Maven89
Smash Master
No, it was cool and it filled every woman who read it with uncontrollable lust
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
The Salt Factory - Mafia Metagame Discussion Thread
- Thread starter #HBC | Laundry
- Start date
#HBC | Gorf
toastin walrus since 4/20 maaaan
duuuuuuuuuuuude
july and kataefi are the best example of light-hearted players that were good cuz they stayed logical
july and kataefi are the best example of light-hearted players that were good cuz they stayed logical
#HBC | ZoZo
Shocodoro Blagshidect
We used to have a lot of discussions over this because for I was a bit of her kryptonite for the long time. Hell, marshy even says he would falter at some points when talking to me. *shrug* I'm not trying to make an argument for how I play haha.
I also want to say I am not knocking people who make it competitive like Laundry suggested because I do not mind when people do play this competitively even though there is no prize/no ranking/no full motive for it. It's just my cup of tea, but I have never said anything other than the fact that this is a game for fun and that is my utmost goal as the mod to make sure the game remains that, a fun game that helps the community grow and players stay happy. I used to be a very cutthroat competitive player around here, but not to that extant anymore.
If the competition aspect becomes a problem, like it did in the past, I will say things then, but at the moment I don't have a problem.
ranmaru
Smash Legend
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 13,296
- Switch FC
- SW-0654 7794 0698
I think mafia is not just a competition, but also a team game. Now that reminds me, Blitzcrank is pretty fun. Of course, I like to play him as support. Yet I wouldn't only play him to hook every opportunity I would get.
(choosing to ignore the competitive vs for funsies debate because meh, no interest)
If J was July's kryptonite via AtE, and yet July generally played analytical logical games, what's the lesson here? It should be jumping straight to mind.
I mean. J was almost as obvscum in Minimafia in my eyes as Kaladin, but he perfectly hit his AtE notes and they did nothing for me because I actively CHOOSE to ignore them. And sure enough, he was scum. And J tried to AtE his way out of pressure, and Maven and Del chose to be logical rather than emotive, and it was like a carpetbomb dropping down on him because his logic and fauxhunting weren't up to snuff. I just don't get how there's a "disagreement" here, much less a different strokes for different folks sentiment pervading. If Maven and Del had fallen for J being able to fake the emotions of a frustrated townie despite having absolutely no leg to stand on regarding his play, that wouldn't have been a "good job J" win, it would have been a "Maven, Del, guys, what the actual ****" loss for town.
If anyone would have done differently from Maven and Del (and Orbo!) in that situation, then a glaring flaw in their play would be immediately obvious. And if it's that simple a matter to correct, obviously the deception there is anything but high level, even when well-perpetrated.
If somebody puts together false connections and red herrings using logic to win as mafia that's impressive because they're putting the pieces together in a way that isn't actually true, but appears to be so in a convincing manner to a critical eye. You've literally created a false truth that somehow survived logical scrutiny. How is that not better than playing someone on the primal emotional level -- again especially through the internet? You're not a CIA officer pretending to be an arms dealer in an opium den surrounded by terrorists, or a psychopath defeating a polygraph examination, or an for that matter a stage actor disappearing into his role and convincing hundreds of audience onlookers of their performance. You're faking the feefees through text, where you've had time to think about what you're going to say and how you're going to say it, and no one can read your inflection and tone and body language and literally everything that makes in person deception of that magnitude impressive. Literally anything that makes emotional deception impressive isn't even at play through text, and... you're just denying everything that's known about behavioral science (including acting) if you think otherwise lol. A thirteen year old can competently pose as a 20something attractive gym rat cool kid with almost no difficulty, because the internet takes away all the difficulty of pretending to be something you're not at such a superficial level.
I worked as a loss prevention officer for a while and it was funny how similar it was to mafia. You could think of everyone in a store or shopping center as "the town" and thieves as the mafia goons. The thieves are trying to get one over on you and deceive you in every way possible, right down to interrogation after you arrest them. What do you think was more valuable -- behavioral analysis or "this guy makes me FEEL like he's ..."? The path to success was always -- not "for me", for anyone in the field -- about looking for people that make you ask "why" questions. I caught a professional thief that was a visible minority, faking a disability, and using a walker. Here's how easily he could have blown right by me if I just want "poor guy" and ignored him -- I caught him because I noticed he came in with one of those recyclable grocery bags, and he had the straps dangling off of his forearm. And I realized that was strange, because wouldn't that be hard on your back and arm and presumably whatever injury you have when you later have a bag full of groceries hauling down on you awkwardly like that? I followed him. He stole -- a lot. And then when I confronted him he played the cripple card and threw every lie at me he could possibly think of in a short period of time. You wanna guess how sincere sounding his sob story was? Because the answer is "very, but the facts made things clear so I ignored him". Something I learned in the criminology field is that while you can't discount the humanity of perpetrators, you also can't get wrapped up in it because absolutely everyone that wants to deceive you in that world has a story.
