|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 3:05:47 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 24, 2010 3:05:47 GMT -5
If we all agree otherwise, I'll eat my hoodie. I also doubt you'd get universal agreement on when this game crosses the threshold from "early" to "late", but I'm willing to hear your projection of that magic moment when everyone should shift their voting methods in unison.
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 4:19:34 GMT -5
Post by Total Ullz on Feb 24, 2010 4:19:34 GMT -5
A agree on the mass claim. It feels to early right now, but we might get to the point where it could give us vital information about the game.
As for the voting - I'm not really sure if I like the system with more votes. But it's in the game and this will make analyzing the vote-records harder (at least for me).
And the more I play, the more I think we almost always lynch town when we lynch a lurker. It's really turning down the game of mafia and just playing by luck. I know lurking doesn't help town - but I don't think we should lynch based on the number of post alone.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 5:54:44 GMT -5
Post by luvbwfc on Feb 24, 2010 5:54:44 GMT -5
If we all agree otherwise, I'll eat my hoodie. I also doubt you'd get universal agreement on when this game crosses the threshold from "early" to "late", but I'm willing to hear your projection of that magic moment when everyone should shift their voting methods in unison. fair point. Impossible to say in a closed game. We would need to know number of scum/3rd party remaining. Only other option open to us that I can see is keeping people very very accountable for their votes.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 6:19:47 GMT -5
Post by BillMc on Feb 24, 2010 6:19:47 GMT -5
Now, this is why people are suggesting that we not use our 2nd or 3rd votes. It adds a scummy tinge to act of using them because not using them makes it harder for scum to pull such a stunt without getting noticed. And since there is protown reasoning behind NOT using your 2nd and 3rd votes, surely scum is gonna be all over it. Borda count does have it's benefits, it allows you state who you absolutely want to lynch that day. It also gives you an option to say, "If I wasn't going to lynch Player A, I would lynch Player B, and if not him, then Player C." Sure, that's what FOS's are for, but saying you are suspicious of someone and saying you are ready to lynch someone are not equal at all in my book. The Borda system allows you to state your opinion on a group of people, and in my limited experience, you end up with a lynch candidate you were happy with. (Too often am I seen as town with a one off vote for someone because I am the only one who has that person for my primary suspect.) The potential issue with just casting 1st votes, is that that vote is worth three points - so single 1st votes can swing the lead dramatically. Of course, you could mitigate this by saying everyone should just cast 3rd 1 pt votes, but then it would someone to throw in a 1st vote right at day end to change the outcome. The flip side of only casting one vote, is reducing the power of suspicion - if I find three folk scummy - then why should I only vote for 1 of them? it gives the other two a by.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 7:50:27 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 24, 2010 7:50:27 GMT -5
If we all agree otherwise, I'll eat my hoodie. I also doubt you'd get universal agreement on when this game crosses the threshold from "early" to "late", but I'm willing to hear your projection of that magic moment when everyone should shift their voting methods in unison. Let's not replay Pod People with our discussion of differences though ;D
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 8:00:02 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 24, 2010 8:00:02 GMT -5
Only other option open to us that I can see is keeping people very very accountable for their votes. This. I think that this is best way to handle borda count. This would have been difficult with the requirement that everyone place all three votes, since there would have been a plethora of "I just voted those last two to make my votes count type phrases" which would have made assigning accountability hard. Also, although this is only a slight benefit, more voting = more accountability.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 9:15:02 GMT -5
Post by fluiddruid on Feb 24, 2010 9:15:02 GMT -5
The flip side of only casting one vote, is reducing the power of suspicion - if I find three folk scummy - then why should I only vote for 1 of them? it gives the other two a by. Voting, as a mechanic, is intended to indicate who you want to lynch that Day. If you have a first place candidate, I'm afraid I don't see a Town value to adding votes for a presumably inferior candidate that may cause them to be lynched first. Why would you want to do this? It just adds an element of randomness -- and even worse, easy scum manipulation -- to the whole voting system. I feel being direct is the best mechanic. If you want to lynch someone, vote for them. Simple as that. Adding "Well, if I can't lynch so-and-so, I'll add a second but less valuable vote to someone else who might also be scum" just gives a tremendous amount of wiggle room to swing the vote. You can give someone the FOS without a vote easily, so I don't see the benefit at all. Unfortunately I doubt we're likely to reach consensus on this issue, and frankly I think I've learned from my previous game and the double-lyse issue that it's even more pro-scum to indefinitely hash the subject out. But it does reduce the value of vote analysis and gives scum a clear edge, and that's disappointing.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 9:22:46 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 24, 2010 9:22:46 GMT -5
and maybe we have beaten this horse enough but where it really becomes scum helpful is towards the latter part of the game. 1 or 2 scum can potentially give swings of 6 - 12 votes right at the end of the day. now of course this will most likely result in their immediate lynch the next Day but if they are already close it can basically take one mislynch away from town.
