good scum player. would you have predicted that? I dont think this game was as much of a sure thing as you think it was. I mean yea its hard to prove anything but i dunno i just think scum had a legit chance to win. anyway i have to go. was fun chatting with you all. for some reason i love reading axle's post game posts. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43266 Posts
I think scum made some mistakes, not that they did play bad. I found it very fishy that Axle did not vote for WoS earlier when there was same amount of evidence against him than when he did vote. Tunkeg's approach to N2 basically gave him out. Oats played pretty well, had he done something productive on D3 and not waited for people to show up (why would you want to wait as the lynch candidates were in thread?) it would have been harder to catch him. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
The balance doesn't have to be 50/50 anyway as everyone gets a chance to play town and mafia and in the end your own performance should matter more than whether you won or lost. | ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
1.) How volatile games of mafia are, take nomination where mafia had the game in the bag and managed to inexplicably blow it. Look at how quickly people begin doubting "confirmed" townies, etc. Look at how marv played in personality (sorry marv). having a vet on a team is no guarantee of anything. 2.) Breakout games, I haven't seen many of late, but there are occasions where a previously unpromising player absolutely rocks a game, usually this happens when they are forced to step up, e.g. town lacks focus and direction (The absurd medic/leader in one of the new games, got nominated for best newbie for that play. DrH in his first game where he became a focal town leader. Myself in the pardoner game. Jackal in XXXIII.), or they are placed in a team with no leadership and are forced to step up. I personally think its totally impossible to predict accurately who will win from a playerlist. This game could have easily turned into the town infighting and lynching itself had day 1 gone differently, or had one member of the scumteam done an absurdly ballsy play, etc. Anyway, blaming the "balance" of rnged rolls seems like a waste of time, its better to focus on lessons learned so that next time that a "weak" mafia team rolls out they know what to do. So, what could the mafia team have done better to establish thread presence? How could they have avoided the disastrous day 1 hammer (if at all)? What was the proper form of damage control post fact? | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43266 Posts
On April 11 2013 13:05 AxleGreaser wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 11 2013 05:25 XXX wrote: I don't really know what to make of it: - Oats questioned a lot of other people than WoS at that time. - I was not around until last moments. I was suspicious of WoS earlier though. - prpl voted for WoS cos busy and marv/Palmar voting for him, later said he only then understood Tunkeg's case fully. - Axle/Tunkeg were MIA. AKA Axle asleep in a different TZ. On April 11 2013 08:23 XXX wrote: Because i was at LAN-party with shitty internet and about 24h/weekend drunk like a fish. AKA XXX was MIA? What I find funniest(funny peculiar) about these games is how the same or similar observations get re-interpreted entirely depending on the current posters current beliefs. Although the example is of rayn, I ripped the name out as its only an example. While I know I was scum, and I did get caught, some part of the 'scumminess' of my play... wasn't. I at least never found anyone scummy because "they weren't around when they should have been" or other bullshit. I also never used those quoted things as a defence. In the first one i specifically said (after that) thet "at least i can't make anything out of it, because people were not around". And the second one was a honest answer to WoS and is not alignment indicative in any way. It's not "when people are around" but rathet "what they do when they are". | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On April 11 2013 23:11 raynpelikoneet wrote: The evidence against Oats was overwhelming and i think marv would have noticed it too. Palmar did a great job on D3 requesting a re-look on WoS/scib wagons and what happened at that time. I think scum made some mistakes, not that they did play bad. I found it very fishy that Axle did not vote for WoS earlier when there was same amount of evidence against him than when he did vote. Tunkeg's approach to N2 basically gave him out. Oats played pretty well, had he done something productive on D3 and not waited for people to show up (why would you want to wait as the lynch candidates were in thread?) it would have been harder to catch him. Pretty much yeah. By the time I died at the end of N1 I had everyone as town to some extent, excluding Ace/Tunkeg. So obviously when Ace flips town I would need to reassess. There are certain players who I found it practically impossible to be mafia: iamp/DP/sciberbia/WoS Which leads me to having to look harder at: rayn/prplhz/Oats, so yeah. Kinda inevitable. You nailed Oats pretty nicely day 3 there rayn. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On April 11 2013 23:16 GMarshal wrote: Anyway, blaming the "balance" of rnged rolls seems like a waste of time, its better to focus on lessons learned so that next time that a "weak" mafia team rolls out they know what to do. So, what could the mafia team have done better to establish thread presence? How could they have avoided the disastrous day 1 hammer (if at all)? What was the proper form of damage control post fact? Well, that's the magic isn't it. If you can tell me how players who regularly have low thread impact can all of a sudden have high thread impact, I'm all ears. Mafia will suddenly become a super ez game for everyone  | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43266 Posts
On April 11 2013 23:17 marvellosity wrote: Pretty much yeah. By the time I died at the end of N1 I had everyone as town to some extent, excluding Ace/Tunkeg. So obviously when Ace flips town I would need to reassess. There are certain players who I found it practically impossible to be mafia: iamp/DP/sciberbia/WoS Which leads me to having to look harder at: rayn/prplhz/Oats, so yeah. Kinda inevitable. You nailed Oats pretty nicely day 3 there rayn. I do stuff when i have to. I also thought Ace was scum on D2 because i felt like he was trying to derail the discussion with prplhz into something that'll never reach a conclusion (arguing about different thing) and was waiting for him to come back and explain himself. Then he got hammered. D3 i knew i have to do stuff and N2 was to keep Palmar alive and either get a mafia check on him or semi-clear him. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43266 Posts
On April 11 2013 23:22 marvellosity wrote: Well, that's the magic isn't it. If you can tell me how players who regularly have low thread impact can all of a sudden have high thread impact, I'm all ears. Mafia will suddenly become a super ez game for everyone It's pretty sad this is how it goes. For example in Red i was really angry for people that noone except marv was willing to comment on anything i said in thread. I don't like people being treated as "bad" or "good" when there is no reason to do so. All that matters is if they make sense or not, and what do you make of it. If someone just gets ignored town either loses a possibly valuable source of information or a possible mafia who could out himself if questioned. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
| ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
On April 11 2013 23:22 marvellosity wrote: Well, that's the magic isn't it. If you can tell me how players who regularly have low thread impact can all of a sudden have high thread impact, I'm all ears. Mafia will suddenly become a super ez game for everyone I would argue that I'm usually one of those players who has low thread impact. I've also never rolled scum. Do you know for certain that I won't magically become a good scum player once I finally roll it, or that I'll finally learn what I've been doing wrong in all these games and actually start being a strong town/overall player? You don't, and neither do I just yet. I just don't see the inherent benefit in not RNGing the teams; there's going to be skill imbalances in every game (read: BW/LoL/etc) and one-sided stomps based on which team is better than another. I'm with scib in that I don't think that's a bad thing necessarily. I'd much rather be destroyed by a really good scumteam (or town if I ever hit scum) knowing it was a random selection. | ||
|
AxleGreaser
Australia1154 Posts
On April 11 2013 23:16 GMarshal wrote: I think you guys arguing for balanced teams underestimate two things 1.) How volatile games of mafia are, take nomination where mafia had the game in the bag and managed to inexplicably blow it. Look at how quickly people begin doubting "confirmed" townies, etc. Look at how marv played in personality (sorry marv). having a vet on a team is no guarantee of anything. 2.) Breakout games, I haven't seen many of late, but there are occasions where a previously unpromising player absolutely rocks a game, usually this happens when they are forced to step up, e.g. town lacks focus and direction (The absurd medic/leader in one of the new games, got nominated for best newbie for that play. DrH in his first game where he became a focal town leader. Myself in the pardoner game. Jackal in XXXIII.), or they are placed in a team with no leadership and are forced to step up. I personally think its totally impossible to predict accurately who will win from a playerlist. This game could have easily turned into the town infighting and lynching itself had day 1 gone differently, or had one member of the scumteam done an