The Salt Factory - Mafia Metagame Discussion Thread

[JTB]

Couldn't drawing someone that you want to lynch into a battle of walls a positive thing if you are confident on making the person look scummier through elongated confrontation?

 

[JTB]

And do you have an example of what xonar is suggesting doesn't work ryker? I know I've been away for a while from mafia, but I would think baiting someone into defending the weaker points of your argument and ignoring your main points would be a great way to lynch someone

 

[Maven89]

I think it depends on whether or not people read, and lots of people here seem to hate it when posts are more then a facebook post

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

J and EE in Pulp Fiction. J gets squashed because he gets drawn into trading walls after posting extra things he didn't need to add that EE could actually defeat lending the illusion that he had defeated the argument.

Using that as a way to make someone look scummy is a double risk.

1.) What's your reaction when someone calls you out on a WIFOM tell as either alignment? You likely want to challenge the slander to your name as town and you likely want to supply another possible explanation as scum. You can EASILY find yourself looking with confirmation bias at a townie that wants to clear his name.

2.) You can get yourself in trouble because it looks like your shifting the goal posts. You may have had this ingenious plan to bait the other person, but then they flip town (or you don't get the lynch) and the town looks at you and sees you using whatever you're given and just throwing it at the slot in an attempt to end the day rather than seeing someone trying to take what the other guy is saying and figure out his alignment.



However, neither of those matter in this case since the question was what to do to get people lynched, not what to do to discern their alignment.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I think it depends on whether or not people read, and lots of people here seem to hate it when posts are more then a facebook post

No one, I repeat, no one. Reads all the information better than a skim when you start trading light novels.

If you keep the post engaging and enjoyable to read, you can get most of them to read one long post in isolation. Never start trading novels if you want to get somewhere. Keep in manageable.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I can get into this argument with you but honestly I feel like my replies at this point would be predictable because you probably know exactly what I mean. It would be very becoming of someone who claims to have high intellect to not use the same arguments repeatedly when they fail to address my points. If you are somehow honestly convinced that even with proper post construction and follow-up such arguments give a player rope, then you're simply wrong. Ad hominems and intellectual dishonesty are part of your forte though.

With proper post construction you are not including things that can be defeated by even the most rudimentary prediction of counter arguments to come. I appreciate you trying to assault my character in this argument, but you're simply wrong here. This is about moving people and it is simply better to not give the person you're trying to lynch enough room to wiggle around and garner support for his side. Keep it short. Keep it interesting. Do not include things that aren't necessary. Don't even engage the person you're trying to lynch anymore. Your objective is to get the town to catch onto your idea as THE idea rather than letting it become part of the bouncing around topics ("What do you think of Xonar vs Ryker?"). Your idea doesn't catch when you get pulled into multiple posts explaining to others that, no, they didn't defeat the arguments that should cause their lynch. The longer the process drags on, the less certain your lynch is. That's why you don't include extra information if your objective is to get a lynch.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

It's pretty sad.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Basically keeping your points concise is the best way to get someone lynched because other people are too inept to extract accurate tells from long exchanges.

 

[Hardbody Warrior]

rykers advice works 4 most players. i jus thought it was hilarious how zozo was talkin **** n i had 2 endorse it

itz good 2 leave da opposing side as little wiggle room as possible wit an airtight argument where dey choke. ive seen ****** make GREAT arguments (adumbrodeus v chaco in bingo 2) against scum but still get ****ed up cuz da town misinterpreted their points as da scum spun wifom **** da other way. yu wanna b real n ask yurself is 'is it possible that dis ***** culd body me in argument if i engage him directly wit x/y point or that ppl will b 2 dumb 2 understand the superior side of an argument?'

that said i think some players CAN get away wit usin wifomy points so long as dey can make sure 2 not give em TOO much potential ammo. itz usually jus best 2 hav im not b able 2 tell yu **** so yu can tell im 2 shut their mouth n die doe. zozo is among these players hence me not taking issue with what hes saying