That's real world deception and investigation, folks. You follow your feels, you get burned. How many very sincere tears do you think I saw? Because the answer is quite a few. Anytime somebody that gets caught doing something bad, they will have a sincere core of indignation, defensiveness, and every other single thing you can conceive of that an innocent person in the same situation would have. It's the reason studies have been done that show cops, border officers and similar professions THINK they're better at "sensing" a liar, but actually have about the same efficiency for it as average people with little difference. That's not my opinion, that's actual science that I learned substantiated by actual study. Emotion can only be read accurately in a very controlled environment by someone that has studied the human mind and human behavior for upwards of a decade, and above all, in person.
In other news 1+1=2
If J was July's kryptonite via AtE, and yet July generally played analytical logical games, what's the lesson here? It should be jumping straight to mind.
I mean. J was almost as obvscum in Minimafia in my eyes as Kaladin, but he perfectly hit his AtE notes and they did nothing for me because I actively CHOOSE to ignore them. And sure enough, he was scum. And J tried to AtE his way out of pressure, and Maven and Del chose to be logical rather than emotive, and it was like a carpetbomb dropping down on him because his logic and fauxhunting weren't up to snuff. I just don't get how there's a "disagreement" here, much less a different strokes for different folks sentiment pervading. If Maven and Del had fallen for J being able to fake the emotions of a frustrated townie despite having absolutely no leg to stand on regarding his play, that wouldn't have been a "good job J" win, it would have been a "Maven, Del, guys, what the actual ****" loss for town.
If anyone would have done differently from Maven and Del (and Orbo!) in that situation, then a glaring flaw in their play would be immediately obvious. And if it's that simple a matter to correct, obviously the deception there is anything but high level, even when well-perpetrated.
If somebody puts together false connections and red herrings using logic to win as mafia that's impressive because they're putting the pieces together in a way that isn't actually true, but appears to be so in a convincing manner to a critical eye. You've literally created a false truth that somehow survived logical scrutiny. How is that not better than playing someone on the primal emotional level -- again especially through the internet? You're not a CIA officer pretending to be an arms dealer in an opium den surrounded by terrorists, or a psychopath defeating a polygraph examination, or an for that matter a stage actor disappearing into his role and convincing hundreds of audience onlookers of their performance. You're faking the feefees through text, where you've had time to think about what you're going to say and how you're going to say it, and no one can read your inflection and tone and body language and literally everything that makes in person deception of that magnitude impressive. Literally anything that makes emotional deception impressive isn't even at play through text, and... you're just denying everything that's known about behavioral science (including acting) if you think otherwise lol. A thirteen year old can competently pose as a 20something attractive gym rat cool kid with almost no difficulty, because the internet takes away all the difficulty of pretending to be something you're not at such a superficial level.
I worked as a loss prevention officer for a while and it was funny how similar it was to mafia. You could think of everyone in a store or shopping center as "the town" and thieves as the mafia goons. The thieves are trying to get one over on you and deceive you in every way possible, right down to interrogation after you arrest them. What do you think was more valuable -- behavioral analysis or "this guy makes me FEEL like he's ..."? The path to success was always -- not "for me", for anyone in the field -- about looking for people that make you ask "why" questions. I caught a professional thief that was a visible minority, faking a disability, and using a walker. Here's how easily he could have blown right by me if I just want "poor guy" and ignored him -- I caught him because I noticed he came in with one of those recyclable grocery bags, and he had the straps dangling off of his forearm. And I realized that was strange, because wouldn't that be hard on your back and arm and presumably whatever injury you have when you later have a bag full of groceries hauling down on you awkwardly like that? I followed him. He stole -- a lot. And then when I confronted him he played the cripple card and threw every lie at me he could possibly think of in a short period of time. You wanna guess how sincere sounding his sob story was? Because the answer is "very, but the facts made things clear so I ignored him". Something I learned in the criminology field is that while you can't discount the humanity of perpetrators, you also can't get wrapped up in it because absolutely everyone that wants to deceive you in that world has a story.
