|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 4, 2012 12:49:40 GMT -5
*sniff* I'm annoying? *sniff* I think you're a wonderful person with a host of quality traits, but I think you'll agree, the new you gets up people's noses a bit.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 4, 2012 12:57:41 GMT -5
@ Rysto half way through your comment 1:30 I wanted to reply [snipped to the point] I’ve been the vanilla-est of Town and voted like a pit bull for – you guessed it Town. One game every single one ended up claiming a Town Power truthfully Then you follow with Which meets my earlier point. It seems to me reading the points ..that you are arguing with yourself?
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 4, 2012 13:00:00 GMT -5
SBrOwn could you use default text like the rest of us?... it is disconcerting
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 4, 2012 13:05:53 GMT -5
Yeah, someone who hasn't played in longish time chiming in on Ed's posts here: It's not a new posting style, and it's certainly not a lack of tactic or whatever. It's fundamentally very similar to peeker's, in that it stirs up shit, and then he picks out details in the aftermath. It works for him. Whether he's town or scum or whatever remains to be seen, and his style is a null-tell, as gnarlycharlie says. Yes, people are confused about what's changed in my playstyle. What I've tried to change is engaging in the in-depth research, the arguing little points, the trying to prove my case. The way I played against you in Alpha-Centauri, the way I played in Dr Seuss. My personality hasn't changed. I'm still going to poke, prod, ask and answer questions, defend myself, attack others. I'm just more focused on the fun and less focused on the winning. And, oddly enough, I've started winning more.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 4, 2012 13:06:43 GMT -5
*sniff* I'm annoying? *sniff* I think you're a wonderful person with a host of quality traits, but I think you'll agree, the new you gets up people's noses a bit. The old me did too. The new me just cares a little bit less about being right and cares a little bit more about enjoying the game.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 4, 2012 13:08:35 GMT -5
*sniff* I'm annoying? *sniff* I think you're a wonderful person with a host of quality traits, but I think you'll agree, the new you gets up people's noses a bit. sure he's annoying - i've been saying that for years. and sure he gets in folks grill. i remain unconvinced that either of those traits equates to scum or not town. matter of fact i consider that using that as any component for voting for someone is about scummy as hell. it's too fucking easy and lazy. it's kind of like the old prospectors. they went through a crapload of mud to find a couple of nuggets of gold. but i don't think they cursed the mud. they understood that it was a component to riches.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 4, 2012 13:09:41 GMT -5
Nanook, I'm just being transparent. It is early. Disagreeing about rule interpretation on Day One is not something to get hot and bothered about without additional data points. Feel free to disagree and get hot and bothered if you like, though.
LightFoot, I think you're reading a bit too much into Rysto's use of 'critical' maybe? He's not saying that a player's voting record is the only thing that should be used to try and gauge alignment. If I were to pass your comment through the same sort of filter, it would seem that you're saying that because a Town player can conceivably vote against Town all through a game despite their best of intentions otherwise, that the voting record shouldn't be used at all when trying to deduce alignment. And that doesn't really work either. I think best practices lie somewhere in between these two extremes.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 4, 2012 13:10:51 GMT -5
@ Rysto half way through your comment 1:30 I wanted to reply [snipped to the point] I’ve been the vanilla-est of Town and voted like a pit bull for – you guessed it Town. One game every single one ended up claiming a Town Power truthfully Then you follow with Which meets my earlier point. It seems to me reading the points ..that you are arguing with yourself? I would agree with Rysto, but maybe if it was phrased like this it would make more sense to you: An individual's voting record is critical for determining if they are Scum or not. I agree it is much more difficult to determine if a player is Town. And, I think also, the voting record does not occur in isolation. It's not just determining if they voted for Scum. It's also determining who was in lynch contention, how did the vote swing or not swing a bandwagon, were there 'safe' votes, were the votes early or late, etc.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 4, 2012 13:13:10 GMT -5
Unvote me, Chronos, I'm contributing to the discussion.
Wait! maybe I have some weird power where Chronos must do my bidding!
Bark like a seal, Chronos!
