The Salt Factory - Mafia Metagame Discussion Thread

[#HBC | Nabe]

I'd have to discuss an ongoing game to respond to that tag properly, but I enjoy D1 as all factions (although especially as town). I recently played my first proper D1 in ages (since I play as a sub more often than not) and came away from it satisfied. Admittedly, I play more in my mind than I do on paper, but I always have feelers out. I engage people and try to prop up energy levels in D1 if the rest of the town is being **** (and if I'm town myself).

 

[Gargaglione]

A lot of the games I've played here a lot of people won't vote throughout the day and wait until deadline to rush a lynch. It's pretty lame honestly. Not the games, just that aspect because urgency, you know?

Should a townie be voting someone 99% of the time? Does Town collectively not voting make it easier for scum to hide?

 

[#HBC | Gorf]

i dont think a votes really worth putting out just for its own sake. but thinking of votes as just a means of lynching is pretty lame logic imo

 

[Maven89]

I consider it both, votes are both to give a firm stance on a person that people can read, as well as an attempt to kill the person or at least put pressure on them. Should be clear based on the post/game itself which is which.

 

[Nameless]

Should a townie be voting someone 99% of the time? Does Town collectively not voting make it easier for scum to hide?

yep. yep

otherwise yu get ******** "wait deadlines 2mrw? OH **** we gotta lynch some1!!" deadline lynches which are usually halfassed cuz niggazve lost focus on da legit scumtells spotted throughout da day by that point

yu also get townies who dive headfirst into da null pile cuz "what the **** has this guy even done?" or scum takin advantage of ****** restin on dey laurels

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

There's almost always a better way to use your vote, basically. Votes can distract town but also focus them, and someone voting you will almost always be a harsh reminder every votecount for scum. Not to mention, voting patterns is a great paper trail.

 

[#HBC | Kary]

zzzZZZZZzzzZZZZzzzzZZZZzzzZZZZzzzzZZZZzzz

With Kary's latest work, the visionary dGamer is once again challenging the boundaries of what is possible in a post. Well-known for using just his avatar as a response, its clear that this artist sees understatement as a rich vein to be explored. Here posting in the metagame discussion thread, we can see Kary's snoozing or tiredness as a critical reflection of contemporary SWF mafia games, succinctly expressing his argument while being careful not to discuss ongoing games. Whether this work is a product of life in a post-shake up sphere, or just the natural result of an ongoing dGames career, it remains to be seen. As ever with Kary's work, not knowing is part of the magic.
-- Sadie Snow, Noose Quarterly

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Please don't just bump threads with no content. That's just spam.

: /

 

[Xivii]

yep. yep

Coverin tracks?

 

[Orboknown]

Whats the general consensus on playing as and balancing an indy within a setup?

 

[~ Gheb ~]

There is no general consensus on it.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Here's some advice. Unless your indy is specifically needed, ditch him. There's no reason for us to have this unspoken rule in DGames that every game has an indy or two mafias or both. Indy's should be the exception, not the rule and balancing them suffers a lot from the fact that they are expected in every game.

Let the indy's burn.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I usually put them in to be an added thing for scum to think about and be wary of so they need to step it up and find them if they become a threat.

Otherwise I don't really add them just for the hell of it.

I love indies, but they need a purpose.

Unless it is one of my fun set-ups then I throw them in for lulz.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Almost all of my favorite setups in dGames history had indies.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Almost all the setups in dGames history had indies.

 

[Xivii]

Completely 'pends on the indy.

Here's some advice. Unless your indy is specifically needed, ditch him. There's no reason for us to have this unspoken rule in DGames that every game has an indy or two mafias or both. Indy's should be the exception, not the rule and balancing them suffers a lot from the fact that they are expected in every game.

Let the indy's burn.

You used to be mad pro-indy

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I also used to be absolutely terrible at designing set-ups.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Also, let me specify. Indies are not a bad thing. They're cool. They can add spice to set-ups. However, when your Town vs. Mafia interaction takes back seat in a set-up to indies without a damn good reason, then you've ****ed up. I see people get so hype about their spin on a SKiller that they just add a stock town and mafia in order to "mask" the presence of their indy. That doesn't work. If I sign up for a game in DGames, I assume there is an indy. All those tips about indy hunting being bad are useless here because we should actively be hunting indies so long as we are including them in 90% of set-ups.

 

[ranmaru]

Shouldn't our wincon be different if indies are going to be a major influence in the town?

 

[Orboknown]

Why would having anindy chAnge the wincon?

 

[Nightmare Before Hardbody]

Shouldn't our wincon be different if indies are going to be a major influence in the town?

nah. most win cons say "all threats to town" already n i dont even kno whyd yu consider emphasizing the inclusion of indies after rykers point of most of em bein shoehorned

 

[ranmaru]

Nah I never intended to put them in.

Thoughts on cases and lynching your scumreads? That's an area I'm weak at and have been experimenting with in previous games.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

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.