That's real world deception and investigation, folks. You follow your feels, you get burned. How many very sincere tears do you think I saw? Because the answer is quite a few. Anytime somebody that gets caught doing something bad, they will have a sincere core of indignation, defensiveness, and every other single thing you can conceive of that an innocent person in the same situation would have. It's the reason studies have been done that show cops, border officers and similar professions THINK they're better at "sensing" a liar, but actually have about the same efficiency for it as average people with little difference. That's not my opinion, that's actual science that I learned substantiated by actual study. Emotion can only be read accurately in a very controlled environment by someone that has studied the human mind and human behavior for upwards of a decade, and above all, in person.
In other news 1+1=2
Just watched a couple parents basically Jedi their whiny brat kid that was having a temper tantrum about mcdonald's not having the toy he wants
guess what they did
they literally talked him down by asking him logical questions and making him accept the reality that crying and whining wasn't going to accomplish anything and he'd have to get the toy another time via another tactic lmfaooooooo
guess what they did
they literally talked him down by asking him logical questions and making him accept the reality that crying and whining wasn't going to accomplish anything and he'd have to get the toy another time via another tactic lmfaooooooo
Last edited:
ranmaru
Smash Legend
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 13,296
- Switch FC
- SW-0654 7794 0698
I'll keep that in mind. Anyway the lesson is that others, including July, should try to be prepared for the AtE that comes their way and decipher it correctly. Try not to give in to your own emotions. Reminds me of Hearts Mafia. I was super salty that game.
adumbrodeus
Smash Legend
Here's the thing, at the end of the day, mafia isn't just about understanding people, it's also about convincing and manipulation. Appealing to emotions, even subconsciously, is a very powerful tool and even the people who are most prided on their logical analysis make use of it on a certain level.
Things like having an air of gravitas, that's very much based on the emotions you cause in people's subconscious.
Even if you're purging emotions from your analysis of who is scum and who isn't, the reality is going to be that most people can't separate their emotions out and sprinkling subconscious appeals is a powerful tactic for manipulating people into doing what you want.
Doesn't matter how logically right I was about it being impossible there were 3 town roleblockers Swiss' superiority at appealing to people at a subconscious level meant I was never going to lynch him over it. To deny that power is not to play to win.
Things like having an air of gravitas, that's very much based on the emotions you cause in people's subconscious.
Even if you're purging emotions from your analysis of who is scum and who isn't, the reality is going to be that most people can't separate their emotions out and sprinkling subconscious appeals is a powerful tactic for manipulating people into doing what you want.
Doesn't matter how logically right I was about it being impossible there were 3 town roleblockers Swiss' superiority at appealing to people at a subconscious level meant I was never going to lynch him over it. To deny that power is not to play to win.
lmfao so true, I'd D1 lynch most of the coworkers I've had in my life not gonna lie
Orboknown
Smash Hero
I cant say that at my job haha
Ok.
That doesn't really apply to the discussion though.
The thing we're talking about is obvious appeals and how to deal with them. I mean, we can bandy words, but that's what the subject everyone has been talking about. Not subtle additions to a case to make you more approachable. Not phrasing to be certain you don't trigger someone and make them harder to convince of your point of view than necessary. We're talking primarily "poor me" and "I can't believe you would do that!" and making sure we diagnose that, from a game theory standpoint, you can should ignore it. When people point out that AtE blows chunks, don't ****ing defend the AtEing person and DEFINITELY don't start pushing the attacker for something that is correct play.
I don't care how difficult it is to separate. I don't care if you measure it as a skill. Hell, I think I'm better than almost everyone at manipulating people's opinions of me to be what I want them to be (generally slightly pissed off or in my pocket). That said, it is CORRECT to ignore AtE. Period.
AtE, in its most blatant uses, are generally used as a defense directly (indignation or seeking sympathy), a defense indirectly (being friendly to color perceptions of you), or an offense indirectly (coloring perceptions of others by making them seem an asshole, a moron, or other negative things). If you use it as a direct offense, it is painfully obvious and falls apart in the face of logic that our target will inevitably respond with once you try and push a garbage case on them. You simply can't push someone because "they are an asshole," "they're stupid/bad/etc," or "I feel like they're scum." None of those would fly, but we let people slide for things we should equally be ignoring elsewhere.