I blew it there, didn't I?
|
|
|
Post by Rysto on Mar 4, 2012 13:13:43 GMT -5
When I said voting record I wasn't limiting myself solely to just who-voted-for-whom. There's so much more to the voting record than that. There's the arguments made in favour and against vote trains. There's the internal consistency of a players arguments and actions across multiple Days (and even multiple games -- I've caught scum who have made vastly different arguments as Town than as scum in different games). There's the timing of votes.
The critical thing that you have to understand is that all of this only has any relevance at all because at the end, there is a vote and there are consequences to the result of that vote.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 4, 2012 13:16:52 GMT -5
The old me did too. The new me just cares a little bit less about being right and cares a little bit more about enjoying the game. But it's for a different reason. It's interesting that you're bringing up vote analysis. I was just thinking there wasn't very much of that in Conspiracy. We focused a lot more on power role interactions, it seemed to me.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 4, 2012 13:18:43 GMT -5
Nanook, I'm just being transparent. It is early. Disagreeing about rule interpretation on Day One is not something to get hot and bothered about without additional data points. Feel free to disagree and get hot and bothered if you like, though. LightFoot, I think you're reading a bit too much into Rysto's use of 'critical' maybe? He's not saying that a player's voting record is the only thing that should be used to try and gauge alignment. If I were to pass your comment through the same sort of filter, it would seem that you're saying that because a Town player can conceivably vote against Town all through a game despite their best of intentions otherwise, that the voting record shouldn't be used at all when trying to deduce alignment. And that doesn't really work either. I think best practices lie somewhere in between these two extremes. Not shouldn't be used, but should not be primary. I use voting trends in my suspect pool as well but the verbage as I read it seem contradictory
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 4, 2012 13:22:20 GMT -5
NETA comments since clarify some
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 4, 2012 13:30:56 GMT -5
The old me did too. The new me just cares a little bit less about being right and cares a little bit more about enjoying the game. But it's for a different reason. It's interesting that you're bringing up vote analysis. I was just thinking there wasn't very much of that in Conspiracy. We focused a lot more on power role interactions, it seemed to me. Conspiracy is different. There are four factions and a different mix. And there was vote analysis. It helped find texcat. And some people dismissed me as a witch because of my early idle vote
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 4, 2012 13:33:09 GMT -5
I was thinking more about the Days that I was there.
|
|
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:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Mar 4, 2012 13:34:18 GMT -5
I'm late for the party - sorry all. 1. Vig - Okay it seems like we can all agree to disagree. That's nice. I'll follow along: I think the vig should act as e (love the e-thing!!!) sees fit, no I don't think a vig-vote would work (as we already have problems with people not real-voting every Day), no I don't think the vig should take out the closes to being lynched (all to often a Town Power claiming Day 1,2,3 and saved in the last couple of hours of the Day). 2. Ed - wauw - nice to read you're winning more and enjoying the game New style indeed. I regret not being around to see the lovely old you turn into the lovely new you The editing... yeah, well, what can I say. You did annoy me on that one. First time ever I think. Maybe I should try and work on a new style as well. Or not 3. The votes on Ed. I don't have a problem with them so far. It's early Day 1 and I can see why some would like to make sure they had a vote down on an anti-town playstyle yet not willing to take it to a lynch. It's like a Lynch-A-Lurker-vote. You put it down while stating that you're still looking elsewhere. And if a bandwagon starts you're ready to drop it to see what's going on before you replace it or place it elsewhere. 4. Meeko - I am not really sure if I understand all you write. I think we've only played in one game before and I sometimes have a bit of trouble following you. Please don't take it personal. It took me a couple of games before I understood Peeker as well. Now I'm a huge fan of his writing-style. But I have to say - I am somewhat unsure about your theory about Rysto and Ed. I think I fail to see why you connect the two of them...
|
|
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:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Mar 4, 2012 13:49:08 GMT -5
I knew I'd forgotten something.
The letter-not-handshaking-theory:
I actually like it. And don't really see any drawbacks. Mostly because when I mod games I always provide scum with tons of fake Roles and will even write them new ones based on their wishes. It's because faking my way of writing would be almost impossible to someone with English as their native tongue. But being restricted with a line of letters like proposed would make the job a lot harder.