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

zozo is among these players hence me not taking issue with what hes saying

Yeah player meta is really strong on this site. It made the game pretty unappealing when you combine that with the fact that you realize that some of the more passive players remain static over the course of several games and you could essentially join a game a month later and feel like deja vu when people begin to bring up past games to either underscore or even blatantly justify their decision when placing a vote.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Was pretty funny though when you just had consistent policy lynches on players that were just impossible to accurately follow in terms of their thinking process because they barely invested themselves in anything they typed or any of their actions. Was just outright depressing though when you had a player deny that the targeted player was just a policy lynch but then basically state that said player is inconsistent when that's not an actual rational reason since that is their stat quo behavior. That was actually another unappealing factor for me personally. I hate delusional people and I hate b.s. because I deal with that enough in my real life.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

I'm just going to stop right there because I will get really pissed off if I go into details.

 

[Sons of Hardbody]

2 b fair admittance on the part of whoevers pushing da lynch opens them up 2 all sorts of criticism n potential to hav the tables turned on em "yu wanna lynch on policy but not scumminess? dats scummy" (whether this argument is valid or not is another beast n irrelevant to the point)

not that ive ever done such a thing

i feel yu doe

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

2 b fair admittance on the part of whoevers pushing da lynch opens them up 2 all sorts of criticism n potential to hav the tables turned on em "yu wanna lynch on policy but not scumminess? dats scummy" (whether this argument is valid or not is another beast n irrelevant to the point) not that ive ever done such a thing i feel yu doe

Yeah, no. That didn't happen.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

With proper post construction you are not including things that can be defeated by even the most rudimentary prediction of counter arguments to come. I appreciate you trying to assault my character in this argument, but you're simply wrong here. This is about moving people and it is simply better to not give the person you're trying to lynch enough room to wiggle around and garner support for his side. Keep it short. Keep it interesting. Do not include things that aren't necessary. Don't even engage the person you're trying to lynch anymore. Your objective is to get the town to catch onto your idea as THE idea rather than letting it become part of the bouncing around topics ("What do you think of Xonar vs Ryker?"). Your idea doesn't catch when you get pulled into multiple posts explaining to others that, no, they didn't defeat the arguments that should cause their lynch. The longer the process drags on, the less certain your lynch is. That's why you don't include extra information if your objective is to get a lynch.

I knew you would appreciate it, hence me including it.
Also, if anything, a stronger case makes for less of a process. Should the target try to drag it out by getting at your weaker points, then yes, technically that could cost a few extra posts, yet when played correctly should generally work in your favor if anything. A long process is not a bad thing per se if the process stays focused on the right subjects.

EE is also an outlier in a lot of scenarios, but I bet there's a right way to handle his wall replies, and compromising on the strength of your case is not the proper solution.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Yeah player meta is really strong on this site. It made the game pretty unappealing when you combine that with the fact that you realize that some of the more passive players remain static over the course of several games and you could essentially join a game a month later and feel like deja vu when people begin to bring up past games to either underscore or even blatantly justify their decision when placing a vote.

if Orboknown has another game like Swag Mafia I might just join games to policy lynch him until he fixes it.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

I also take issue with Ryker looking at lynching someone in such an isolated view. Strengthening your slot's status IS part of getting people lynched, and even if it wasn't, it shouldn't be ignored. Mafia is too holistic to look at individual aspects in isolation. I would argue that giving up lynch strength for the sake of other aspects is definitely worth considering and relevant to the matter of how to get a lynch.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

zozo is among these players hence me not taking issue with what hes saying

That's why I keep saying you can get them lynched THROUGH that if there's something else in it you want, but it's longer and harder.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I knew you would appreciate it, hence me including it.

LOL. You guy, you.

I also take issue with Ryker looking at lynching someone in such an isolated view. Strengthening your slot's status IS part of getting people lynched, and even if it wasn't, it shouldn't be ignored. Mafia is too holistic to look at individual aspects in isolation. I would argue that giving up lynch strength for the sake of other aspects is definitely worth considering and relevant to the matter of how to get a lynch.

