#HBC | Gorf
toastin walrus since 4/20 maaaan
theyre aight but like i aint bout dat stickin it in the butt **** cuz like poop comes out of there
-
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
Dooms
KY/KP Joey
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
- Messages
- 5,955
- Location
- Louisville, Kentucky
- NNID
- Doomsyplusle
- 3DS FC
- 2921-9568-4629
That's the best part, though!
#HBC | Joker
Space Marine
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,864
- Location
- St. Clair Shores, Michigan
- NNID
- HBCJoker
- 3DS FC
- 1864-9780-3232
Girls have butts too, I'm jus sayin' 
Kantrip
Kantplay
yeah but girls dont poop
#HBC | Gorf
toastin walrus since 4/20 maaaan
same rule applies all round
also what kantrip said
also what kantrip said
#HBC | Kary
Fiend of Fire
RIP thread
Dooms
KY/KP Joey
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
- Messages
- 5,955
- Location
- Louisville, Kentucky
- NNID
- Doomsyplusle
- 3DS FC
- 2921-9568-4629
What are the pros and cons of being ambiguous with your reasoning for wanting someone lynched?
#HBC | Gorf
toastin walrus since 4/20 maaaan
you leave yourself less capable of having faulty logic, if youre correct in your scum read the scum member has more of a chance at becoming apparent if you dont give him a fat amount of fuel, lack of ridiculous oversubstantiated walls, more appeal if you replace the word "ambiguous" with "concise," and so on. a case can be very good if you have a wall, but the negative effects of a wall are more likely the bigger the post. and saying the same thing over and over and over just makes your case look bare balls. i think laundry's case on circus in mmu is a prime example of a great case. it wasnt too big OR too small, and his objective was to get him lynched, not dwell on every facet of his play and walk us through why he was scummy.
They all get summed up with
1.) The scum team gets less of an idea what you want to do next (and you don't out your role or reads).
2.) You look worse so you might not get night killed.
1.) You may not get the lynch you want.
2.) Your suspicions may die with you or be misconstrued to scum purposes after your death.
3.) You look worse so you might get lynched.
Rule of thumb, I think the cons outweigh the pros. There are times for you not to out your purpose (oftentimes due to your role), but in those cases you had better be piggybacking someone else with an air tight plan for if you get called out as an opportunistic punk.
1.) The scum team gets less of an idea what you want to do next (and you don't out your role or reads).
2.) You look worse so you might not get night killed.
1.) You may not get the lynch you want.
2.) Your suspicions may die with you or be misconstrued to scum purposes after your death.
3.) You look worse so you might get lynched.
Rule of thumb, I think the cons outweigh the pros. There are times for you not to out your purpose (oftentimes due to your role), but in those cases you had better be piggybacking someone else with an air tight plan for if you get called out as an opportunistic punk.
Welcome to how not to get someone lynched 101. Either by falling prey to the above mentioned concerns or by not substantiating your case.
The ACTUAL way to get someone lynched is to make your case WITHOUT giving them a million ways out. I don't CARE what made you decide he was scum, if you've decided to lynch him, then you need to present only the points that will convince people and not include any point you can already see the other man strawmanning without being prepared to deal with the strawman. If someone defeats your point, decide whether or not they are scum. If they are still scum, just drop it. Don't get into wall trading. There's NO REASON to trade walls with the other guy if it reaches a point where it is just making people skim and stopping you from gaining votes.
And never continue arguing a point that has been defeated when you recognize you are wrong. Your pride is only going to get battered in the process while you manage to ruin your standing.
#HBC | Gorf
toastin walrus since 4/20 maaaan
^
yee
ultimately, mafia is politics. youre LOBBYING for your ideal lynch choice. if someones running your campaign, join their wagon. if not, show the people what they want to see: a clear-cut case as to why the person you want to lynch deserves to get lynched. nobody cares about you, they care about finding scum.
yee
ultimately, mafia is politics. youre LOBBYING for your ideal lynch choice. if someones running your campaign, join their wagon. if not, show the people what they want to see: a clear-cut case as to why the person you want to lynch deserves to get lynched. nobody cares about you, they care about finding scum.
Last edited:
Exactly. When it comes to getting lynches, it doesn't matter if you are right or wrong. You can be completely correct about every scum on Day 1 and get end gamed without ever getting a lynch and you know what you accomplished? Nothing.