 

[Xivii]

The most important thing is simply how you present yourself. The less passive you are, the more influence you have. That seems obvious, but people often have this overall passive attitude in respect for other player's opinions & out of hesitance. This is not a bad thing in the slightest. One needs both of those things (respect and hesitance), because you're more often wrong than you are right. However, a balance of inquiry and assertion would hypothetically make the best player (I can't think of anyone whos done this adequately).

Do you know how many mislynches I've actively lead through out the years? Despite this, people are still willing to follow the courses I've laid out all because of how assertive I am in pushing it. While this is beneficial when one is actually right, it's completely devastating when wrong--which, as I stated, the latter is more often the case than the former.

Ran you've achieved this assertive type of play in a number of games before. Two that I was in: Doctor Who and Wal-Mart. You were a town leader in both. Mad assertive and unrelenting. In one, your reads were spot on; the other, completely wrong. You know how each turned out.

 

[Xivii]

Remember Amidamaru in Sleepover? During the game I had mentioned how you had a personality shift. During the first half, you were standard, goofy Ran. Passive and hesitant. The second, you were commando elite--Chip Hazard. It was like you were possessed by some spiritual authority. This is the kind of assertive state I'm referring to. Despite that fact that you were spewing out ridiculous theories, people still looked to you as a town leader in the game. If you want to lynch your scum reads, stop focusing on trying to form the optimal argument and presentation of the facts, and start trying to replicate this state of being / persona.

That's how to achieve your goal. Whether or not it's a good way to play is up for debate. Like I said, balance would make the best player to me.

 

[da marsh]

lynching your scumreads?

itz how yu present yur push

yu wanna place dat vote down like a bawse in a manner that makes it look like yu jus had a eureka moment. make da town think that yure da 1 who shuld b followed. ive seen votes placed down 4 dumb as **** reasons but cuz da player used momentum/good timing or acted like he ran **** ******* ate it up

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

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.

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.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

But the point is not to figure out if they're scum in this instance. It's to get them lynched.

Also, using it as a scum tell is going to be a hell of a false positive because EVERYONE is going to respond negatively to WIFOM they are being falsely accused of.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

"Tackling those points and not your main points"
how difficult is this you ****

also, gett them lynched by proving a real-time example of scumminess. idk man.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Get lost, Ramses. You and I both know how easy it is to get lost on throwaway points as both town and scum for a lot of people.

And your REAL TIME example of scumminess is so easy to call a simple mistake that it's stupid hard to stick.

"I haven't GOTTEN to the rest of your post because those were the most egregious misrepresentations you posted. You've simply been hounding me about them since."

That or some throw-away response to the rest before drawing you into defending something you shouldn't have said in the first place. When trying to get someone lynched, you never want to reach a point where you're defending your own points. They should be solid enough not to require any lawyering and pointing out "this isn't necessarily scummy, but I think it looks bad." Next thing you know, people are on your case for chasing weak points and trying to get someone lynched regardless of alignment rather than pursuing things that are scummy no matter what the meat of your case (buried for two pages now) said. Regardless of whether you can get them lynched after that, you could've simply avoided the entire situation.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

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.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Why would you mention them in the first place if they exist to divert focus from what you want people to be thinking about? That's exactly what I'm talking about. By controlling what you post, you control what CAN be focused on and remove all ability of the condemned to redirect focus.

Once more, why are you posting it in the first place when it causes more work for you? You need post only the significant points that will get more than half the remaining players to vote the player you want lynched.

As for how you approach the slot, that doesn't matter at this point. You have approached and interacted with the slot already at this point (or you haven't). If you have enough to put them under, the argument should stand alone with little help from you to get them lynched. How you interacted with them does not matter for the purposes of getting them lynched unless you were the other name on the chopping block.

Furthering your influence matters for further pushes and what to share to do that depends entirely on the playerbase. It does not matter for this push.

As for your last paragraph, are we talking about good players? Here I thought we were talking about lynching players. You know what the majority of players are? Don't worry about, I'll tell you. They're bad. Leaving them room to **** up and get themselves in deeper **** is almost as bad as letting a scummer out of the noose.




All of the things you're talking about seem to be about other facets of the game you are willing to sacrifice the strength of your push for because you're solid enough to hammer it through anyway. You cannot convince me that leaving people rope to climb out is going to cause them to hang themselves.

 

[Gova]

I think this discussion between you two gives more credit to Ryker's point.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

You cannot convince me that leaving people rope to climb out is going to cause them to hang themselves.

That's fine, because I'm not trying to.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

I think this discussion between you two gives more credit to Ryker's point.

then again, when did your opinion ever matter

 

[Gova]

The doctor consulted me when deciding what to do about the stick in your ass.

That's when it mattered.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

The doctor consulted me when deciding what to do about the stick in your ***.

That's when it mattered.

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

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Oh ****. Someone is salty.

 

[Raziek]

Settle down ladies, you're lacking Christmas spirit.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Oh ****. Someone is salty.

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.