Storyteller has a unique way of writing and so faking a Role in this game not written by him would be more than difficult. I'd say almost impossible. It's the mix of humour with fiction and color that's hard to match. He might have provided Scum with fake Roles - but if we make them have to choose one early in the game it will be harder for them to rationalise after the events when claiming.
Let's say a Scum is on the line and have to claim. Let's say we have a watcher and they have been seen. Now the Scum can't claim to have been a doctor and trying to protect if every one they visited died the same Night. Or I guess they could - but it would make the claim so much harder to believe.
So I am all for trying the share-your-letters-theory. Will it do us any good? Maybe. Will it hurt us? I don't really see how.
We all agree that Town needs information and so on.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 4, 2012 13:58:58 GMT -5
I dunno. It reminds me of the time someone suggested we all make hashes of our role pms and post the hashes. If I remember correctly, the hashes couldn't be reverse-engineered to recreate a role pm but you could then take someone's claim, run it through the hasher and see if the result matched what they posted.
I'm against this stuff on an emotional level as it seems like it's not within the spirit of the game.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Mar 4, 2012 14:09:22 GMT -5
I dunno. It reminds me of the time someone suggested we all make hashes of our role pms and post the hashes. If I remember correctly, the hashes couldn't be reverse-engineered to recreate a role pm but you could then take someone's claim, run it through the hasher and see if the result matched what they posted. I'm against this stuff on an emotional level as it seems like it's not within the spirit of the game. i seem to remember that as well. was that De'endee? i think the hashes would have been useful because the PMS were identical (at least for vanilla). from what i hear, storyteller would not use the same PMs for same roles.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 4, 2012 14:11:52 GMT -5
Oh yeah, that may have been it. An attempt to create a vanilla mason pool.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 4, 2012 14:18:20 GMT -5
In the last game, there was a PFK the Joker. (I know Pollux knows this, but others don't.) He was a Day kill SK with a restriction on who he could kill and was played by Santo Rugger. His restriction was that he could only target people with less posts in any given day than he himself had. IIRC, the original concept was that this would act as a corrective measure on low volume posters. Santo was going to have none of that though, and had a huge post count all the Days he was alive. And he would do things like Ed is, using multiple posts for things that could have just as easily been in one. Fluffing some. Commenting on everything. Oooh yeah. I completely forgot about the post count thing with the Joker. That does make sense now that I think about it. Good call. Now I'm definitely going to watch Ed. I strongly disagree. How, exactly, is having players voice an opinion on who should be killed a fruitless thing? It may not help the Vig directly too much, but it sure as hell helps the town as a whole, for both vigging and lynching considerations. Since multiple people commented on it, let me clarify. I think it would be fruitless for the Vig. As a whole, there is information to be gleaned from suggesting Vig targets but I think ultimately it won't do any good for the Vig itself. That's what I meant when I said fruitless. Also, the viability of discussing Vig targets is beneficial to scum. If scum are looking to even the odds and know who the Vig might potentially target, they'll spread their kills around so there are definite multiple kills, helping the scum win condition. I'm quite confident that this setup is no where near the original. Arkham Knights was a blast, but let's face it, it really wasn't balanced. 1 mislynch in 10 Days is an incredibly high bar for Town to try to overcome. I do remember story was one of the ones who commented on how there was only one mislynch and town still ended up at LyLo at the end. There was a huge discussion on whether lynching third-parties was beneficial to town or not (and this was the beginning of distinguished PFK from Third-Party). The entire idea of lynching PFKs is about playing chicken with the scum. Scum want town to lynch PFKs so they stay safe, while town wants scum to Nightkill PFK. But that's a whole different issue to discuss and we'll cross that bridge when we get there. As a whole, story has always been good at balancing, so I don't doubt this game is a little more balanced than the original. Assume that Ed has a bomb type power. Can we trust a Pro-town Vig, if we have one, to take him out? If we can't, is voting for Ed then the safest course of action? [ ] Aren't we, to some extent stuck voting for a bomb, if the Vig won't comply to our wishes?I don't think a bomb would draw this much attention to himself Day One, to be honest. Look at Alfred in the original Arkham Knights. It was much more useful late game, when he was able to take out story who was the doctor. And it was only after they knew he was the doctor that the bomb got activated. A bomb blowing up on Day One doesn't help scum at all because they don't really know what the roles are they're dealing with. Bombs are better for mid-game, getting rid of town that are nearly untouchable at Night. Bark like a seal, Chronos! Arf! Arf! ...wait a minute. I dunno. It reminds me of the time someone suggested we all make hashes of our role pms and post the hashes. If I remember correctly, the hashes couldn't be reverse-engineered to recreate a role pm but you could then take someone's claim, run it through the hasher and see if the result matched what they posted. I'm against this stuff on an emotional level as it seems like it's not within the spirit of the game. I'm in agreement with this. At some point, it stops being a game and starts being a "how can we make this as not fun as possible and instead make it a boring machine so we can achieve a meaningless victory through SCIENCE!" Considering how fun Arkham Knights was (or at least how fun it was from an outside perspective, cry) I really don't want to screw this game up with that kind of thing.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Mar 4, 2012 14:21:47 GMT -5
Ed strikes me as playing as he always does, which to me is a null tell. I actually voted for him in a recent game (before this one) where I thought he was acting like he usually didn't...but in this game, all I've seen is the typical Ed.
The vig, as always, should do whatever he or she wants to.
|
|
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:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Mar 4, 2012 14:29:53 GMT -5
I dunno. It reminds me of the time someone suggested we all make hashes of our role pms and post the hashes. If I remember correctly, the hashes couldn't be reverse-engineered to recreate a role pm but you could then take someone's claim, run it through the hasher and see if the result matched what they posted. I'm against this stuff on an emotional level as it seems like it's not within the spirit of the game. I expect Storyteller to have thought of all this and if a gambit/theory like this doesn't break the game... I see it (IMO) as a part of the game. Like I as a mod will write false claims to players, I also expect the players to false claim in the game and for the rest of the players to see through it in any way they can. That being said I don't expect or like it when people distrust others IRL looking at facebook-status or check-in times. Some still do it - but to me that's taking the game outside the game. Looking at PMs and trying to figure out if they are real. That's to me a big part of the game. But if we can't all agree on it... I guess it ends there. However I'd be more than willing to post my line of letters as well.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 4, 2012 14:48:00 GMT -5
Posting role pms and analyzing them for evidence of false claiming, well, that's not really different than analyzing posts for false claiming and lies. I don't really have an objection to that.
But posting specific letters of specific lines of PMs and creating hashes strikes me as less mafia and more cryptography. (I also find Chronos' suggestion to be completely in line with my idea of his personality. I don't find it scummy that he suggested it or immediately acted on it.)
|
|
|
Post by Chronos on Mar 4, 2012 15:05:49 GMT -5
egad. and i think ed addressed this but .... so we should vote him as long as it's not a "pile on". we've got to deal with eventually but just not in a majority situation? right? but it's scummy not to vote him? right? jeebuz, that's convoluted even for me. To clarify: At this time, I think it would be best to lynch Special Ed. However, a lynch by unanimous vote produces results no different from a lynch by a one-vote margin. And it's possible that Ed might have some power that in some way penalizes the people who vote for him, so if that's the case, a lynch by a small margin would be better than a lynch by a large margin. Also, the viability of discussing Vig targets is beneficial to scum. If scum are looking to even the odds and know who the Vig might potentially target, they'll spread their kills around so there are definite multiple kills, helping the scum win condition. I don't see that it actually makes much difference. In a game with a vig, if people suggest vigging someone who happens to be Town, the scum will kill someone else because they'll be hoping that the Vig kills that person for them. In a game without a vig, if people express suspicion of someone (which is really what suggesting vigging is), the scum will kill someone else because they'll be hoping that Town will lynch that person later. No matter what, Scum are going to tend away from hitting folks who are under significant suspicion.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 4, 2012 15:17:16 GMT -5
After saying this: sure he's annoying - i've been saying that for years. and sure he gets in folks grill. i remain unconvinced that either of those traits equates to scum or not town.peeker, you have taken a bold stand on special ed, in that you've taken no stand. matter of fact i consider that using that as any component for voting for someone is about scummy as hell. it's too fucking easy and lazy.But you find votes for ed to be scummy. You'd think that voting for someone you have no lean on would lead to... perhaps... a lean? Shake loose some informations, perhaps? But then you keep going and say this. it's kind of like the old prospectors. they went through a crapload of mud to find a couple of nuggets of gold. but i don't think they cursed the mud. they understood that it was a component to riches. What point are you trying to make anyway? Pardon, excuse me. What the fuck point are you trying to make, anyway? We must not vote for special ed, you have no lean on ed, and there's cursed gold in your rich crap nuggets? You stink of trying too hard to be wishy-washy while taking a stand against voting someone for being themselves, on day one no less. Maybe someone is trying too hard to act like their usual self. One of you or special ed are scum. Since defending a townie ed also makes sense, you have two possible motives for not wanting to encourage ed's death. But really, either one of you is fine with me. Ed's noise is grating on my nerves, and you'd think incessant nonsense posting would be the first thing on ed's list of things not to do lately. I nominate and Vote: peekercpa for being full of golden crap nuggets in my completely un-humble opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Mar 4, 2012 15:30:50 GMT -5
On this other board, do you usually have a single vote per player or multiple votes? With single votes, do you think a whole new vote would provide more information than simply picking off the second highest vote getter? Single vote. And no, because it defeats the whole purpose of resolving the second wagon if there's actually a separate vote. ;D That is, you let things play out the way they play out, and if a townie is lynched then the vig considers resolving the runner-up in votes, for the reasons I laid out earlier. Having a separate vote for who the vig should kill is an entirely different thing (not to mention that it would be too hard to coordinate even if it was a good idea, in contrast to the purely mechanical "the vig can decide during the Night whether they want to resolve the person who happened to end up with the second-most votes for lynch"). That's a tough question. First, I assume that whatever the setup, the preponderance of players are going to be Town-aligned. (If this turns out to be incorrect, I'll obviously adjust my approach to people and ramp up the paranoia, but standard mafia even with thoughtful, complex setups like this almost have to make Town the largest single faction, to compensate for the information asymmetry that's at the heart of the game.) Even if Town only makes up 51 percent of the player pool rather than, like, 70 percent, it still means that most of the people out there are likely to be either (1) on my side, or (2) effectively on my side for the purposes of hunting scum, since it behooves even PFKs to act publicly in a pro-town way (having no more information than the rest of town does) and to genuinely be trying to ferret out non-townies, for a variety of reasons, at least at the outset. I'm basically just saying that I see people sometimes approach the game by viewing everyone else by default as a potential scum, and I think it's more productive (for my personal approach) to start with the statistical baseline that most people you interact with actually share the same goals that you do. So if someone gets a read wrong, I'm not necessarily going to jump to thinking they're scum, when mistaken townie is more likely (only scum, after all, know who's scum and who isn't with any degree of certainty). I'm going to view people with a critical eye and (as I said before) keep my reads provisional and dynamic, but I'm not going to be afraid to treat someone as a likely townie if I think a likely townie is what they are. If that makes sense and/or answers your question at all.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Mar 4, 2012 15:36:49 GMT -5
I'm also not a huge fan of brute-force approaches like the acrostic stuff for a few different reasons,* but being away from home and all I'll do as the Romans do.
*I have less-than-fond memories of attempted handshakes marking me as an obvious power role in the SDMB Lord of the Rings Mafia, for one.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 4, 2012 15:43:13 GMT -5
Well, that was a different kettle of fish. It was, like the hash technique, an attempt to create a vanilla mason pool.
|
|
|
Post by Chronos on Mar 4, 2012 15:57:52 GMT -5
askthepizzaguy, believe it or not, but peeker is actually being a lot more clear and communicative in this game than his usual.
(apologies if this posts twice; I got an Error Bear when I tried before)
|
|