What matters to you is not what you need to tell everyone. You need to tell everyone what will accomplish your goal.
What matters to you is not what you need to tell everyone. You need to tell everyone what will accomplish your goal.
Xivii
caterpillar feet
From my experience, honesty is the best policy. I think it is better to completely lay out your thought process, because it allows others to follow you more clearly, judge your alignment more accurately, and point out the fallacies in your logic. I think it is a mistake to hide your reasoning (other than for PR reasons), because you're making the assumption that your read is infallible in that case. If that were the case, then there would be no reason to hide your reasoning. No matter how good of a player you are, you are still susceptible to mistakes and biases. Allowing a peer review of your thought process can reveal these biases and fallacies and ultimately prevent a mislynch.
For example, in Sleepover mafia both Murderbush and #HBC | Amidamaru had a very strong scum read on #HBC | Leviathan. These were two players that are known to be influential player in the game. However, both of these slots decided not to play their traditional manipulative styles, but rather play cooperatively with the rest of the players instead. Even though these two slots had such a huge scum read on #HBC | Leviathan, the rest of the players were not convinced, and most actually saw him in a town light. The two big cases that each of these slots made on #HBC | Leviathan were continuously debunked by the rest of the cast, and ultimately town #HBC | Leviathan was not lynched. Not only did this prevent a town lynch, but it prevented a lynch that would have placed the three mafia players in a town light, and caused distrust of town Murderbush and #HBC | Amidamaru. Furthermore, #HBC | Leviathan ended up being the primary influence of all three of the mafia lynches.
Three out of four of the heads in the Murderbush + #HBC | Amidamaru hydras were working under the bias that #HBC | Leviathan was someone they knew. Their perception of the slot was based on the meta of that player and limited their ability to look other directions. If these two slots had decided to play in a manipulative manner, instead of choosing to play openly and cooperatively, the game could have ended much differently.
For example, in Sleepover mafia both Murderbush and #HBC | Amidamaru had a very strong scum read on #HBC | Leviathan. These were two players that are known to be influential player in the game. However, both of these slots decided not to play their traditional manipulative styles, but rather play cooperatively with the rest of the players instead. Even though these two slots had such a huge scum read on #HBC | Leviathan, the rest of the players were not convinced, and most actually saw him in a town light. The two big cases that each of these slots made on #HBC | Leviathan were continuously debunked by the rest of the cast, and ultimately town #HBC | Leviathan was not lynched. Not only did this prevent a town lynch, but it prevented a lynch that would have placed the three mafia players in a town light, and caused distrust of town Murderbush and #HBC | Amidamaru. Furthermore, #HBC | Leviathan ended up being the primary influence of all three of the mafia lynches.
Three out of four of the heads in the Murderbush + #HBC | Amidamaru hydras were working under the bias that #HBC | Leviathan was someone they knew. Their perception of the slot was based on the meta of that player and limited their ability to look other directions. If these two slots had decided to play in a manipulative manner, instead of choosing to play openly and cooperatively, the game could have ended much differently.
#HBC | Laundry
Grand Sage of Swag
I think there is some value in being right or wrong as well, at least in terms of a person's play. The person may ultimately flip town (because it's very possible townies can have bad games), but accurately analyzing a player's play first and foremost is often the biggest step in the game and one that I see a lot of people botch around here.
Being right follows under three points:
1. Am I accurately describing a player's play? Often times players will partially to wholly fail to describe what a player is even doing, instead going off memory or describing what they think happened rather than describing what actually happened and this is a serious issue to me. You need to be accurate in what a player is doing in order to describe why they are scummy. If you are not correctly summarizing a player's contributions then you are painting them in a bad light and a simple reread is going to expose that. It's better to get your facts straight than it is to throw something out there and see if it sticks if you throw enough buzzwords at the problem.
2. Do I have to do some mental gymnastics to make it scummy? Basically speaking, there's multiple motives to fit a single action and they're never consistent across games. I think the biggest example of this is posting less. Sometimes players do it because they're scum. Sometimes they're busy. Sometimes they drew a PR and are trying to keep a low profile. Sometimes they're simply changing their approach. Sometimes they're letting things play out. Calling someone scummy for having a low post count is a terrible thing to do because there's no obvious answer simply from the fact that they aren't posting. It's a non-tell at best and you would have to seriously spin it into a specific scenario that is probably not based on reality to have an argument. That's not a solid lynch.
