|
Post by peekercpa on Dec 1, 2010 9:59:01 GMT -5
But this is not the time and place to fill up the game with general mafia-talk IMO. It's always time for mafia talk. ;D But really. While it may not seem immediately relevant, general talk reveals how players think. Which is immensely useful in the long run for distinguishing scum from town. I do understand if you're constrained by other games, though. Just try to keep the talk truly general. Or specific to this game. posting as i catch up. meh, on the mass claim thingy, at least at this specific time point. i think that after some stuff has gone down it makes more sense. plus it's kind of more fun the first Day or so just to be trying to figure stuff out. after Day 2 or 3 when the conversation starts to peter out then sure it injects a little bit of adrenaline into the game. my two cents, ymmv, and probably does. re: sachinteresting that the person thinking that Night 0 conversation in helping town power roles is pointless is the one that gets it in the neck. but regardless of that he would be a juicy scum target, knowing that he is not on your team, because he is pretty durn strong. of course a 3rd party or town killer, not knowing where the hell he aligns, would also use the same reasoning, i presume.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 10:04:14 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Dec 1, 2010 10:04:14 GMT -5
I would be ok with a name claim, but I feel like anything more would benefit scum. If the town power roles were truthful it would make scum's job easier by painting a target, and if they lied I think they would be as likely to slip up as the scum are. Maybe even more likely because the scum would possibly have a fake PM, but the town power roles would probably have to make one up if they wanted to lie. first, glad to see you again, been a while. second, disagree strongly. name claims are about as useless as the tits on a boar hog, imo. lot's of discussion about canon, etc. and if this game is about tarot (?) well crud any card has both its good and bad sides. it's about the person using the card. third, ask opal.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 10:46:03 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Dec 1, 2010 10:46:03 GMT -5
I'm against an early mass Role-claim on principle. I just don't think it's in keeping with the "spirit of the game". Later in the game, it may be a different story, but not now.
As for a mass Name-claim, I'm against that right now as well. I don't think it will give us any immediately valuable information, because I'm confident that there is no obvious pattern to the distribution of cards in this game (e.g. Major Arcana=Power, Minor Arcana=Vanilla). If it were that simple, then a mass claim would be game-breaking, and I'm sure that bufftabby took that into consideration when designing the game. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if there were some pattern to the distribution, but one that's not going to be apparent until much farther into the game.
And that's why I'm against a Name claim. I think it will lead to endless theories about who is and isn't Scum based solely on the cards they have been dealt. Most of these theories will simply be completely wrong, and several of them will no doubt be carefully crafted attempts by Scum to take out Town players. At this point I think a mass Name-claim generate more misinformation that useful information. It would suit us much better after 2 or 3 days, when we have a few useful data points to go along with the Names.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 11:06:17 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Dec 1, 2010 11:06:17 GMT -5
I think it is too early for a mass role claim. I think it's better to wait until we have more information on which to judge the claims. Right now I think the information would have more value to scum than to us. And I don't understand the theory that we would force scum into making a claim and sticking with it. Would we expect the doc to make a claim and stick with it? Presumably, the scum could find as good an excuse as the doc for lying about their original claim.
At first glance, a name claim doesn't seem like it would give much information to town or to scum. I am of the opinion that the names will not have any relation to role or faction. So it might be better to avoid that distraction.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 11:16:40 GMT -5
Post by special on Dec 1, 2010 11:16:40 GMT -5
Crap...I got to go to work, I'll be back to finish this later. Let me know if this is making sense so far. Yes, you're making sense. I guess I don't want to get into the mindset of doing anything to get more information for the town. I feel that often in an early mass claim that Town gives away more information than it gains.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 11:45:38 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Dec 1, 2010 11:45:38 GMT -5
I guess I don't want to get into the mindset of doing anything to get more information for the town. That's good, but we also need to avoid the mindset of doing anything that minimizes risk to the town. That's only true because in a late mass claim, a large number of townies have already claimed via being dead.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:04:37 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Dec 1, 2010 12:04:37 GMT -5
<FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12px">Oh, huh? My name is not one of the major arcana cards. :/ Perhaps, perhaps not. If you're town, it reveals to everyone with a major arcana role that the minor are indeed in play. It will reveal even more as we lynch more people and see more deaths and get a look at the breakdown of town vs scum, major vs minor arcana, and power role vs vanilla. I'm a little surprised you were so cavalier with it. what sticky said. what was the fracking point? pleo freaking junior.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:14:50 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Dec 1, 2010 12:14:50 GMT -5
Crap...I got to go to work, I'll be back to finish this later. Let me know if this is making sense so far. Yes, you're making sense. I guess I don't want to get into the mindset of doing anything to get more information for the town. I feel that often in an early mass claim that Town gives away more information than it gains. oh boy oh boy. once again ed is yin to my yang. he was making no sense to me. you seriously don't want town "to get into a mindset" that gives information to town? what the heck (remember ed's school filters) are we supposed to do? just fly around and hope we don't run into the mountain or something equally preposterous. lah lah lah, i am blissfully ignorant and hope that my keno numbers play out, stuff? ok, i kind of agree that the early mass claim (toDay) is not wise. but to some extent it's like ltl. at what point do we as a collective decide that it is optimum. i would posit that we all have a threshhold, and that to some extent they are fairly unique.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:20:36 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Dec 1, 2010 12:20:36 GMT -5
That's only true because in a late mass claim, a large number of townies have already claimed via being dead. I disagree. A later claim has the advantage of being able to judge each claim based on the player's vote record, interactions with other players, confirmable actions, investigation results, etc. An early claim just gives us a whole load of noise that only the scum can make any sense of.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:21:29 GMT -5
Post by Inner Stickler on Dec 1, 2010 12:21:29 GMT -5
I am ok with holding off on mass claiming for now.
I know there are a couple newish players so maybe we should talk about some other Day 1 basic stuff as well. For me, I tend toward liking lurker lynches especially in the second half of the game. I think there's a strong tendency for scum to drop their postcounts and hide in relative obscurity. The threat of a lurker lynch spurs people to avoid hiding and the more people talk, the more they slip up. I know others disagree about the exact utility, but there you go.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:22:10 GMT -5
Post by guiri on Dec 1, 2010 12:22:10 GMT -5
That's only true because in a late mass claim, a large number of townies have already claimed via being dead. I disagree. A later claim has the advantage of being able to judge each claim based on the player's vote record, interactions with other players, confirmable actions, investigation results, etc. An early claim just gives us a whole load of noise that only the scum can make any sense of.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:24:20 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Dec 1, 2010 12:24:20 GMT -5
ok, serious no b.s. question.
ed does this get past your school filters?
phuq.
in college we got to pick our intramural names on our jerseys. one of my bros use mudda phuqa as his name and i was staunchly anti u.t. at the time so used beeva eata. i swear i think the administration didn't have a clue.
ahh, to be twenty, drunk and stoned one more time just for a weekend would be kind of fun.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:28:01 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Dec 1, 2010 12:28:01 GMT -5
I am ok with holding off on mass claiming for now. I know there are a couple newish players so maybe we should talk about some other Day 1 basic stuff as well. For me, I tend toward liking lurker lynches especially in the second half of the game. I think there's a strong tendency for scum to drop their postcounts and hide in relative obscurity. The threat of a lurker lynch spurs people to avoid hiding and the more people talk, the more they slip up. I know others disagree about the exact utility, but there you go. the problem with that strategy sticky is that we then end up using mid game with do we frag a lurker or go for someone else. kill 'em early, get rid of the distraction, take the posters and evaluate what they have contributed, lynch scum. lather, rinse repeat.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:30:25 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Dec 1, 2010 12:30:25 GMT -5
neta: of course my favorite scum strategy is to get rid of the high volume folks early (preferably ed, NAF or pleo) and then make town have to deal with lurkers when the odds are stacked.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 12:41:24 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Dec 1, 2010 12:41:24 GMT -5
I guess I don't want to get into the mindset of doing anything to get more information for the town. you seriously don't want town "to get into a mindset" that gives information to town? what the heck (remember ed's school filters) are we supposed to do? just fly around and hope we don't run into the mountain or something equally preposterous. lah lah lah, i am blissfully ignorant and hope that my keno numbers play out, stuff? What ed meant, I think, is that we should not be willing to pay a large price for only a small amount of information. He is not suggesting we ignore all information. That's good, but we also need to avoid the mindset of doing anything that minimizes risk to the town. I'm having trouble parsing this statement. Are you suggesting that Town should not be risk adverse? Yes. We should be willing to take some risks. I feel some players want to do everything possible to minimize risks to town, and thus give up opportunities that could put scum at a disadvantage. For example, see how our discussion on a mass claim focuses on the risks to town, rather than the potential benefits to us or the risks to scum. Calculated risk-taking can be a great boon to us and it makes the game more fun. I would counter that by saying an early claim has the advantage of letting us judge that player's future vote record, interactions with other players, confirmable actions, investigation results, etc. A late mass claim allows scum to tailor their false claim to match their actions and other information already revealed.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:03:56 GMT -5
Post by special on Dec 1, 2010 13:03:56 GMT -5
I guess I don't want to get into the mindset of doing anything to get more information for the town. That's good, but we also need to avoid the mindset of doing anything that minimizes risk to the town. That's only true because in a late mass claim, a large number of townies have already claimed via being dead. It is also true because as we approach EndGame, the value of many power roles decreases, all things being equal. Doctors have fewer protections to provide. Investigators have fewer investigations to conduct. Perhaps the case can be made that Roleblockers and Vigs have an increased value as the game progresses, but even so having been outed makes them more vulernable.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:08:18 GMT -5
Post by special on Dec 1, 2010 13:08:18 GMT -5
Yes, you're making sense. I guess I don't want to get into the mindset of doing anything to get more information for the town. I feel that often in an early mass claim that Town gives away more information than it gains. oh boy oh boy. once again ed is yin to my yang. he was making no sense to me. you seriously don't want town "to get into a mindset" that gives information to town? Why would you leave off the middle of that sentence? "doing anything to get more information" is not equivalent to "getting more information" The mindset was not about getting information. The mindset was about doing anything (a mass claim will net information as will mass suicide) You butchered my comment to make it look like I don't want Town to have more information.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:09:50 GMT -5
Post by special on Dec 1, 2010 13:09:50 GMT -5
[quote author=pleonast board=aaaa thread=1523 post=71789 time=1291221938]That's good, but we also need to avoid the mindset of doing anything that minimizes risk to the town. I'm having trouble parsing this statement. Are you suggesting that Town should not be risk adverse?[/quote] You too? Is it that difficult to understand? NAF said Town needs information and has numbers. This implies that sacrificing numbers for information is always a good thing. All I'm stating is that it is not always the case. Some trades are not worth it. Let's not "do anything" for more information
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:11:15 GMT -5
Post by special on Dec 1, 2010 13:11:15 GMT -5
ok, serious no b.s. question. ed does this get past your school filters? phuq. it seems to, but there's always a threshold. I think they base it on the frequency of words using some complicated calculation.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:21:15 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Dec 1, 2010 13:21:15 GMT -5
NAF said Town needs information and has numbers. This implies that sacrificing numbers for information is always a good thing. All I'm stating is that it is not always the case. Some trades are not worth it. Let's not "do anything" for more information Agreed. But I think you and I are thinking of it differently. Numbers are part of the currency that town can spend to gain information. Well, actually numbers are the insurance on the currency. Risk and communication are the actual currency. It's up to us as a town to decide if the price is right, but at some point we need to get the information or we lose, and the sooner we buy (generally) the less it costs. (It's also harder to use, and that has to be factored into the math, but I am hoping we all understand that some actual thinking needs to be done.) The metaphor isn't perfect in a lot of ways, but it gets you into a better mindset I think than thinking of it as a sacrifice of numbers for information. @peek, you said that I wasn't making sense to you. What didn't you follow or agree with?
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:21:19 GMT -5
Post by Rysto on Dec 1, 2010 13:21:19 GMT -5
NAF said Town needs information and has numbers. This implies that sacrificing numbers for information is always a good thing. In the case of a mass claim, we aren't trading numbers for information. We're trading information for information. It seems to me that this is far more valuable to scum than to town, because the scum have a lot more information that they can use to interpret the new information for their benefit.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:39:03 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Dec 1, 2010 13:39:03 GMT -5
It is also true because as we approach EndGame, the value of many power roles decreases, all things being equal. Doctors have fewer protections to provide. Investigators have fewer investigations to conduct. Perhaps the case can be made that Roleblockers and Vigs have an increased value as the game progresses, but even so having been outed makes them more vulernable. The value of town power roles is a different topic than the value of information. In the case of a mass claim, we aren't trading numbers for information. We're trading information for information. It seems to me that this is far more valuable to scum than to town, because the scum have a lot more information that they can use to interpret the new information for their benefit. I would argue the information gain is far more valuable to the town. Scum start out with a lot of information--any gain is incremental. Town players start out with almost no information--any gain is a substantial increase.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:39:37 GMT -5
Post by metallicsquink on Dec 1, 2010 13:39:37 GMT -5
I was told there would be no math.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 13:59:03 GMT -5
Post by Rysto on Dec 1, 2010 13:59:03 GMT -5
I would argue the information gain is far more valuable to the town. Scum start out with a lot of information--any gain is incremental. Town players start out with almost no information--any gain is a substantial increase. I disagree. Information in this game is subject to a network affect. Individual pieces of information become far more valuable when you have other information that you can cross-reference against. A single vote made by a player means little. That player's voting record 4 or 5 days into a game means an awful lot, because with several pieces of information you can establish a trend. If the doctor were to claim right now, the town would see little benefit. We wouldn't have any idea as to whether the claim was true. The scum, on the other hand, would benefit greatly. Because of the additional information that they have, they know that the claimed doctor is extremely likely to be truthful.
|
|
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 One
Dec 1, 2010 14:13:23 GMT -5
Post by Total Ullz on Dec 1, 2010 14:13:23 GMT -5
Seems like we can all agree that information is important. So how to get it? 1. Lynch 2. Claim (and risk giving away more information than we need) 3. Trust a power role to provide it Today we seem to agree we're not going to claim. Also it would be no good to have a power role claim to provide us with a snip of information from one single Night. So who do we lynch? I'm soooo in the peeker-camp and ready to take out a lurker. Not a non-participant, but a lurker. Not a low-posting player but a lurker. Someone here, posting, making no-contribution to the game, keeping the talk running but not really committing to this game. Why should we leave the lurkers alone for several days while we run the risk of mis-lynch vocal-townies make a single little mistake like using the word "debacle"? The last couple of games I've had the pleasure of following I've seen so many townies sticking their neck out and still they have been lynched. For stupid little mistakes. While the Scum were all saying "stay under the radar" and just keeping their posting to a minimal. We have to force Scum to participate - and the only way is to make sure they know the risk of not participating in the discussion. They might be lynched if they keep staying quiet. So my vote will be going out for someone not willing to run the risk of telling the rest of us what they think, where they'd like to see the game go, why they vote and so on. And if I run the risk of hitting a Town Power - I am really at a point where I don't care. I'd rather keep a Town vanilla alive if the player is posting, reading, contributing. It might be a bit of a personal thing - but I'm so fed up with having vocal players lynched because they played the game and posted. Oh, my - better pack away that soap box for now. Sorry.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 14:27:15 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Dec 1, 2010 14:27:15 GMT -5
I would argue the information gain is far more valuable to the town. Scum start out with a lot of information--any gain is incremental. Town players start out with almost no information--any gain is a substantial increase. I disagree. Information in this game is subject to a network affect. Individual pieces of information become far more valuable when you have other information that you can cross-reference against. A single vote made by a player means little. That player's voting record 4 or 5 days into a game means an awful lot, because with several pieces of information you can establish a trend. If the doctor were to claim right now, the town would see little benefit. We wouldn't have any idea as to whether the claim was true. The scum, on the other hand, would benefit greatly. Because of the additional information that they have, they know that the claimed doctor is extremely likely to be truthful. You're ignoring your own insight. No one is advocating that the doctor claim right now. Instead, we are discussing whether or not all players should claim right now. You're right that a doctor claim by itself is not much help, but as one claim of many, it is very useful. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ On another topic, where are the votes? I see lots of discussions, but no votes made. No cases against other players, no pokes to encourage low participants.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 14:49:33 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Dec 1, 2010 14:49:33 GMT -5
I'm having trouble parsing this statement. Are you suggesting that Town should not be risk adverse? You too? Is it that difficult to understand? NAF said Town needs information and has numbers. This implies that sacrificing numbers for information is always a good thing. All I'm stating is that it is not always the case. Some trades are not worth it. Let's not "do anything" for more information I think some people are making the same type of error here as with Mahaloth's "help out the town power roles" statement during Night 0. I believe you meant that we should avoid the mindset of "doing anything" that minimizes risk. Some people are interpreting your statement as saying we should avoid doing "anything that minimizes risk". I agree with the first statement, and not at all with the second. In the case of a mass claim, we aren't trading numbers for information. We're trading information for information. It seems to me that this is far more valuable to scum than to town, because the scum have a lot more information that they can use to interpret the new information for their benefit. I would argue the information gain is far more valuable to the town. Scum start out with a lot of information--any gain is incremental. Town players start out with almost no information--any gain is a substantial increase. The problem is that the Town has no way of separating "information" from "misinformation" (at this point). Yes, the town has a larger 'gross gain', but once you filter out the lies told my Scum, I don't think the 'net gain' is necessarily worth it. A bit farther into the game, we have more data to work with and it becomes easier to filter out the misinformation, resulting in a larger net gain for Town.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 15:03:23 GMT -5
Post by special on Dec 1, 2010 15:03:23 GMT -5
@ Suburban, I have no idea how you manage to make the quote look like I said anything about minimizing risk. I believe that was part of what Pleao was talking about.
My statement was:
There was nothing about risk.
Of course, I suppose it's still posible that peeker misunderstood, but why didn't he include the phrase in his analysis? His analysis made it look like it was the only interpetation.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 15:10:10 GMT -5
Post by metallicsquink on Dec 1, 2010 15:10:10 GMT -5
<snip> On another topic, where are the votes? I see lots of discussions, but no votes made. No cases against other players, no pokes to encourage low participants. Did I miss the post with your vote on another player? As for who I'm thinking about voting for, I'm not quite sure. I need to take a closer look at the player list and who has been posting what so far. At this point, I don't see anything glaring other than your impulsive vanilla claim, which I still don't think you've explained very clearly. You said that an individual claim is different than a mass claim (agreed) but still did not quite explain why you personally felt the need to claim so early.
|
|
|
Day One
Dec 1, 2010 15:13:36 GMT -5
Post by Suburban Plankton on Dec 1, 2010 15:13:36 GMT -5
@ Suburban, I have no idea how you manage to make the quote look like I said anything about minimizing risk. I believe that was part of what Pleao was talking about. My statement was: There was nothing about risk. Of course, I suppose it's still posible that peeker misunderstood, but why didn't he include the phrase in his analysis? His analysis made it look like it was the only interpetation. My apologies. I copied and pasted (since the nested quotes don't work that many levels down) form your Post 77 above, where you were responding to Guiri. I thought the quote referenced in that Post was yours, when in fact it was actually Pleonast who talked about risk.
|
|