that's why it is maybe even more important to get some votes out early. that way any last minute manipulation becomes a little more apparent.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 11:01:21 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Feb 24, 2010 11:01:21 GMT -5
Okay, I'm kind of a lot confused.
When we vote, we should be indicating that we're placing a 1st (3 point) vote, a 2nd (2 point) vote, and/or a 3rd (1 point) vote? So we can vote a 3rd (1 point) vote even without having a 1st/2nd?
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 11:04:50 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 24, 2010 11:04:50 GMT -5
Okay, I'm kind of a lot confused. When we vote, we should be indicating that we're placing a 1st (3 point) vote, a 2nd (2 point) vote, and/or a 3rd (1 point) vote? So we can vote a 3rd (1 point) vote even without having a 1st/2nd? Yes.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 11:12:11 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Feb 24, 2010 11:12:11 GMT -5
Last time, as I recall, most of the 2nd and 3nd slot voting was just to fill the slots. People even voted for themselves, so that their entire vote would count.
Since we don't have that restriction this time, it should be a lot easier to hold people accountable. I guess that's all I have to say about that.
As far as mass claiming goes, well, it's what won the last Conspiracy game as well. It's a great idea, later in the game. I don't think the value is as great in the beginning, so I'd be against it until at least after Day 3.
--FCOD
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 11:16:43 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 24, 2010 11:16:43 GMT -5
FOR THE RECORD. I FUCKING, FUCKING HATE THAT YOU CANT MULTI QUOTE HERE. THE SYSTEM TO DO SO HERE IS A JOKE. I have tried multiple times, and I can not figure it out. It does not work, and I can only imagine the magic combination to get it to work. --------------- I cut and pasted mine. I don't think I snipped. I hope I don't vote myself because of it. -- Cookies, I don't follow. At all. Help me out here. In most games, an unvote or a last minute vote is a switch from A to B in terms of lead. We now have a situation where a single unvote or last minute switch can go from A to B OR C. Scum is given an entire extra track to switch last minute votes on. Yet you don't worry? Please explain. You say you would not be bothered if some some insight is potentially not present. Please elaborate on this, with an example wherein the element of missing insight is present, and it would be acceptable to you. How will we be less likely to infer scummy motivations? And if I am beginning to understand you, wouldn't this also mean that we would not have any scummy motivations to infer, from scum as well ? It is one thing to get rid of False positives. It is an entirely different affair to get rid of ALL Positives in doing so. Something about Babies and Bathwater here. Per your last paragraph: You want me to tell you how I think scum can hide their vote tells? Fish much? -------------------- Meeko: You admit that you aren't following me, yet you're comfortable coming to the conclusion that I'm fishing? Read what I said again, without that part of putting words in my mouth, and maybe you will see that your paranoia is a bit overkill. The rules are the rules, and there have been a few posts that seemed to be "Oh noes!11! Borda bad!!" which I don't understand. Why sweat it? Be aware of it, yes. Discuss strategy about it, fine. But I'm confident Pede gave us a balanced game with an apparent upgrade in flexibility of the borda system since the last go-round. I don't see how worrying and fretting and wringing our hands about it is worth the keystrokes. In the part of my post that you are interpreting as fishing, apparently, all I am asking is that the players who are, as Nanook has proposed, likely not to utilize all of the votes at their disposal to explain why. If you someone is going to try and telegraph a personal policy about how they plan to use restraint in their number of votes like that, I'd like to hear the logic behind that decision. Does he, by extension, consider people who do not make a similar pledge or who end up voting with a different policy as suspicious? Anyone who might pledge to use all of their available votes each and every day would get the same question. The silver lining statement was just that. There is a cloud of potential scum manipulation of the votes in this set up, and such manipulation will be difficult to tease out of vote analysis. The silver lining is, if we are mindful of this and emphasize scum-hunting in areas outside of vote analysis, we will be less likely to run into those pesky false-positives where we lynch Townies because of their bad voting records. Not celebratory sunshine and flowers and unicorns...the silver lining of a cloud. Reluctantly I will go deeper here. I am feeling baited already. Beyond regular Meeko baiting, to the point where I feel soon enough I will be playing your hypothetical game and not the one