absurdly ballsy play, etc. Anyway, blaming the "balance" of rnged rolls seems like a waste of time, its better to focus on lessons learned so that next time that a "weak" mafia team rolls out they know what to do. So, what could the mafia team have done better to establish thread presence? How could they have avoided the disastrous day 1 hammer (if at all)? What was the proper form of damage control post fact? To be crystal clear. I am not arguing for "balanced teams" I am saying there is something between pure flat RNG, and handcrafted guessable teams. The thing i am saying will not be reasonably gameable by real players. > I personally think its totally impossible to predict accurately who will win from a playerlist. This game could have easily > turned into the town infighting and lynching itself had day 1 gone differently, or had one member of the scumteam done > an absurdly ballsy play, etc. You are perfectly correct, it is "impossible to predict accurately who will win from a playerlist." I am not sure that it being 'impossible to be accurate', means it is anything like impossible to be able to guess considerably better than average(randomly guessing) , or to be able to choose which combination of teams ought be less likely to be generated as they are more likely to lead to a ROFL stomp. The algorithm to then roll such teams is no longer, simple enough to be easily done with a dice pen and paper, its also not prohibitively difficult. > This game could have easily turned into... I suspect that while it could have easily done this, the odds of such things happening was not near 50% > 2.) Breakout games, I haven't seen many of late, but there are occasions So i guess break out things don't happen all that easily... Do note however, break out things may start happening never if hosts start balancing games such that scum teams never think OMG were fucked... Lets try something extraordinary. Lets try to be great !! So yeah i am both with you and against you, scum team like the one I was just in need to be possible, but does it have to be exactly as likely as some of the other possible teams?. Syllogism said: I'm personally not going to join a game if I know for a fact the host balances teams. I don't like it when people work out who is and is not scum due to nothing that player did at all. (eg Host balance and other flips.) That doesn't feel like you beat the scum player at all. WORSE. Outcomes will tend to be scum stomps or town stomps because if any scum players flip, now not only the inter-player interactions but the game balance inter actions solve it. However, if the host only makes it some unknown amount more or less likely that a team would have all strong or weak players, and the hosts actual estimate of how strong all the players are is unknown and some of that imbalance may be addressed by role distribution in scum or town, and.... Then using host balance speculation as part of any lynch would become much more dubious. Fundamentally how much do I think hosts should tweak teams and power roles to get balance. 1) The goal is not that everyone has 50% chance of winning. better players ought win more often. 2) If the players have gamed he host and are successfully guessing teams based on balance... Time to change the algorithm. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43266 Posts
On April 07 2013 03:33 raynpelikoneet wrote: I'm starting to think WoS is actually town.. Cna we lynch sci? I just didn't feel the need to provide the reasons at least when marv noticed the same thing. Yeah, i'm all for 100% RNG'ing teams. At worst this results in a one-sided stomp but it is also a good learning experience for the "lesser" team. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
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. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36156 Posts
| ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
On April 11 2013 23:53 AxleGreaser wrote: 2) If the players have gamed he host and are successfully guessing teams based on balance... Time to change the algorithm. so what do you propose this game would have been a fair scumteam? | ||
|
DarthPunk
Australia10847 Posts
If people want to win more try harder and play better. I don't know how many times I have said this to newbies but if you post more as scum you are harder to catch and look townier. For instance. Oats posted rubbish spammy shit for most of the game. His cases were poor and yet he blended in rather well. Both axle and tunkeg had by far the shortest filters in the game and IMO if they had simple posted bad cases and pushed bad cases and spammed more they would have been far less likely to be caught. I think Scum could have won if Axle had posted as much as I have seen him post in his town games for instance, and without his lynch scum would have been in a pretty good spot. | ||
|
DarthPunk
Australia10847 Posts
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. | ||
| ||