People will AtE indirectly. It's a matter of good public speaking and is an important part of convincing others and manipulating the game as either alignment. However, we should be pointing it out where it is blatant and we should not be condoning it IN PLACE OF CONTENT! We certainly should not be condemning others for failing to back off of someone who is using an AtE defense. Condemn them if they are pushing a **** case that you think is scum motivated, but not for refusing to change their view because the other guy is mad/sobbing. Finally, we shouldn't be getting pissed when, no matter how mad you are, people don't change their view in the face of your own AtE.
2 things:
Identify AtE and ignore it.
Not that hard.
#HBC | ZoZo
Shocodoro Blagshidect
Good post.
#HBC | Kary
Fiend of Fire
What the **** happened while I was away LOL
edit: well this is an interesting conversation. nice. well played dGames.
edit: well this is an interesting conversation. nice. well played dGames.
Last edited:
The Man From Delamar
Smash Journeyman
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2015
- Messages
- 206
I think I like that Ryker fella.
I dunno. Lots of conversation goin on, lots of it mentions me (I THINK I'm flattered?) but its about the community and I ain't a part of the community.
But there was a time where I bothered with tryin to read emotion and it burned my boots but good. And there was a time where I tried whining my way to victory and it felt tainted and unsatisfying. Ultimately I ask myself in games if the way I'm investigatin (or pretendin to... Which sometimes ain't that far off hah!) would net me results in my actual career or get me fired as soon as I get unlucky. Y'all can probably guess where I stand.
Insert shruggin shoulders .gif here
I dunno. Lots of conversation goin on, lots of it mentions me (I THINK I'm flattered?) but its about the community and I ain't a part of the community.
But there was a time where I bothered with tryin to read emotion and it burned my boots but good. And there was a time where I tried whining my way to victory and it felt tainted and unsatisfying. Ultimately I ask myself in games if the way I'm investigatin (or pretendin to... Which sometimes ain't that far off hah!) would net me results in my actual career or get me fired as soon as I get unlucky. Y'all can probably guess where I stand.
Insert shruggin shoulders .gif here
adumbrodeus
Smash Legend
@Ryker
Well yes, but the only difference between blatant ATEs and what I'm talking about is it's more difficult to identify and therefore defend against, the arguments for learning to mechanically analyze or dismiss are the same, as are the arguments against falling for it.
Which is again why I only begrudge ATEs, blatent or otherwise, if they don't work. It seems like soup's ATEs aren't working for him so that's a good reason for him to adjust or get better at it. The onus is on the other players to not fall for them.
Well yes, but the only difference between blatant ATEs and what I'm talking about is it's more difficult to identify and therefore defend against, the arguments for learning to mechanically analyze or dismiss are the same, as are the arguments against falling for it.
Which is again why I only begrudge ATEs, blatent or otherwise, if they don't work. It seems like soup's ATEs aren't working for him so that's a good reason for him to adjust or get better at it. The onus is on the other players to not fall for them.
Last edited:
#HBC | Red Ryu
Red Fox Warrior
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2008
- Messages
- 27,486
- Location
- Milwaukee, Wisconsin
- NNID
- RedRyu_Smash
- 3DS FC
- 0344-9312-3352
Uhh, random critique question, do I use ATE in some shape or form outside of being goofy?
Maven89
Smash Master
I've wondered if you were lying about posts being drunk posts before
I don't know what that's a reference to but it's still hilarious and I'm liking the post
Cheerilee
Smash Ace
- Joined
- May 24, 2013
- Messages
- 548
It's a reference to Undertale. It's basically the marriage of a top quality A-game to a nice soundtrack and a casual "bullet-hell" experience. I actually like this game so I won't go anymore into detail about it. However, I thought it was a funny analogy to the thread based around the very concept of the game and how it relates to dealing with AtE from other people.
Last edited:
Actually I came from Salt Mini Mafia and then did Revival of DGames before starting Jungle Republic and Zalak was in Gheb's Auction Maifa then stopped posting here for like half a year, but yes, we are all new-ish.