at hand. Cookies, I am going to ask you more questions. Not that you answered my first questions. But still. Nice try on trying to dismiss my entire line of valid questions by calling it "overkill", or paranoid. What do you mean by Following? Do I need to be more clear here Cookies? You Ping me. You pingged me from the moment of your post on how Borda isn't that bad, and that it is acceptable to not have information in the game. The entire "Following" thing strikes me as the old "Do you still beat up your wife" trick question. No answer is acceptable. But, if I answer it, your baiting has worked. I don't get what you mean by following. This seems like a cooked up term, meant only to smudge. How does Town play ANY mafia game, unless they Follow? What is a WOW if not "follow" and the extra "stalking" ? I don't understand the term. How then can I admit that I am not following you? What words did I put into your mouth? You said you are not bothered by the fact that our game could have less information than usual. I am asking you for an example to support this claim. I don't see how less information can be acceptable If you ask other people how they plan to vote, it WILL influence how you think about your votes. If you are scum, what better information to have than "Hey, If I do this, the entire game will KNOW I am town." If this term is not fishing, I don't know what term will suffice. You are asking Town for information. You are then using that information to your advantage. You made your Silver lining totally worse. You are now saying that we should totally ignore ALL votes and to make off the difference with a double helping of scum hunting elsewhere. Because town's abillity to hunt scum is so great as is, that we can afford to tie one had behind our back, and just make heads or tails out of it ""elsewhere"". Not that you were too terribly clear on how or where to do this. This not only carries the baby out with bathwater, it calls the bed a bathtub, and asks us to look there for the baby. -- In a seperate house no less. And just so we won't forget that I asked, and that I still want an answer: Why do find a game with less player insight to be acceptable?You say you would not be bothered if some some insight is potentially not present. Please elaborate on this, with an example wherein the element of missing insight is present, and it would be acceptable to you. At worst Cookies, you deserve a 3 point vote from me here. You came on strong trying to make breathing space for Scum to live in among the fact that Town needs to tighten up the game. Town would not reject the self imposed restraints. Scum would. Further, you are ignoring questions when pressed to this end. Beyond that, you are smudging me and coming out of no where with a charge of "following". Which I still don't get. Apparently playing the game at the given status quo is now OMFG Meeko is Heavy Handed man, I can haz meekowiches for lunches? There is no vote here. Day 1 votes being what they historically are. Just a landing here, in case I need to revisit. At best, I do not understand the Voting system, and my understanding of your play style has gone out the window. All past experience with you be damned. As said I don't need new and different rules to enter my realm just when I feel I am getting standard Mafia down. You might be Baiting me, I may be totally wrong. I hate how escelated this has already gotten, and I am not about to turn up the heat, or continue as is. Cookies, please answer my questions. Town, please help me out here. How far gone am I on this? And I can only begin to guess how long this post took me to create.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 11:30:35 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 24, 2010 11:30:35 GMT -5
If we all agree otherwise, I'll eat my hoodie. I also doubt you'd get universal agreement on when this game crosses the threshold from "early" to "late", but I'm willing to hear your projection of that magic moment when everyone should shift their voting methods in unison. I swear Cookies, you are becoming Peeker. You had the entire Following thing, which I still don't understand, and now this? Ok, So, I assume you mean to say you are going to eat your hat on something. As written, you seem to simply state this, and move on to something else entirely, with the word "Also". If you want to drop the entire arguments between us, that is fine with me. I'm just not clear on what Hoodie you are eating.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 12:03:33 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Feb 24, 2010 12:03:33 GMT -5
Well, I'm not cookies, but I think I can clarify:
she's responding to luvbwfc's comment on the bottom of Page 1:
and saying that the odds of getting all of us to agree to this action are slim to none.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 12:06:09 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 24, 2010 12:06:09 GMT -5
Sorry, I didn't confirm in the confirmation thread. I sent a PM back to our esteemed moderator in response to receiving my role.
