Self-Voting Thoughts

[Ankamius]

Duckling :(

[MaryJoLisa]

Tbf the competent players tend to die before lylo

Well aware.

[RadiantCowbells]

i will nightkill you mjl

[MaryJoLisa]

i will nightkill you mjl

I would be so honored! <3

Highest form of flattery!

[Ankamius]

Competency changes from game to game...

[Shoshin]

Votes don't always need to be on the opposite alignment to further your win condition. After all, votes impact the game beyond causing lynches & that means players may use them to scumhunt or manipulate or pocket or otherwise accomplish things besides causing a lynch on the object of the vote. And self-voting is no different.

Instead of making an assertion and using it as evidence, I highly recommend providing an example or theoretical situation where this might be true, else it helps the discussion not at all.

First votes in the game don't need to be on scum to further town's win condition, they help town scumhunt without necessarily causing a lynch on the object of the vote, and that applies whether it's a self-vote or a vote on someone else.

[Shoshin]

Self-voting does not achieve reads on other players, because responses to it are predictable and have been seen in hundreds of games prior.

Responses to self-votes are not predictable. Please provide evidence for this assertion.

[Shoshin]

Also, please provide evidence for your assertion that doing things with predictable responses doesn't achieve reads.

[Shoshin]

Also, maybe follow your own advice of not making assertions without providing evidence?

[Ramcius]

Your point is to be petty and waste time, but you're right, I can't convince you

No, my point is that you don't know the minds of the other players and what's winnable and isn't until you try to win it.
If you want to build up my argument as something it's not so you can put your defeatist attitude on display, please make your own thread to do that.

Now you making assumption, how do you know I (or other people) can't read minds?

[Enter]

Votes don't always need to be on the opposite alignment to further your win condition. After all, votes impact the game beyond causing lynches & that means players may use them to scumhunt or manipulate or pocket or otherwise accomplish things besides causing a lynch on the object of the vote. And self-voting is no different.

Instead of making an assertion and using it as evidence, I highly recommend providing an example or theoretical situation where this might be true, else it helps the discussion not at all.

First votes in the game don't need to be on scum to further town's win condition, they help town scumhunt without necessarily causing a lynch on the object of the vote, and that applies whether it's a self-vote or a vote on someone else.

First votes in the game on yourself don't further a town win condition. Responses are predictable and therefore borderline useless as far as finding who is scum, and voting yourself does not help other players read you because it's easily replicable as town and as scum with similar likelihoods (AFAIK). In addition, votes on yourself give no indication of your immediate and unaltered thoughts on other players - a big part of mafia as scum is knowing who is easy to mislynch and who isn't and responding to the town attitude and reads by building cases on who they think is mislynchable enough w/o giving away they're playing opportunistic. In the first phase of the game, however, there are no thoughts on who is scum and who is not, placing your vote on someone else is the beginning of associatives w/ that player and can be used in PoEs/VCAs to to narrow down who you could be scum w/, who that player could be scum w/, etc. A self-vote withholds that information and makes the player more difficult to read.

[Enter]

Self-voting does not achieve reads on other players, because responses to it are predictable and have been seen in hundreds of games prior.

Responses to self-votes are not predictable. Please provide evidence for this assertion.

Also, please provide evidence for your assertion that doing things with predictable responses doesn't achieve reads.

Also, maybe follow your own advice of not making assertions without providing evidence?

You getting flustered over me not providing reason for my reasoning for my statement is different from me getting flustered over you not providing reason for your statement.

[Enter]

When the topic of the thread is "self-voting" you saying "i like self-voting" doesn't further discussion. me saying "i don't like self voting because" does further discussion. If you need me to go into detail on the "because," ask.

[Enter]

When a player self votes other players will respond by voting the player in question or not voting the player in question. These responses are not useful to read anymore, because the push on the player could easily be one of disgust for self-voting and the refusal to push could easily be one of support for self-voting. The play is no longer about the alignment of the original player, it's about the singular play the one player made.

[Enter]

When a player self votes other players will respond by voting the player in question or not voting the player in question. These responses are not useful to read anymore, because the push on the player could easily be one of disgust for self-voting and the refusal to push could easily be one of support for self-voting. The play is no longer about the alignment of the original player, it's about the singular play the one player made.

By self-voting, you allow scum to push you based on something that is not your alignment, giving them an opportunity to push for your mislynch for the remainder of the game based on something no one can read them on because it's not play indicative.

[Enter]

If this push results in a policy lynch, the scum bear no responsibility, because it is the original players crappy play that lead to their lynch, not the push of the mafia.

[Shoshin]

When you self-vote you deprive town of your vote on other players as a note of where your stance is at that point in time, and you manage to do nothing with it but draw attention to yourself. If the goal is to draw attention to yourself, there are less anti-town ways to do that.

How do self-votes prevent townies from voicing their reads? Why can't a townie self-vote while expressing their reads through other words (e.g. "X is town, Y is scum, and I'm self-voting because of Z."

Why can't self-votes be a valid way of drawing attention to oneself?

First votes in the game on yourself don't further a town win condition. Responses are predictable and therefore borderline useless as far as finding who is scum, and voting yourself does not help other players read you because it's easily replicable as town and as scum with similar likelihoods (AFAIK).