Anyways, how do you think a "Blind-Man Mafia" would work out (making this up as I go)? There would be a total of 13 people (3 mafia, 1 indie, 9 town || 3 mafia, 10 town) or 15 people (4 mafia, 1 indie, 10 town) (alignment balance is up to change), but the scum wouldn't have any means of communication with each-other, and they would only know one other scum (1 would know 2, 2 would know 3, 3 would know 1). They could vote for who the NK should be on, and the most popular vote is the lynch target. In addition, if there is a 3-way tie, one of the votes will be randomly selected and that will be the lynch target. If a vote is cast on a scum, it is ignored and the other non-scum votes are counted. If all 3 are placed on scum, a random non-scum slot is selected.
Also, it's an open setup because I'm putting the rules out here.
Is this a good idea for a game, or do I just need to get more sleep?
Last edited:
Maven89
Smash Master
I like the idea, the problem is that it introduces a new mechanic to the scum team but doesn't introduce any new mechanic to the town team, meaning it essentially just nerfs the scum team.
An idea I had would be to make it so that people have a certain number of points, and each individual mafia selecting one of those targets removes one of the points, the target dying when they have no more. If there's 4 mafia have it be something like 2-3 points? Then on top of the regular lynch, town also votes on a living player to restore to full points. It gives individual mafia player more control over NK's and helps remove the burden of no communication, while the town gets to interfere with their ability to get multiple NK's as well as getting to see who was targeted, something the mafia would have to manipulate through sometimes voting their own
An idea I had would be to make it so that people have a certain number of points, and each individual mafia selecting one of those targets removes one of the points, the target dying when they have no more. If there's 4 mafia have it be something like 2-3 points? Then on top of the regular lynch, town also votes on a living player to restore to full points. It gives individual mafia player more control over NK's and helps remove the burden of no communication, while the town gets to interfere with their ability to get multiple NK's as well as getting to see who was targeted, something the mafia would have to manipulate through sometimes voting their own
Last edited:
Orboknown
Smash Hero
That's cool but the game would last sooo long with mavens addendum
Designing a game 101
check to see if all your super cool ideas might gimp one faction over another. Then ask yourself how disastrously bad the worst case scenario for either faction could go. These two checks will erase like 80% of bad setups or ideas before they even reach the discussion phase of existence
check to see if all your super cool ideas might gimp one faction over another. Then ask yourself how disastrously bad the worst case scenario for either faction could go. These two checks will erase like 80% of bad setups or ideas before they even reach the discussion phase of existence
Cheerilee
Smash Ace
- Joined
- May 24, 2013
- Messages
- 548
Could be an ego booster when you don't know your teammates but everyone seems scummy.A scumteam that can't communicate usually won't win.
I actually like this idea. Maybe one town with this PR if it's 2 points per player and two town (or one and a backup, each night would be clearing two slot's votes at a time) if it's 3 points? I was thinking that town not being able to analyze scum interactions as effectively would nerf town pretty significantly (since everyone on scumteam only knows one of their teammates). Do you think these mechanics will balance each-other well?
Hmmm... Good point, but it would just be like 4 Indie slots all aligned together and with a collective NK, and each with a clear on one slot. Can Indies win? If you answer yes, then it's very possible for the scumteam to win. (If I'm wrong, just say so; I'm much newer to the meta of this game.)A scumteam that can't communicate usually won't win.
#HBC | Kary
Fiend of Fire
Seems like you're changing the game for the sake of it. Obviously makes the mafia weaker, but also takes away one of the fundamental selling points of the game. Just sounds less fun for the scum team. Like, if we play basketball, but with a house brick instead of a ball- I'm sure you could make that a game. But it isn't better.
They 'can' win but practically speaking ... they don't. Indies have the worst win rates in just about every setup and they are the hardest party to balance. Even in Jungle Republic, which is usually the blueprint setup for viable indie teams, 3rd party has the lowest overall odds to win.
dGames in specific has had its fair share of awfully implemented indies which is a big reason why they aren't used a whole lot anymore these days. Historically the indie role that has the best chance of winning or coming close to it in dGames are indie lovers/siblings. They've won twice and got very close to it another time. But all three of them consisted of respectable players and some of these teams were just performing well against the set-up based odds because of player skill. And guess what, indie lovers/siblings can communicate privately *hint hint*
So yeah, for now I'd definitely advice against doing it. You should probably host some simple setups to get a better understanding of things first.
Also Indy lovers/siblings are a bull**** role that basically just rolls the dive every phase.
Independents are in no way necessary and work far better in a world where there isn't an independent of some kind in every game.
Independents are in no way necessary and work far better in a world where there isn't an independent of some kind in every game.
Lost. Mafia.
ranmaru
Smash Legend
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 13,296
- Switch FC
- SW-0654 7794 0698
Can we talk about substantiating votes?
I think Dgames needs to care more about wagons that are fueled by 'feelings' and not as much by 'evidence'. I am indeed talking about the Gheb wagon that happened in Maven's Monty Python game.
I know I may have been biased in the past asking for votes but nowadays I try to let things happen and ask people 'would you vote him, what's your read on him?' instead of just 'hey hop on I don't care about the reasoning!. I don't think we should be ok with letting people hop on our wagons (unless we are scum then it's fine) but I don't think it's pro-town.
I don't think a lynch going through on a person who actually had a valid defense/reasoning isn't legit especially with gutscum reads.
---
I know sometimes there are wagons early game that have some unsubstantiated votes to add pressure, to gain reactions to read, to shake **** up... but it's not ok when you just sit there willy nilly and let the lynch go through. Plus, I would expect the persons would actually have reasoning but would release it later on after ****'s happened.
---
I think Dgames needs to care more about wagons that are fueled by 'feelings' and not as much by 'evidence'. I am indeed talking about the Gheb wagon that happened in Maven's Monty Python game.
I know I may have been biased in the past asking for votes but nowadays I try to let things happen and ask people 'would you vote him, what's your read on him?' instead of just 'hey hop on I don't care about the reasoning!. I don't think we should be ok with letting people hop on our wagons (unless we are scum then it's fine) but I don't think it's pro-town.
I don't think a lynch going through on a person who actually had a valid defense/reasoning isn't legit especially with gutscum reads.
---
I know sometimes there are wagons early game that have some unsubstantiated votes to add pressure, to gain reactions to read, to shake **** up... but it's not ok when you just sit there willy nilly and let the lynch go through. Plus, I would expect the persons would actually have reasoning but would release it later on after ****'s happened.
---
Fandangox
Smash Lord
The Gheb wagon happened because Gheb claimed one player was obvscum. A player that was barely active and went into inactivity about 10 posts in. A player that he failed to give out any actual reasons why he thought it was "obvscum" Not even mentioning that player wasn't even the target of Gheb's push, it was me based on what he thought was me being his scumbuddy.
Which was DUMB as hell because
1: He called a player obviously scum and yet never actually argued or explained why.
2: His push on me was he scumreading me on relations on D1 when we had no flip, like I mentioned in the thread, the ONLY way his push would make sense is if KNEW that Kouse was scum, but of course that was impossible on day 1.
3: When we called him on it, he procceded to explain why his VOTE and ACTIONS were logical. He went on a mechanical explanation without once again actually explaining why Kouse was scum, which was the key factor on his push on me.
The only reason I didn't vote him when he first brought it up is because I thought it was just his way to of getting a read on me, when he actually doubled down and I realized he was serious is when I voted him. Because for me that was the scummiest move in the entire game.
Which was DUMB as hell because
1: He called a player obviously scum and yet never actually argued or explained why.
2: His push on me was he scumreading me on relations on D1 when we had no flip, like I mentioned in the thread, the ONLY way his push would make sense is if KNEW that Kouse was scum, but of course that was impossible on day 1.
3: When we called him on it, he procceded to explain why his VOTE and ACTIONS were logical. He went on a mechanical explanation without once again actually explaining why Kouse was scum, which was the key factor on his push on me.
The only reason I didn't vote him when he first brought it up is because I thought it was just his way to of getting a read on me, when he actually doubled down and I realized he was serious is when I voted him. Because for me that was the scummiest move in the entire game.
My reasoning on why Kouse should've been the play was well explained tbh.
But I don't really see Ran's point anyway. If people lynch other people for dumb reasons then it's town's job to do something about. That's what mafia is about and if town fails to realize that they'll lose. Simple as that.
But I don't really see Ran's point anyway. If people lynch other people for dumb reasons then it's town's job to do something about. That's what mafia is about and if town fails to realize that they'll lose. Simple as that.
#HBC | Laundry
Grand Sage of Swag
ranmaru
Bad bandwagons happen in every game of mafia with a lot of tacked on votes for weak or shoddy reasoning. Anything that doesn't hold up to the light of scrutiny is the first thing you should be questioning and unsubstantiated votes are probably the best thing of those to question. If the rest of town is willing to write passes for bad votes and later loses, they have no one to blame but themselves.