Anyway, /in, and all that. I'm sure this game is going to confuse the hell out of me. ;-)
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 12:15:10 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 24, 2010 12:15:10 GMT -5
Sorry, I didn't confirm in the confirmation thread. I sent a PM back to our esteemed moderator in response to receiving my role. Anyway, /in, and all that. I'm sure this game is going to confuse the hell out of me. ;-) Going? You mean it hasn't confused you already? I was going to say ""At least I'm not the only one here"". I will say it in advance. Just let me know once you get as confused as I am, Drain.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 12:31:47 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 24, 2010 12:31:47 GMT -5
and saying that the odds of getting all of us to agree to this action are slim to none. Also, I would like to point out that it's quite often town who fucks up and breaks policy, scum tend to be more conscientious of their actions. The other problem with these kind of policies to prevent vote manipulation is simple: Scum doesn't have to break policy until it suits them to do so, and by that time it's way too late. I think a policy that robs us of a potential tool is foolishness, how to use this tool effectively for town, I do not know yet. (And if you plan on using it, you better make it plain how your decision to use it benefits town.) Seriously, the remedy in this game is simple. Accountability, make people accountable for whatever votes they put out there. Challenge them if you think they are bullshit, be active and be aggressive. That's how town wins.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 12:57:21 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 24, 2010 12:57:21 GMT -5
Meeko,
I think you are seeing things in Cookie's posts that just aren't there. Or you aren't completely following and you're allowing your paranoia to fill in the gaps.
As far as I can tell, Cookies point is that the Borda system has its advantages (one being that we won't be overly reliant on vote analysis which quite often proves totally useless, especially with a few early mislynches). She acknowledges a disadvantage is that we might lose some vote analysis usefulness.
She then asks for ideas on how we can limit the Scum's ability to manipulate the votes. (This is the part you accused her of fishing. I think you might have been under the impression that she was Scum asking for advice on how to hide her votes. That would be foolish, especially since the advice would be public and it would mean the Scum couldn't hide in that fashion)
I think you may have just read too quickly or just misunderstood. I aslo think you might be over reacting. So take your time, please. Make a point, if you feel you have one, but then allow time for other people to put in their comments and see if things might make more sense. (This is advice I should be following, but usually don't)
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 14:22:24 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Feb 24, 2010 14:22:24 GMT -5
Fluid more or less summed up my thought process on why I don't plan to use my two vote. If I really want whoever it is I'm voting for dead, I don't want to dilute that by voting for someone else too. Plus, I was in the last SSB game and saw first hand the damage Borda can do(for the record, I was scum in it). On top of all that, my recollection is the same as FCOD. There were a ton of "vote myself just so I have three" votes.