Why are self-votes predictable?

Why are predictable actions useless?

Is voting randomly somehow not as easily replicable as self-voting?

What's your evidentiary basis for saying that town/scum self-vote with similar likelihood?

Do you think the specific tendencies of each player & their personal likelihood to self-vote as either alignment in RVS or elsewhere is irrelevant to scumhunting?

In addition, votes on yourself give no indication of your immediate and unaltered thoughts on other players - a big part of mafia as scum is knowing who is easy to mislynch and who isn't and responding to the town attitude and reads by building cases on who they think is mislynchable enough w/o giving away they're playing opportunistic. In the first phase of the game, however, there are no thoughts on who is scum and who is not, placing your vote on someone else is the beginning of associatives w/ that player and can be used in PoEs/VCAs to to narrow down who you could be scum w/, who that player could be scum w/, etc. A self-vote withholds that information and makes the player more difficult to read.

Do you think it's impossible for a townie to give "immediate and unaltered thoughts on other players" while self-voting?

When a player self votes other players will respond by voting the player in question or not voting the player in question. These responses are not useful to read anymore, because the push on the player could easily be one of disgust for self-voting and the refusal to push could easily be one of support for self-voting. The play is no longer about the alignment of the original player, it's about the singular play the one player made.

Why doesn't your reasoning apply to normal votes? Why can't players have NAI responses to votes on other players?

I strongly disagree that your two examples of what players "could easily be" are the only responses to self-votes. Why are those the only possible responses? If I'm confronted with a self-vote, you're going to see a lot more nuance than that, and if you look at games with self-votes, you'll definitely see other responses beyond these two.

I also strongly disagree that those responses aren't AI. Why can't those responses be AI for some players based on their personality?

If this push results in a policy lynch, the scum bear no responsibility, because it is the original players crappy play that lead to their lynch, not the push of the mafia.

This is entirely circular. Scum aren't responsible for policy lynching self-votes because self-votes are crappy play. Self-votes are crappy play because ... scum aren't responsible for policy lynching them. What am I missing here?

[Shoshin]

When the topic of the thread is "self-voting" you saying "i like self-voting" doesn't further discussion. me saying "i don't like self voting because" does further discussion. If you need me to go into detail on the "because," ask.

Your hypocrisy is annoying but I'm not going to tell you to behave differently, you're welcome to be whatever kind of person you want.

[Ankamius]

self-votes are volatile and while they can be a good strategy in some scenarios, they are gambit-like in that it backfires harder than most other strategies when they backfire

it's dependent on the playerlist as much as the situation whether it's valid or not tbh

[Enter]

When the topic of the thread is "self-voting" you saying "i like self-voting" doesn't further discussion. me saying "i don't like self voting because" does further discussion. If you need me to go into detail on the "because," ask.

Your hypocrisy is annoying but I'm not going to tell you to behave differently, you're welcome to be whatever kind of person you want.

Why not just say "I think you're a hypocrite" instead of being passive about it?

[Shoshin]

it's dependent on the playerlist as much as the situation whether it's valid or not tbh

I agree, the players are part of the situation.

[Enter]

I strongly disagree that your two examples of what players "could easily be" are the only responses to self-votes. Why are those the only possible responses? If I'm confronted with a self-vote, you're going to see a lot more nuance than that, and if you look at games with self-votes, you'll definitely see other responses beyond these two.

I also strongly disagree that those responses aren't AI. Why can't those responses be AI for some players based on their personality?

This is entirely circular. Scum aren't responsible for policy lynching self-votes because self-votes are crappy play. Self-votes are crappy play because ... scum aren't responsible for policy lynching them. What am I missing here?

How do you disagree that the two possible responses to anything in mafia are to vote or not to vote? Yes there is more nuance to it. There is more nuance to everything. But the general response is the same. And reading people in mafia is about WHY they do things. The "why" when you self-vote is already answered - that player does or does not have a stance against self-voting.

What is AI about your beliefs on optimal mafia play?

[Enter]

When the topic of the thread is "self-voting" you saying "i like self-voting" doesn't further discussion. me saying "i don't like self voting because" does further discussion. If you need me to go into detail on the "because," ask.

Your hypocrisy is annoying but I'm not going to tell you to behave differently, you're welcome to be whatever kind of person you want.

Why not just say "I think you're a hypocrite" instead of being passive about it?

Also irrelevant

[Enter]

This is entirely circular. Scum aren't responsible for policy lynching self-votes because self-votes are crappy play. Self-votes are crappy play because ... scum aren't responsible for policy lynching them. What am I missing here?

Self votes are crappy play because they're not alignment indicative and they generate no alignment indicative responses.
Scum aren't responsible for policy lynching self-voters because self-votes are crappy play.
This makes self-votes even crappier play.

[Enter]

How do self-votes prevent townies from voicing their reads?

I didn't say this.

Why can't a townie self-vote while expressing their reads through other words (e.g. "X is town, Y is scum, and I'm self-voting because of Z."

I didn't say this either.

Why can't self-votes be a valid way of drawing attention to oneself?

Just responded to this again. Basically - it doesn't help people read you, it doesn't help people know who you're aligned with and who you're not aligned with, it just draws attention for the purpose of drawing attention.