Mini 493: Methodical Mafia - Game Over!

[Seol]

/boomshakalaka

[Seol]

well obviously the plan is flawed if he's town. it is also worth remarking that if lml is a godfather the plan, if followed, would be just dandy for the mafia. trouble with that latter point is mafia would be silly to suggest a plan and then just a minute later point out that it doesn't work themselves (if their objective is to have people follow the plan), so i'm thinking there's a 30% chance lml made an honest cock-up, 70% chance of mindgames.

cock-up is consistent with both scum and town, and considering we're talking lee, mindgames is consistent with both scum and town too.

[Seol]

vamp: you've played two games here before, correct?

have you played any mafia elsewhere, if so how much?

[Seol]

okay i reckon we can turn this night start into a day start by using the vig's kill as the d0 lynch. i am of the opinion that this would be a good thing - although there are downsides the benefit is i think well worth it. thoughts?

[Seol]

Upside: The vig alone is not responsible for deciding the kill; any pro-town power roles get a chance to claim rather than be (more or less) randomly killed.

i would hope that any methodical vig is not expecting to kill every night.

Downside: Scum get to vote on who to kill and exert influence over the decision; we may not want to force power roles into claiming D0.

scum participating in the voting is not actually a downside. :teach:

day 0 claims (and general info leakage) is the downside.

flay: what do you mean by vigilante is the classic sk claim? i mean i recognise the truth of the statement but who are you addressing? fwiw i'm not suggesting the vig, if one exists, claims.

and obv lml's plan is crap, we can move on from thinking about implementing it now i hope?

I've finished 2 games, I have also been lynched in another but it not at game over, but am playing 3 others including this! But I don't know any other Mafia site! I'm getting the feeling that the experienced players don't like me because I'm kind of new!

The correct play would probably be to call appeal to emotion (?), but I don't see people of his experience performing things like that very often...

the correct play is not to assume that logical fallacies from newbies need to be attacked.

And I

seriously

doubt anyone would hate you because you're new XD

exactly. you will be treated differently, because you

are

different. your inexperience will affect your play. that does not mean we do not like you, or that you detract from the game experience as a whole - on the contrary, a mix of new and experienced players usually leads to the most interesting games.

plus, if you're scum, you'll be easy to catch, which is always nice.

[Seol]

We don't know for certain there's a vig.

The fundamental purpose of the vig is

not

just the second lynch of the day. It's often used that way, but the point of a vig is to have a kill that is decided by an individual who is pro-town as opposed to by consensus.

I agree that without a pre-submission discussion phase, the vig would be firing pretty much randomly and it would be arguable what the point of such a role was. However, we do have a pre-submission discussion phase and I imagine that was taken into account in designing the game. So we might have a vig, or we might not.

So there's two questions re my plan. Do we want to act as if we have a lynch "today" if we do have a vig? And do we want to act as if we have a lynch "today" if we don't? I suspect we want to act as if we have a lynch today in both circumstances.

[Seol]

Well, if the SK wants to kill our agreed pseudolynch target for us tonight, I'm fine with that too.

[Seol]

I made the assumption there was only one killing party. It was a mistake, and I will surely die from it.

Now here, Xdaamno, it

is

correct to call appeal to emotion. Seriously Lee, this is just

cloying

.

I was trying to gain an edge for the town here. Sorry I didn't think it through as seriously as I should have.

Mistakes are one thing. The way they're handled is another. I'm not in the least bit comfortable with how you handled it.

[Seol]

Then again, a one-shot seems sort of odd for this game as well, so I'd be content with a vig-lynch target of LML.

Hey jackass! I said I could watch MYSELF once. Doofus. You have totally blipped my scumdar. (AKA, I could watch all others)

PS: Just wanted this, in thread, so everyone knows that this quote is attributed to Flay, the person who should be lynched D1. You heard it here first.

you're quite sure this was malicious, and not just a cock-up? because i'm seeing a little bit of pot/kettle here y'know.

plus massive over-reaction.

[Seol]

i agree with ces, and furthermore:

i may be misunderstanding but doesn't your method mean that should you need to claim early actions your upcoming actions will be derivable? given stoof's assurances that claims are of limited value (and also because i hate relying on assumptions if those assumptions can hurt us) i would be surprised if there are not allowances for the scum to react, i.e. act non-methodically.

so even if you are going to generate your list randomly, doing it in an open way is the worst possible way of doing it. what's wrong with random.orging and doing it privately? unless you're more concerned with pronouncing to the game at large that you're doing it randomly than avoiding the potential pitfalls of being second-guessed?

[Seol]

The mafia and SK are obviously not going to target the same people we all agree to target, right?

Hmm.

Wait, what?

Agree to target? With the possible exception of my plan, why would anyone reveal who they're intending to target?

[Seol]

Targeted people die, right?

Please explain exactly how you came to be under this impression.

[Seol]

Targeted people die, right?

Please explain exactly how you came to be under this impression.

Sorry, I was reading the rules, and I thought maybe all roles could target, since the front page role PM example had like everything.

Misunderstanding.

It's not the roles targetting that confuses me. It's the "targetted people die" bit that confuses me. What gave you that idea?

Also what in the front page role PM example mentions anything about targetting, let alone dying?

[Seol]

Well, mostly Texas Jestice NYPD type games.

What's this game got to do with Texas Justice games? Have you been involved in a lot of Texas Justice games in the past, or come from an environment where it's a common archetype of game? Was there something about this game that lead to to confuse it with Texas Justice?

Well, I obviously read the rules wrong. My apologies. It does say target, though. I guess I shouldn't skim things like that.

Ah, sorry, when you said the role PM example I thought you meant the role PM example, not the game blurb. Yes, it does mention targetting there.

[Seol]

The reason I feel that the vig would be the "if it states so in your role PM" person is that vigs can't (logically) randomly fire at will. I don't think I've ever seen a vig kill on Night 0 (and not regret it, at least). Forcing a vig to make a list that he would be bound to would be ultimately foolish, I think.

The whole point is that this day 0 turns night 0 into night 1, that alone is enough to give some method to a methodical vigilante. Also, it is not unheard of for roles to exist in games for reasons other than to improve their side's chances of winning.

Stoof might have thrown that in there as a red herring, but we can't assume that he did. As for the non-methodical role being scum, it's a possibility.

If one exists, it's almost certainly scum. Also please note that the methodical role implementation has no impact whatsoever on day abilities, if any exist. All that we should take from this at this point however is a spirit of caution - we can't rely on all choices being locked in - not a spirit of optimism.

Although, I think that this game will be more centered on role claims and the disproving therein.

Stoofer doesn't. And, um, he designed the game. Also, with presubmitted lists it's

harder

to prove claims.

And what's with this "enough talking" vibe going around?

BMQ, I'm agreeing with Simenon. Your post felt more than anything like you wanted to

appear

to be contributing (as opposed to actually contributing), which is backed up by:

In fact, had I not commented on LML's strategy, would I be targeted and persecuted for "ignoring" it and not contributing to the topic of discussion? Am I to be punished simply because others were able to speak on a subject before I was able to?

Basically you're saying you made that post because you thought you'd be attacked if you didn't. It's not that you didn't add anything, but that you're excessively concerned with your own appearance.

Also, discussing the doc strategy in-thread? No! Bad BMQ!

Bad

BMQ! That's wrong on

so many

levels.

[Seol]

Also, discussing the doc strategy in-thread? No! Bad BMQ!

Bad

BMQ! That's wrong on

so many

levels.

Do you want the doctor to protect randomly? Or to make uneducated decisions? If we are not to discuss targeting strategy on the first day, then what are we to do? Sit around and talk about avatars?

Spend day 0 as if it's day 1, as I proposed earlier? Give people an opportunity to decide who is acting scummily in this game to give more material on which to base lists?

Also, if doing something is bad, we are better off doing nothing than doing that thing.

I'm against the doctor protecting randomly, but I would rather trust the doctor to make good decisions by themselves than discuss out in the open where the scum can both influence the decision and pick up hints about how best to minimise the impact of the doctor (

especially

if we reach a "conclusion" about the best strategy), or even get clues as to who may be the doctor. Yes, there's a risk that someone will make poor decisions that way, but that's a considerably lesser risk than talking about it.

pseudovote: BrianMcQueso

.

[Seol]

I make that three pseudovotes on BMQ (CES, me, Simenon) and none on anyone else. Anyone else want to take a position (either for or against anyone) before we go to night?

[Seol]

I disagree with BMQ's decision, but I don't really think that's a good reason to vig him. I also think that we don't really want to be forcing claims before the lists are submitted, since it gives the scum a heads up.

I agree that it's premature to either represent that there is a town consensus for a vigilante kill as DIY-lynch or push for a claim (which is the logical conclusion of the former).

[Seol]

BMQ's rather unhinged on his attention of the game atm. Does this mean he's scum? I see more town players playing loose than scum players, TBH.

My concerns with BMQ aren't that he's playing loose, but that he's promoting discussion which actively helps the scum and hurts the town - and in a manner which looked like he'd given it plenty of thought.