Don't get me wrong. If there's a situation that calls out for 2 or even 3 votes for people, I will do it. I can't picture what that situation would be at this point, but I don't see any point in getting caught up in never say never type situations.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 15:02:58 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 24, 2010 15:02:58 GMT -5
I think you might have been under the impression that she was Scum asking for advice on how to hide her votes. That would be foolish, especially since the advice would be public and it would mean the Scum couldn't hide in that fashion) I think you may have just read too quickly or just misunderstood. I aslo think you might be over reacting. So take your time, please. Make a point, if you feel you have one, but then allow time for other people to put in their comments and see if things might make more sense. (This is advice I should be following, but usually don't) To the first part, This. I'm sorry, are the implications I read simply not there for other players? At any time, couldn't anyone, asking anyone else, for ANY piece of information, be considered as fishing? Hence the term? I didn't see how sharing "how to play as town" can help town more than scum. ""That would be foolish, especially since the advice would be public and it would mean the Scum couldn't hide in that fashion)"" You appear to argue that someone will use a strategy previously disclosed, stemming from Cookies' questions. We as town will point to a player using this strategy and we will call them Scum because of it. To avoid this, scum will not use these methods. Correct? It won't work this way. The question and discussion after is an attempt to get at the best way a townie can vote. There is no best way for a townie to vote, that scum can not hide in.We will conclude on a best as we can get it town strategy. Scum will HAVE to use this strategy as well. If they don't they will stick out like a sore thumb. Let me try this another way. All squares are rectangles. Not all rectangles are squares. Any comment you make about squares, you can also make about rectangles. Squares are a subset of Rectangles. Substitute squares for town, and rectangles for Scum. The standard thinking is exactly, EXACTLY backwards. Town is a subset of Scum. What can you say about a townie, that you can not also say about scum? What can you say about scum, that you can not also say about townies? Scum can hide in this fashion. It is exactly how they play the game, and indeed it is what makes the game work. Bonus Round : Now that I have gone this far, let me go a few steps further, RE where I am with Cookies. Because Scum can and will hide in this way, I consider an open call for open season on the ideas to be fishing. There will be vote switching in this game. I am willing to bet Scum will switch votes at last minute. Again, in most games the switch is only A -> B. This system allows for A -> B or A -> C. I don't know how anyone can have comfort with that. It's doubly dangerous for town when it comes to vote switching. I simply asked for an example where less information would acceptable to Cookies. I can't find one personally, but then again, I didn't make the statement. I just found all of those things to be quite unexpected. The unexpected is the essence of getting pinged. Did I read things to fast, did I jump to conclusions? I can't exclude that as a possibility. That is why I am talking things out, and not voting yet. And if the two infomercials on the tv are any indication, this post took me over an hour to create.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 15:42:14 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 24, 2010 15:42:14 GMT -5
To the first part, This. I'm sorry, are the implications I read simply not there for other players? At any time, couldn't anyone, asking anyone else, for ANY piece of information, be considered as fishing? Hence the term? Generally the term fishing in mafia refers to a specific type of questioning, or vote direction. Namely, questioning or pressure which subtly tries to illicit information about a players role. Asking about strategy, directly asking about a players role is simply asking questions, and is not outwardly scummy since, the intention is plain. I didn't see how sharing "how to play as town" can help town more than scum. Scum can talk amongst themselves and help each other. Town must talk in public to do this. The question and discussion after is an attempt to get at the best way a townie can vote. There is no best way for a townie to vote, that scum can not hide in.We will conclude on a best as we can get it town strategy. Scum will HAVE to use this strategy as well. If they don't they will stick out like a sore thumb. Yeah, but like I said before, town is at least equally likely to break a policy. And its even odds that they won't try something as blatant as vote manipulation until it is able to be a coup de grace. All squares are rectangles. Not all rectangles are squares. Any comment you make about squares, you can also make about rectangles. Squares are a subset of Rectangles. Substitute squares for town, and rectangles for Scum. The standard thinking is exactly, EXACTLY backwards. Town is a subset of Scum. What can you say about a townie, that you can not also say about scum? What can you say about scum, that you can not also say about townies? This analogy is bunk. Town is not a subset of scum, by any measure. Both are subsets of players, but town is not a subset, abstraction or even a specification of scum (which is what I think you were trying to say). Note this: A square is a rectangle. A town player is not a scum player. Thats where it breaks. Also I can say that scum know who is on their team, and town does not. I simply asked for an example where less information would acceptable to Cookies. I can't find one personally, but then again, I didn't make the statement. I wonder how more votes = less information. More votes might equal a lower signal to noise ratio, but it no way shape or form does it equal less information. Sorry, more information = more information and more work for town to sort out.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 16:00:11 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 24, 2010 16:00:11 GMT -5
Meeko, I don't know what to tell you other than you are very much seeing things in my posts that just aren't there. Ed's synopsis is a good one, but now it looks like he's in hot water with you too.