3. Is it actually scummy? This is both based in game context and general scum play as a whole and it's important to consider things like that. Scum have a gameplan most of the time. Scum do things most of the time as a unit, so it's important to try to figure out their gameplan more often than not. Even the most disjointed ones have a gameplan--it's called bus the **** out of your mates and ride that to LyLo. It's important to look at how scum are playing as a team and to find a papertrail based on that. It's also important to note that while there is a general idea of what scum will do in a game, scum will do anything they can think of if they believe it'll help them win the game. As a result, you shouldn't follow preset notions of what is scummy and what isn't and read the game based on the situations you're presented.
And you wouldn't believe how incredibly efficient Occam's Razor is in this game. Use it always and forever because it has very rarely steered me wrong.
Being right follows under three points:
1. Am I accurately describing a player's play? Often times players will partially to wholly fail to describe what a player is even doing, instead going off memory or describing what they think happened rather than describing what actually happened and this is a serious issue to me. You need to be accurate in what a player is doing in order to describe why they are scummy. If you are not correctly summarizing a player's contributions then you are painting them in a bad light and a simple reread is going to expose that. It's better to get your facts straight than it is to throw something out there and see if it sticks if you throw enough buzzwords at the problem.
2. Do I have to do some mental gymnastics to make it scummy? Basically speaking, there's multiple motives to fit a single action and they're never consistent across games. I think the biggest example of this is posting less. Sometimes players do it because they're scum. Sometimes they're busy. Sometimes they drew a PR and are trying to keep a low profile. Sometimes they're simply changing their approach. Sometimes they're letting things play out. Calling someone scummy for having a low post count is a terrible thing to do because there's no obvious answer simply from the fact that they aren't posting. It's a non-tell at best and you would have to seriously spin it into a specific scenario that is probably not based on reality to have an argument. That's not a solid lynch.
3. Is it actually scummy? This is both based in game context and general scum play as a whole and it's important to consider things like that. Scum have a gameplan most of the time. Scum do things most of the time as a unit, so it's important to try to figure out their gameplan more often than not. Even the most disjointed ones have a gameplan--it's called bus the **** out of your mates and ride that to LyLo. It's important to look at how scum are playing as a team and to find a papertrail based on that. It's also important to note that while there is a general idea of what scum will do in a game, scum will do anything they can think of if they believe it'll help them win the game. As a result, you shouldn't follow preset notions of what is scummy and what isn't and read the game based on the situations you're presented.
And you wouldn't believe how incredibly efficient Occam's Razor is in this game. Use it always and forever because it has very rarely steered me wrong.
#HBC | ZoZo
Shocodoro Blagshidect
It's not just about what they're doing, it's also about what they want to do. What does their play accomplish? What do they want to accomplish? A lot of this can be found in wording, not just factual results and surface reading. This fits in with point 2 more, I guess.
Occam's razor is a good friend to double check what to pursue or not but more important with edge cases is to differentiate between anti-town and scum, both in results and intentions. If you can't, talk to people.
Getting a lynch should be methodical. Don't give more than you need to give (which, imo, is true for mafia in general), and engage in conversation where needed. A lot of people will panic to some degree (myself included) if they get a ton of votes for "no reason" and it's a great situation to get reads out of players (mostly those not participating and the one being pressured), which is a great pro of being ambigious (as Ryker talked about above)
Occam's razor is a good friend to double check what to pursue or not but more important with edge cases is to differentiate between anti-town and scum, both in results and intentions. If you can't, talk to people.
Getting a lynch should be methodical. Don't give more than you need to give (which, imo, is true for mafia in general), and engage in conversation where needed. A lot of people will panic to some degree (myself included) if they get a ton of votes for "no reason" and it's a great situation to get reads out of players (mostly those not participating and the one being pressured), which is a great pro of being ambigious (as Ryker talked about above)
#HBC | ZoZo
Shocodoro Blagshidect
I'd honestly recommend people to try keeping up quicktopics with thoughts if only for the experience. Overthinking things can be bad but having done it before is good.
http://www.quicktopic.com/47/H/nFMKRxHVZLve example by me
http://www.quicktopic.com/48/H/d7cHqtm9zyXK example by sd
old QTs but hey. Do note that my QT is largely experimental and shouldn't be taken as an example of good play.
http://www.quicktopic.com/47/H/nFMKRxHVZLve example by me
http://www.quicktopic.com/48/H/d7cHqtm9zyXK example by sd
old QTs but hey. Do note that my QT is largely experimental and shouldn't be taken as an example of good play.