Generally, I agree. I don't think most of what we talked about is something I endorse regardless of whether you're looking at a lynch in isolation or not, but I agree with the sentiment at least.

However, the question that was originally asked, and I'm paraphrasing here, was "What about lynching people? That's an area I'm not good at." Adding things that require more complex interaction sounds like a terrible plan for teaching someone how to get their reads acted upon.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

How would you suggest someone get good at it then? I'd day dive into the hard stuff and fail until you get it right. Getting good with an inferior version seems like a waste of time when most will find comfort in their mediocrity.

 

[Maven89]

I feel like this argument is entirely minor and if your play style would win/lose because of something as small as including WIFOM points at the bottom then you'd need to work on your play more.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

How would you suggest someone get good at it then? I'd day dive into the hard stuff and fail until you get it right. Getting good with an inferior version seems like a waste of time when most will find comfort in their mediocrity.

Because oftentimes a lynch is all that's required and looking at it in isolation is fine. It's not strictly inferior at all. There is a time to include more, mostly to play on the heartstrings or otherwise manipulate other players for future lynches, but there are also plenty of scenarios where you don't have to give a damn what others think or where including the fluff that you're mentioning isn't going to accomplish anything (and there's plenty of times where that's true).

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Because oftentimes a lynch is all that's required and looking at it in isolation is fine. It's not strictly inferior at all. There is a time to include more, mostly to play on the heartstrings or otherwise manipulate other players for future lynches, but there are also plenty of scenarios where you don't have to give a damn what others think or where including the fluff that you're mentioning isn't going to accomplish anything (and there's plenty of times where that's true).

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Mafia is too holistic to look at it that way. There will always be other factors that need to be considered. If the "fluff" I'm mentioning isn't going to accomplish anything, then other "fluff" (read: factors) will matter, which is part of the point I'm tryna get across.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

What? Are you saying there is ALWAYS something extraneous you need to post?

 

[Cheerilee]

Gifs only mafia should be a thing.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

What? Are you saying there is ALWAYS something extraneous you need to post?

There's ALWAYS extraneous factors you need to consider. Whether you address them in your post is one thing, but you should always consider them when making your post.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

So, once more, you're talking about the process of deciding what else you need to do, not getting the lynch.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

I think I know what's going wrong, I've been using terms that fall outside of your vocabulary. Do I need to explain to you what holistic means or can babby google it himself?

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

This is the part where Ramses escapes having to back down or offer to agree to disagree with insults.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

You continue to say that mafia is too holistic to look at in isolation and it isn't. Sorry. Bye.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I'm going to go do family things, but the last thing I'll say is that you haven't said anything to challenge the assertion I'm defending. Only including the points that are difficult to argue against makes it easier to lynch someone. None of this crap about mafia as a whole because sometimes, you just need someone gone. Am I wrong with that assertion in most cases?

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

None of this crap about mafia as a whole because sometimes, you just need someone gone. Am I wrong with that assertion in most cases?

Yeah sure, sometimes you just need someone gone. However, if that's your only goal then you're doing it entirely wrong. Then when considering the large array of goals you have as a player, you can't look at lynching someone in isolation, because it's one goal out of many. If you don't consider your other goals then you're gonna risk working against those.

I'd add another insult but you're not giving me much to work with, but it's the thought that counts, right? Sorry. Bye.

 

[JTB]

I feel as if I've missed some important things since I've been gone :o

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

Oh boy, lots of activity here.

Once again, I don't care what made you have a scum read. If you are confident enough to lynch, only mention the things that will make others want to lynch them. Don't use WIFOMy tells that the other guy can easily counter and draw you into a battle of walls. If you get stuck throwing walls at each other, nothing gets done.

I wanna add that this why you see players acting so carefully around each other in game when they suspect each other but have nothing convincing with which to lynch them. It's because they don't wanna just start throwing **** at you because they know you can't die because of it and even get called out on it themselves.

@#HBC | Ranmaru

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

Uh, disagree. You can mention off-hand stuff like that if it's clear that it's not your main point. If someone replies by tackling those points and not your main points, then that's another scumtell more often than not.

http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/28500000/Not-This-****-Again-anime-28533251-604-340.jpg

aw **** here we go again where ramses and drew have a misunderstanding and the two of them spend a week mad at each other.

That's not what he's talking about. He's talking about moving to lynch someone, not angling to get scumreads out of them. If you're moving to lynch someone, you should already have that. If you have a bunch of WIFOMy bull**** and soft little floater things you've thrown out, nobody's gonna bite on that lynch. I've had better built cases than that that nobody's gone for than this.

This isn't to downplay what you're talking about because that is also a very good tactic when you don't have much substantial and want to confirm a read or bait your scumread into giving you enough to lynch them, but you shouldn't be doing that when you're pushing for the lynch. I dunno what else you guys have argued about over the next 50 or so posts but this is really obvious...

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

That's why it's your job as one who tries to get a slot lynched to direct focus approperiately. You can mention these things, and then how big of a deal those points are is, when played correctly, your doing. Every issue you bring forth ^in that post can be moderated with proper post construction and follow up.

These smaller points do add up when presenting a scum case. Yes, sometimes they're WIFOM, but what you fail to consider is that people look at how you approached the slot too and paying attention to points like those can lead to major town points which should strengthen your push, as when a town-read is leading one, pushes gain more legitimacy.

If someone's taking that long to reply to your main points that it's buried two pages deep, it would've happened regardless. The shift of focus to yourself is simply a result of bad posting. A good player can properly focus town in directions that are fruitful.

Ramses this is the **** that we got into trouble for during F&L2. This is the **** I get into trouble for all the time. Whenever I say more than I need to, people ****ing love to hound me, misunderstand my objectives, then jump to conclusions about what I'm saying and refuse to listen when I tell them they're wrong (Gova in particular is incredibly good at this). Whether or not this is actually true, it is so easy for people to miss your point or reinterpret it in their own view on this site and everyone on here is good enough at doing it. By narrowing what you say to the important and most objective points, it becomes harder for this horse**** to happen.

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

You should watch your hands, I heard constantly jerking Ryker's **** causes blisters.

gogdamn

 

[#HBC | Laundry]

This got stupid. I skimmed a lot of the rest.

It goes back to what I said. The best example is a courtroom. When you are moving to lynch someone, you are the prosecutor of the case. Your job is to convince the jury (town) of a person's guilt (scumminess) and therefore move to lynch them. Sticking to the courtroom example, if a prosecutor presents that the defendant had been on the scene of the crime, that the person has a hobby of collecting firearms, he had a habit of wearing clothing that concealed his face, and had a reasonable motivation to kill the person, but nothing else and other possible perps that were also located at the scene, the jury does not have enough conclusive evidence to suggest that someone is guilty and therefore no reason to convict. That doesn't work. It's a lot of tangential evidence but nothing convincing.

Let's move back to that example. Let's say instead of presenting what you did, you presented that the defendant was at the scene but he held the gun as well and a camera angle showed him firing it but not directly at who. That is a lot more damning evidence and you didn't need the other three tangential pieces to convince someone of guilt. That's what Drew's point is. You cut out the unnecessary bull**** that can be argued and get right to the point.

This isn't to say what you're trying to say is a poor method. It's great to try to bait people into giving you reasons to lynch them. It's great to try to bait people into solidifying your suspicions of them or clear them up. It's just not appropriate when you are moving to lynch someone. You want to keep your case concise and to the point. Extra bull**** just makes people get tired of listening to you and question the integrity of your points as well if you keep throwing bull****.

I dunno what you're talking about with holistic nature of mafia because it's not even relevant to me.