I would respond to you line-by-line, but I'm not clear on exactly what your open questions to me are.
For example...
I used the word follow because you had used it.
Which implied, to me at least, that you weren't understanding what I was trying to say. Yet by the end of your post you had come to the conclusion that my first post of the game proper, and all of its three brief sentences, was absolutely scummy and bad for town.
The relevant part of my response was:
But I'm not even sure if you are asking me what I meant by "following", or if you are trying to explain what you meant by "following", or neither.
You seem to want me to be freaking out more about the rules of the game we're playing, and I simply don't agree. The rules are the rules and we can't change them. If you don't expect me to want to try and change the rules somehow, I don't understand your reaction to my reaction to the Borda system in this game.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 16:09:34 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 24, 2010 16:09:34 GMT -5
I got a bit ahead of myself. It wasn't until Meeko's post 41 where the absolutely scummy and bad for town perceptions of me started to flow. The only thing he accused me of in my first post was the fishing.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 16:47:45 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 24, 2010 16:47:45 GMT -5
Ok.
Let me see if I can step back in here and clarify all of it.
I am good with Special Ed.
At the risk of giving in to his snuggling (if he is indeed doing it) he has some good points. I remind the game that Ed was a mason with me in my first game. Either because of this, or because of what Ed has outside of Mafia, I think he understands me better.
Cookies, I am better with you than I was soon after game start. What I brought to our conversations, piled with the vote system, and frankly Cecil Pond clouded me up a tad. I know which game is which, certainly, but we must all take from past [or ongoing] games in order to improve.
I still believe that each side would like to play a better game than how any mafia game shakes out.
The entire double lyse debate got me thinking that Scum would not want to lyse spawn. In order to do this, they would have to present the most Town seeming reasons to do so. Reasons can be many, but at the end of the day, the vote is all that matters.
Reading the early posts here, on how Scum can vote for three townies a day instead of one, and play the numbers on those votes throughout the day had me thinking in similar terms.
Cookies was asking for a LOT of information, the pros and cons of each one seeming to be exactly what Scum would need. It was my opinion that Scum could cherry pick the reasons given here, and in doing so, have a relative safe time doing what they need to do to that end.
Let me get town to explain every strategy under the sun. Then once someone else has done the work I will use the ones that let me act as town, even though I still get my scum intention across.
As I was using the term, this is fishing.
Cookies now appears to be saying that the only way town can play this game, is to accept this is how apparently tilted towards scum the game is, and we need to make it the best we can in response.
I was not "following" as in understanding what Cookies meant to say in terms of logic. Again, understanding this new vote system, and my liberal use of the word fish.
I now see that we were using the words differently.
I thought Cookies was using the word follow in the sense that I Was on her back, seeming to call her on every thing, innocent or not, this of course was not helped by my use of the word fishing.
So from this you get the entire, I thought follow was a loaded term for looking at and isolating a player. Much as police officers engage in racial profiling.
And while that was going on, I was still pinged. I thought I Was on to something with Cookies here. ..... As much as we can be on Day 1. I thought Cookies knew that Town would agree on terms that would overall be better for town than scum. If Scum knows this is where the game will go, I am willing to bet that they know what they can "let go" in the negotiation, and what they must keep. From this vantage point, they will then know what they need, and they will town it up as much as they can.
I hope that last paragraph makes sense.
I will anticipate a question. I remind the entire game that Scum has their board open 24/7 for this game.
4. Days 1-3 are 5 days long, Days 4-6 are 4 days long, Days 7 and after are 3 days long. Night strategy is allowed for town, and Day strategy is allowed on the scum board.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 17:15:19 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 24, 2010 17:15:19 GMT -5
well, it should go without saying that using another game for behavior in this game is not ideal strategy. the whole, no grudges, yada yada yada. and sure if scum come up with town reasons for a particular action and strategy that will benefit them. however, typically they break down under the weakness of an inherrant flaw in their reasoning/logic.
and the problem (inherrant scum advantage) in borda is not that scum can vote for three townies. much more along the lines of manipulating the vote count. ok my scum buddy is a distant nothing. i could place a first vote on them and then a second on a townie leader and a third on some poor random sole. voila, i really wanted to lynch x but shoot the rest of you folks tipped y to the trapdoor. and it really becomes scum loaded at end game when a bum's rush of vote changes as the last second takes a distant second or third and catapaults them into the lead right at the end of the day. believe me we had this figured out in saving nook. i think i had him first and all i would have had to do was totally unvote him and vote the townie first and bingo. if i recall correctly we spent a lot of time on whether was 5 minutes to the deadline too much or should we cut it closer. i had my vote all typed up and ready to hit send with about 30 seconds in the day when my bb rebooted. otherwise it would have been game over.
and sure borda tips the game a wee bit in scummy favor but i would hazzard to guess that pede factored it in when designing this game.
what cookies was up to does not even come close to my definition for fishing. what are we supposed to do if not to talk about generalities until something fleshes out.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 17:25:02 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 24, 2010 17:25:02 GMT -5
regarding mass claims.
i think that they are inherrantly beneficial to town. even if non townies are given cover roles they still have to fit within the general setup to make sense. even the most carefully concocted role not matter how well written must be consistent with game set up. three detectives, well let's start lynching them. that's why i think most of the all power role games tend to favor town. but with bunch of nillers that's a different situation. because at that point town power roles will be exposed.
plus, i like to see what happens for the first couple of days just to get a feel for the game and participants. trying to "break" a game early on can be fun as an intellectual exercise against the mod. and believe me i have tried a couple of times (even succeeded a time or two) but i'd rather be playing against the rest of you fine folks than pede, at this point.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 17:55:28 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 24, 2010 17:55:28 GMT -5
Glad we got that cleared up, Meeko.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 18:51:49 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 24, 2010 18:51:49 GMT -5
well, it should go without saying that using another game for behavior in this game is not ideal strategy. the whole, no grudges, yada yada yada. Snipped. Why do I get the distinct impression that Peeker is talking to me, but not giving me eye contact? Peeker, I think it would help ANY mafia game we both play in, if you would address me by name to points to need to bring up on my behalf. I will do so likewise. I assume you meant the snipped quote towards me. To be clear, I am not holding grudges. I simply meant to say that I believe Scum, in general, for any game, will maneuver / position themselves to obtain the most flexibility they can get, while still appearing town. I'm not sure how grudges enter play, exactly. Abstractly, I think town in general should hold a grudge on Scum in general.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 19:10:27 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 24, 2010 19:10:27 GMT -5
ouch!
sorry, I just bit my tongue
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 19:18:42 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 24, 2010 19:18:42 GMT -5
ouch! sorry, I just bit my tongue Hush. I have been thinking about the boarda count thing for most of the day today, and the more I think about it the more I think that trying to put restrictions on how we use the system will only tie town in knots while always providing a neat loophole for the scum. I don't see any way around it. It would be nice if we all agreed that we don't want to place all three votes without good reason, but borda counting is a mess no matter how you slice it. I think getting too caught up in figuring out how to game borda count will only end up getting us to trip over each other.
|
|