Maven89
Smash Master
Yeah I 100% disagree, if some depressed child has to convince everyone here to let him into the game, swearing he really will play and won't abandon it, then just goes and abandons it while basically bragging about it, then you should not be "warned" for saying the guy shouldn't come back and inflict himself on us. It's not the first time and multiple people defended him, and he still just crapped over it. My point was that he shouldn't come back and make us suffer him. That's pretty damn minor.Consider this a warning, Maven. I won't tolerate such behavior.
I read the situation. Don't be an asshole.
Maven89
Smash Master
So, is making a commitment then saying "**** off" when people ask you to fulfill it being an asshole?
Saying **** off in response to comments like "So, he's blacklisted now" is not.
Maven89
Smash Master
Alright, I realized now that Gheb's warning was specific to his game and not a forum wide warning like I thought it was. Knowing that now it was pretty ****ty of me to bring it up again, in another thread, but I thought it was more official and hence open to discussion.
Last edited:
#HBC | Kary
Fiend of Fire
The Salt Factory™
It's a game specific warning and part of a new policiy on my part where I'm being REALLY strict on fundamental rule #1. I feel like dgames being kinda dead and games becoming less enjoyable it's partly the mods' fault for letting blatant insults just slide like nobody's business.
Thank you Gheb.
adumbrodeus
Smash Legend
me versus chaco in kata's game is a pretty good example of why trading walls doesn't work.Got any concrete examples from dGames?
In my next game my plan is to have a very explicit rule with examples of acceptable, borderline, and not acceptable things to say.It's a game specific warning and part of a new policiy on my part where I'm being REALLY strict on fundamental rule #1. I feel like dgames being kinda dead and games becoming less enjoyable it's partly the mods' fault for letting blatant insults just slide like nobody's business.
Working list right now is something like:
Acceptable:
"I don't like that plan and I don't think it's coming from a town mindset. Vote: Scum"
Aggressive/Borderline:
"That plan is scummy and just plain stupid. Vote: Scum"
Not Acceptable:
"That's so scummy. You are stupid for suggesting that. Vote: Scum"
I'd love to hear other's opinions on the examples and if you think it covers the idea well enough. Basically I'm trying to make it as clear as possible it's okay to be negative about what people say or think, but not on them as a person for thinking/saying/doing it.
#HBC | Gorf
toastin walrus since 4/20 maaaan
not acceptable as not acceptable is chillin. calling a plan moronic or things of that nature imo doesnt constitute a direct attack, and it kinda just unnecessarily softens the game. borderline isnt mean imo. but not acceptsble is chillin.
also i think having a guideline is dumb and should just be enforced when noticed/addressed by a player.
^see now was that offensive?
also i think having a guideline is dumb and should just be enforced when noticed/addressed by a player.
^see now was that offensive?
Orboknown
Smash Hero
Holy **** gorf was nice about something 
Simultaneously, i know i tend to use stronger language regardless of situation and its not really aimed at anyone in particular so i might be a tad bit biased in this situation
Gorf said it pretty solidly, but that middle section ain't really something you can snag a player for. There's probably been at least a handful of times where I (or we when hydraing) have straight up told someone"thats ****in stupid and you should feel bad [ @#HBC | Rake. ]
Simultaneously, i know i tend to use stronger language regardless of situation and its not really aimed at anyone in particular so i might be a tad bit biased in this situation
I don't like it. Making rules that prevent heated exchanges from escalating is one thing. Forcing players to sugarcoat their every thought is taking it too far though.
Aight, just trying to feel out if quantifying this shiz is even possible. Seems like it mostly isn't.
"Borderline" was always supposed to be acceptable. In my head it was an example of someone saying something "negative" that needs to be said for the game but isn't a personal attack and is therefore okay. In retrospect that section was poorly named.
"Borderline" was always supposed to be acceptable. In my head it was an example of someone saying something "negative" that needs to be said for the game but isn't a personal attack and is therefore okay. In retrospect that section was poorly named.
The Angry Mafia Game Nerd
MarshEE
You're saying that people aren't playing D1?
But...why? Do people like setting a precedent that allows scum to prosper due to a lack of effort or inactivity on Town's part? There's talk about players disliking the early game, but holy ****, guys, that's more often than not due to the lack of information. Information that's created by posting. Ask yourself how many mafia games have failed to generate some kind of content on D1 that can be used to work towards figuring out the big picture and the answer is not many. Intentionally not posting in favor of lurking is not only NOT FUN, but it makes your teammates have a difficult time of identifying you as such. Now WHY would you WANT to do that? Why not start off the game by pissing in everyone else's eyes while you're at it? ****, that'd probably be more useful to them than sitting around letting your bodily fluids dispense on the thread.
This has me thinking back to all the times that I rolled scum. You know what I hate as scum and pisses me off more than hearing a movie I'm looking forward to has cast Shia LaBeouf? An active Town who gives a **** about putting information (and thus, posts) out there from everyone because that leaves me with no place to hide! Now that's that **** that leaves me rather wanting to shove a cactus up my ass. It builds the kind of atmosphere where me and my scummates would rather yank out every hair out of our scrotums with a tweezer, blindfolded! It's intimidating and forces us to constantly adjust our strategy to a Town that is setting the pace of the game and level of acceptable contribution, and that's bad news for any scum team. It's more windows of opportunity for them to slip face first into a sinking hole filled with diarrhea vomit. I am sure many of you reading this can recall a time where you rolled scum and were alarmed that you had to play catch up with a Town that left you in the dust.
Why not play D1? What the **** do you THINK is going to happen? Are you going to bore the scum to death? Are you going to make them hate such an uninspired habitat so much that they are just going to get up and say, "Hey! This game sucks! No one is playing, so I'm just going to reveal myself and my partners to get out of it!" when they can just BLEND IN and make a game where Town should statistically begin with a disadvantage even MORE of a crapshoot? What's the protown motivation for such an attitude? Why is it necessary when you can make a few posts with some thoughts on goings-on, and, y'know, PLAY THE GAME YOU SIGNED UP FOR! Have you ever seen a football team where they routinely snap the ball then proceed to have half their players stand around scratching their asses while the other engages their opponents? If you have, you must have been watching the 2008 Detroit Lions.
The worst part about this is that it's easy! Make a joke. Pick someone's words. Join another player's vote. Ask questions. It's the most versatile phase of the game due to not being confined by the restraints that we subconsciously place on each other as the game proceeds. All it takes is a little cooperation and willingness to put yourself out there. Not posting on D1 is pretty much like going to a club, taking a dump in the corner, rolling around in it, then wondering why nobody wants to dance with you.
All you have to do is post. Play. Try. The worst thing that can happen is a Town losing in what would have been a fun game due to the high levels of participation.
To those who don't play D1 or underestimate the value of it, I'm watching you. I want you to know that you are making Towns everywhere that much more ****ty due to your negligence, and that's about as cool as dunking your balls in a coffee cup filled with hot magma. I hope you're proud of yourself. Let me catch you trying to pull this ****ing **** in a game and I'll...I'll...
#HBC | Laundry
Grand Sage of Swag
who the ever loving ****
edit: ee pls
edit: ee pls
Last edited:
#HBC | ZoZo
Shocodoro Blagshidect
bahahahahaah ive missd those
#HBC | ѕoup
The world is not beautiful, therefore it is.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 6,865
RVS is a useless part of the game that is but a segway, however, someone claiming to do something scummy for 'RVS reasons' is not a valid way to look at things. I can't think of many times where I consciously told myself that I wanted to push at something from RVS (and I have) and being looked at like I was in the wrong to do so.
I would argue that intentions are easily more displayed in the beginning of the game then later on, as people haven't gotten their bearings on how to act if they're scum and are more likely to slip up.
I would argue that intentions are easily more displayed in the beginning of the game then later on, as people haven't gotten their bearings on how to act if they're scum and are more likely to slip up.
Last edited: