S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008 - Page 5
Register

User Tag List

Page 5 of 49 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 15 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 250 of 2414
  1. ISO #201

  2. ISO #202

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    No worries, I already got 2 votes on me, join in!

    Point is there is some emotional attachment for me here (hence my statement about being "fair"): I am not a strong player, neither is Paopan (compared to some others, at least), think of us as LHF for a moment. So how can I ethically justify voting Paopan solely on the presumption that he will not be helpful to town (which is, admittedly, a fair assumption based on past games), when similar arguments could be made about me? Should I vote myself?? lol

    Why should one LHF(me) vote another LHF(Pao) solely because because they are LHF or not as strong as other players? Unless there is better information to indicate that Paopan is scummy (which I am sure there will NOT be from Pao D1), I do not want to vote him as I find it unethical (personal opinion). In the PoliticoII game that you were also in, same dilemma came up and I was defensive of Paopan when people wanted to lynch him for reasons that I disagree with (Pao being wild as usual, doing things like voting players that were already dead), some suggested he and I were scum together as a result. My rhetoric that game was that we would need to resolve Paopan later in the game, and as it turns out, we could have won by doing just that (as Town) if we had accurate mech info and thus realized that Paopan was scum, but town did some fake mech gambits that fired back, resulting in a loss. But to say that we should have voted off Paopan early because it's Paopan (50% BS, 50% gut, to use your terms) would be "resulting". There is nothing so far (and I am sure there will not be) in Pao's D1 to be a town-tell or a scum-tell.

    This is one reason I prefer anonymous games, at least one might feel better about voting off a "slot" (rather than the "player") based on their "play" in that game and not based on past game experiences. E.g., should we justify voting off a person merely because they lost 75% (made-up number for example purposes) of their historical games? I think not.
    I don't really care if players are strong or not, I care whether or not they can clear themselves via combinations of play, tone, actions, and reads. If they can do that, even if they struggle to "fit in" great, that's awesome. Basically anything that makes it harder for wolves to push them is good.

    Do you think you can do things that make it hard for wolves to push you?

  3. ISO #203

  4. ISO #204

  5. ISO #205

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanzie View Post
    I've also never seen ITAs, but I think it would be a bad idea to pass up 2.2 expected town-controlled kills.

    However, thinking about it, there are ways we can probably direct these kills. One proposal:

    We set a fake "deadline" at the time that ITAs become available. Whomever has the most votes at the end of that deadline, we have people in the thread shoot them until they die. Then we set another fake "deadline" for a second vote, say at 4 hours left in the day. Then again after that "deadline" whomever is the leading vote, we shoot them until they die.

    Assuming people are around to use their ITAs, this will likely give us two extra TKs today, with time to evaluate flips between these rounds of shots.

    -------------------------------------------

    Personally I think the above plan is major +EV for town. If people have other ideas, I'd prefer we discuss them relatively quickly, try to come to a consensus, then get everyone (or almost everyone) to commit to a joint plan.
    ITAs in a non-mash setting kinda scare me b/c we really need to be correct with our shots. In mashes there's 60+ players and ITAs really exist to weed out the chaff. Here there's bound to be less chaff to weed out so yeah, coming to some kind of consensus i.e. shoot top wagon at half-day, 3/4-day, 1 hr before EOD or something like that makes some amount of sense to me.

    Likewise, if there's not obvs wolfy people to shoot holstering is probably correct. Wise shots > fun shots

  6. ISO #206

  7. ISO #207

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by hollowkatt View Post
    ITAs in a non-mash setting kinda scare me b/c we really need to be correct with our shots. In mashes there's 60+ players and ITAs really exist to weed out the chaff. Here there's bound to be less chaff to weed out so yeah, coming to some kind of consensus i.e. shoot top wagon at half-day, 3/4-day, 1 hr before EOD or something like that makes some amount of sense to me.

    Likewise, if there's not obvs wolfy people to shoot holstering is probably correct. Wise shots > fun shots
    The plan I'm proposing will convert the ITAs into extra vote-dependent TKs. If people agree to this, one stipulation would be that any ITAs that are targeted outside of the two people we decide on as a group would be interpreted as a scum-claim.

  8. ISO #208

  9. ISO #209

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Boba Fett View Post
    I agree with hollow, but players will shoot whoever they think is scum even if we advice them not to.
    If enough people agree to my plan, I am going to @ everyone and try to get them to commit to following it, and explain that deviating from it will be interpreted as a scumclaim by the rest of the thread.

    I can be quite persuasive.

  10. ISO #210

  11. ISO #211

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanzie View Post
    I've also never seen ITAs, but I think it would be a bad idea to pass up 2.2 expected town-controlled kills.

    However, thinking about it, there are ways we can probably direct these kills. One proposal:

    We set a fake "deadline" at the time that ITAs become available. Whomever has the most votes at the end of that deadline, we have people in the thread shoot them until they die. Then we set another fake "deadline" for a second vote, say at 4 hours left in the day. Then again after that "deadline" whomever is the leading vote, we shoot them until they die.

    Assuming people are around to use their ITAs, this will likely give us two extra TKs today, with time to evaluate flips between these rounds of shots.

    -------------------------------------------

    Personally I think the above plan is major +EV for town. If people have other ideas, I'd prefer we discuss them relatively quickly, try to come to a consensus, then get everyone (or almost everyone) to commit to a joint plan.
    That is a rather solid proposal, I like where you are going! As a wise man once said, town's power lies in votes and the ability to lynch. Your idea is basically proxy to voting. We might even consider something like multiple-shots (e.g., via consensus, we determine which 2-3 players should shoot at 1 target - one with most votes, perhaps - and have all of them shoot in succession to see if any resistance from potential scum shooting scum). More thought is needed here, but this is a great start!

    However, I would advocate for employing such strategies more heavily beyond D1, once we have more information, unless we believe the first D1 flip (e.g., person with most votes whom we shoot instead) will generate useful information right away and allow us to pinpoint a quick 2nd target (e.g., if we have counter-wagon situations going on; but even then, from my recent experience D1 double-wagons are often TvT, so I am not sold that we should have what would effectively turn into a "multi-lynch D1" before we have more information from the game's progression). I would like to see as many town as possible live past D1 so that we may get more information from night actions. Informed decisions (D2 and later) are better than D1 less-informed (RVS-type) decisions.

  12. ISO #212

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by hollowkatt View Post
    ITAs in a non-mash setting kinda scare me b/c we really need to be correct with our shots. In mashes there's 60+ players and ITAs really exist to weed out the chaff. Here there's bound to be less chaff to weed out so yeah, coming to some kind of consensus i.e. shoot top wagon at half-day, 3/4-day, 1 hr before EOD or something like that makes some amount of sense to me.

    Likewise, if there's not obvs wolfy people to shoot holstering is probably correct. Wise shots > fun shots
    ++ townpts
    - a point for "shots are fun" (though you never said it was YOUR counter-part that you resonate with )

  13. ISO #213

  14. ISO #214

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Boba Fett View Post
    Seems like a good plan to me, my issue is that I see townies being more hard headed that’s wolves will and we will end up pushing someone who heroes a shot and most likely misses and is town who we unknowingly didn’t realize they shot a wolf until later on.
    Issue noted. I think we deal with how to cross that bridge when we come to it.

    For now, are you willing to commit to the plan (or some variant of it? I want to leave room in case people think of any way to make it even more +EV, but I'd guess having a good chance at 2 extra TKs and almost guaranteed 1 extra TK while removing the agency of people who agree to the plan (PoE plans could also work, but that leaves wolves with agency, which significantly decreases the EV of the plan) is going to be hard to beat.

  15. ISO #215

  16. ISO #216

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanzie View Post
    If enough people agree to my plan, I am going to @ everyone and try to get them to commit to following it, and explain that deviating from it will be interpreted as a scumclaim by the rest of the thread.

    I can be quite persuasive.
    In the interest of not being a victim to a pointless @ ping

    I am fine with the plan
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  17. ISO #217

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Boba Fett View Post
    I agree with hollow, but players will shoot whoever they think is scum even if we advice them not to.
    Very scummy comment. Creating plausible deniability in advance? Town players will not deviate from our agreed upon plan, our strength is in numbers and working together.

    -vote Boba Fett

  18. ISO #218

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    Also, 60+ player games? Do they call them Call of Duty or what? Jeez
    Some people I've heard play mashes exclusively.

    I never tried one because I'm fairly sure it will rupture my brain.
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  19. ISO #219

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    That is a rather solid proposal, I like where you are going! As a wise man once said, town's power lies in votes and the ability to lynch. Your idea is basically proxy to voting. We might even consider something like multiple-shots (e.g., via consensus, we determine which 2-3 players should shoot at 1 target - one with most votes, perhaps - and have all of them shoot in succession to see if any resistance from potential scum shooting scum). More thought is needed here, but this is a great start!

    However, I would advocate for employing such strategies more heavily beyond D1, once we have more information, unless we believe the first D1 flip (e.g., person with most votes whom we shoot instead) will generate useful information right away and allow us to pinpoint a quick 2nd target (e.g., if we have counter-wagon situations going on; but even then, from my recent experience D1 double-wagons are often TvT, so I am not sold that we should have what would effectively turn into a "multi-lynch D1" before we have more information from the game's progression). I would like to see as many town as possible live past D1 so that we may get more information from night actions. Informed decisions (D2 and later) are better than D1 less-informed (RVS-type) decisions.
    This is what I'd call a "PoE plan", and I don't think it is a good idea. Almost assuredly a PoE will contain townies, and leaving people the agency to decide between people in the PoE makes it so that the wolves can strategically target inside the PoE to increase the chances of us having townies die and wolves survive. I think a "TK plan" by trying to emulate a TK is a better play.

    The only difference between D1 and D2 aside from time is the number of flips we've seen. While I would like to have more time between consecutive flips, information wise, we are actually in better positioning if we get 3 TKs today than we would be going into the TK on D2 (because this way we have 2 TKs to analyze going into the D1 final TK, going into the TK on D2, we only have 1 TK and 1 NK to analyze). As such, I disagree, I think holstering today just forfeits the potential for 2 TKs without major benefit.

  20. ISO #220

  21. ISO #221

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    Very scummy comment. Creating plausible deniability in advance? Town players will not deviate from our agreed upon plan, our strength is in numbers and working together.

    -vote Boba Fett
    Fairly sure PQR is just >rand town at this point.

    I hardly see scum push against plausible deniability speculation and I personally have been pushed in the past over it by towns.
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  22. ISO #222

  23. ISO #223

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    I bet each of those games takes a couple years off of the host's life.
    Probably even more so when Mashes on MU are generally like 12/12 phase lengths or something like that.

    They almost always need a team of hosts because of it.
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  24. ISO #224

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanzie View Post
    Spicy take.

    I've got another spicy take. Any guesses what it is?
    What, does it relate to me?

    Hardly anything is spicy d1 imo because its d1 and anything goes

    except like me being voted d1 because that just almost never happens it seems, though in a recent game that did happen
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  25. ISO #225

  26. ISO #226

  27. ISO #227

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanzie View Post
    This is what I'd call a "PoE plan", and I don't think it is a good idea. Almost assuredly a PoE will contain townies, and leaving people the agency to decide between people in the PoE makes it so that the wolves can strategically target inside the PoE to increase the chances of us having townies die and wolves survive. I think a "TK plan" by trying to emulate a TK is a better play.

    The only difference between D1 and D2 aside from time is the number of flips we've seen. While I would like to have more time between consecutive flips, information wise, we are actually in better positioning if we get 3 TKs today than we would be going into the TK on D2 (because this way we have 2 TKs to analyze going into the D1 final TK, going into the TK on D2, we only have 1 TK and 1 NK to analyze). As such, I disagree, I think holstering today just forfeits the potential for 2 TKs without major benefit.
    So I have some thoughts here but I am not sure how much we want to put in writing right now, as we can't privately discuss our plans to catch scum. Should we/town continue discussing in the open or no? Consider that there is a potential for private chats in the future. If multiple ideas exist (i.e., variations to the strategy, and we might consider a different variation at a later time), we may consider "holstering" them (pardon the joke) to see if N1 private chats exist or not.

    I am not advocating for holstering, but I also do not want us to randomly (mis-)kill a bunch of townies D1 based on RVS.
    You say not much difference b/w D1 and D2: but we will also have gained potentially valuable night-action info from N1, when we go into D2. D1, people can't even defend much other than to claim their cards or defend reasons for which they are being scum-read. Let's say we get 2 kills and 1 lynch today. What information are you expecting to generate based off the "analysis" of those flips? Are you thinking to maximize the probability that at least one of those 3 is scum? I am afraid I am not following the rationale for taking advantage of a larger quantity of "uninformed" shots D1 than a lower quantity of "more informed" shots D2. Also, as hollow indicated, past experience indicates alignment deductions from how players used their cards, so shouldn't we aim to allow more players to use their cards N1 instead of getting shot D1?

  28. ISO #228

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanzie View Post
    The plan I'm proposing will convert the ITAs into extra vote-dependent TKs. If people agree to this, one stipulation would be that any ITAs that are targeted outside of the two people we decide on as a group would be interpreted as a scum-claim.
    basically this yes

    Quote Originally Posted by Boba Fett View Post
    I agree with hollow, but players will shoot whoever they think is scum even if we advice them not to.
    right, so we shoot them.

    Like ok, I've done plenty of mashes with ITAs and that's pretty much how it works. You work with your town reads to build a shots list, you shoot on the shots list (in this case leading vote getters or whatever), and if someone shoots off list they either need to claim why they have the information that they do to make that shot OR they go on the shots list.

  29. ISO #229

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    That is a rather solid proposal, I like where you are going! As a wise man once said, town's power lies in votes and the ability to lynch. Your idea is basically proxy to voting. We might even consider something like multiple-shots (e.g., via consensus, we determine which 2-3 players should shoot at 1 target - one with most votes, perhaps - and have all of them shoot in succession to see if any resistance from potential scum shooting scum). More thought is needed here, but this is a great start!

    However, I would advocate for employing such strategies more heavily beyond D1, once we have more information, unless we believe the first D1 flip (e.g., person with most votes whom we shoot instead) will generate useful information right away and allow us to pinpoint a quick 2nd target (e.g., if we have counter-wagon situations going on; but even then, from my recent experience D1 double-wagons are often TvT, so I am not sold that we should have what would effectively turn into a "multi-lynch D1" before we have more information from the game's progression). I would like to see as many town as possible live past D1 so that we may get more information from night actions. Informed decisions (D2 and later) are better than D1 less-informed (RVS-type) decisions.
    yeah because ok here's the shots list:
    player a
    player b
    player x

    we take shots, one at a time, on player a. when player a dies, if there are shots left we swap to b. when b dies we swap to x if there are shots.
    the key thing to take away from this is you've got to be able to trust the person compiling the shots list

  30. ISO #230

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    Also, 60+ player games? Do they call them Call of Duty or what? Jeez
    they call them Mashes, at least they do on mafia universe which is really the only place I've seen them. Some games hit almost 100 lol
    but you also have many culling mechanics and ITAs so by the time you get to D3-4 or so you're down to like 30ish

  31. ISO #231

  32. ISO #232

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by hollowkatt View Post
    I don't really care if players are strong or not, I care whether or not they can clear themselves via combinations of play, tone, actions, and reads. If they can do that, even if they struggle to "fit in" great, that's awesome. Basically anything that makes it harder for wolves to push them is good.

    Do you think you can do things that make it hard for wolves to push you?
    Hey, I was not defending myself. I was pointing out that it would be selfish and unfair for me to vote another player if the reasons proposed for voting that player are BS reasons that could be applied to me (even if to a different extent, if you go by Loldebite's percentages). And if I am an even better man, then it would be unfair to do so even if such reasons could not apply to me. But I can see it from the POV of strong/wolfy town players (better than me) that they can as easily vote off PQR as Paopan because each is not as strong of a player. I kind of know/suspect this from past games, because it is rather frequent to see Paopan or myself or other "policy" getting voted up early (the PoliticoII game I mentioned had me surviving a couple of tied vote situations, and I was town all along).

    Organized, professional wolves can push me, a less experienced player who randomed Town here. Historically, I find that it is other town players that push me when I am town (and the scum enjoy front-row seats to the show)! But of course, I will do my best, and it's a learning experience: another reason I don't want to push policy lynches is that people need the opportunity to learn and grow (myself included), and it is just not in my spirit to consider voting someone because they don't have as much online time (so are contributing less) or joke around too much. Each persona has a different character, personality, etc. Let's stick to legitimate scum-tells and reads, not "historically this player is 50% gut reads".

    With that said, do you think wolves would want to push a not-so-strong player? Or would they prefer to push lynches on strong players they view as a threat? I have my opinion on this, but tell me yours (not that I think your answer will help me read your alignment).

  33. ISO #233

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Loldebite View Post
    This is a very tempting offer that i sincerely wish i could reciprocate... I don't think i've recovered yet from my latest throw, if you're saying this knowingly this is very mean

    Anyone saying they dislike dark theme is scum.
    I just wanna make it right this time 😫
    Also, anyone who doesn't use the dark theme is scum 🤔
    Quote Originally Posted by AnassRhamur View Post
    Please don't post in the punished players section if you're not involved. Consider this a warning from Thugnificent. You got one Thug ticket. Collect 3 more of those and i'll have to issue a Thug Infraction. Collect 3 Thug Infractions and you get 1 Thug Misdemeanor Charge.

    Spoiler : :
    Citizen, Agent, Citizen, Vigilante, Citizen, Godfather, Citizen, Citizen, Voter, Elder, Mafioso, BackUpSleuth, Escort, Mafioso, Detective, Citizen, Citizen, Tailor, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, Citizen, TheJoker, Citizen, LadyGaga, Mafioso, Winston Wolfe, Detective, Citizen, Citizen, Masquerader

  34. ISO #234

  35. ISO #235

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by hollowkatt View Post
    I like that seanzie is obvs town so I don't have to worry about him. I also like the Martin take on PQR given the talk of PQR being a policy push from others Martin working to town read him takes away a chop wolf?Martin might like to have for later
    Please elaborate on this fragment: "... PQR being a policy push ..."

  36. ISO #236

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Good day everyone! It is I, Paopan back from the dead
    ~9 hours has already passed and I kinda like how the thread revolves around me for a bit.
    So what do we have here. Ohhh nice, I'm the top voted player again. Juicy~ To be honest I want to take the first ITA shot. My gambling sense is tinkling because of this. This should be included in every FM game.
    It's read list time!! Feel free to quote your respective slot and we'll go back to back from there on. ISO links are broken so faaaaaaaaaaak this is gonna be harsh

    Marshmallow Marshalt
    Hello Marshmallow, how dare you notice deathworlds vote whilst ignore mine???
    Are you creating some distance between us. I mean that's okay if you are scum!MM
    But I know how to read you so it's only a matter of time

    MartinGG99
    Hello. This is our first time playing with each other I believe (you are just an host before)
    Instead of parrying other players' opinions. Might be your playstyle I don't know yet.
    But tell me what do you personally think about PQ and Gikkle??

    StealthBomber16
    Sup fellow scum. Where u at? Talk to us later okay??
    If you lie low for more than 24h I will vote heavily scum read you okay??

    Mesk514
    Locking someone as town 5h after the game has passed. Pretty sus??? brooo.

    loldebite
    Be wary of this slot. This slot is going to vote me up later on and will use his/her "personal beef" with me as an excuse to hide the real motives.

    Also, -1 for blatant lies about me spamming, everyone here can refer to the archived games involving me and I will guarantee you I am not in any of the top 5 posters of all those games.

    Deathworlds
    Oh you voted me. It's okay, we need to know each other first.
    Sup man. Ur old player but we new to each other lah?
    NGL but I like your MM vote also.
    Guess we both got fooled by scum!MM in the past???

    Boba Fett
    Sup. I have seen any substance from you yet.
    Since this is the first time you are playing on this site (I'm currently assuming you aren't anon)
    Are you new or experienced in FM? Just sooo we can place our expectations from you ya know...

    Gikkle
    Your first post of the day is to vote me without explanation.
    Then your follow-up quote is to say hollowkatt is sus?
    Doesn't make any sense coming from you (as a strong player I believe)
    Currently, that's a pretty weak vote even in an RVS stage

    Hollowkatt
    Heya. Nice meeting you! Are you new to FM or only just new to this site?
    Give this lamb some info about your experience on this game

    DoctorZeus
    Hey! I think you are not new to FM. But welcome to the site.
    What do you think of me, Paopan?

    Takumi Fujiwara
    YOU ARE DRIVING AN AE86. CONFIRMED TOWN!!

    PQRnHack
    Just meh. When I was town and you are scum (with MM)
    On day 1, you buddied with me but even though I knew it was obvious.
    I like having friends on day 1, but I also hate that's one of the reasons why we lost as a town on day 2.
    Using that as a reference, right now, I am scum-leaning you but I want you to change my mind. We still have 40h or so~

    Seanzie
    I like and hate on how he is trying to establish himself as town leader. (Must be me!!)
    In any case, his clash with PQ and ITA idea deserves a +1 but I'll hold it for now
    Although this is my first time playing with Seanzie, so if he's a strong player, it's pretty good to have him as town.

    Now that I have placed my trap cards. I will end my turn

  37. ISO #237

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by hollowkatt View Post
    I like that seanzie is obvs town so I don't have to worry about him. I also like the Martin take on PQR given the talk of PQR being a policy push from others Martin working to town read him takes away a chop wolf?Martin might like to have for later
    I think you've confused PQR and Paopan.

    I don't think anyone said PQR was a policy chop.
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  38. ISO #238

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    Rules say that we can paraphrase information from private chat with the Host.
    Wait

    wha-

    19) Do not quote any private communications with me, including but not limited to content, timestamps, etc. You may paraphrase.
    Huh. I always thought people similar to him with respect to being strict on angle-shooting and what-not were against mention of host communications, under the theory that wolves are less likely to claim or mention host communications. I mean, Guilo has even made announcements in the past where the announcement themselves say to not talk about said announcement.

    Guess I was wrong.
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  39. ISO #239

  40. ISO #240

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    So I have some thoughts here but I am not sure how much we want to put in writing right now, as we can't privately discuss our plans to catch scum. Should we/town continue discussing in the open or no? Consider that there is a potential for private chats in the future. If multiple ideas exist (i.e., variations to the strategy, and we might consider a different variation at a later time), we may consider "holstering" them (pardon the joke) to see if N1 private chats exist or not.

    I am not advocating for holstering, but I also do not want us to randomly (mis-)kill a bunch of townies D1 based on RVS.
    You say not much difference b/w D1 and D2: but we will also have gained potentially valuable night-action info from N1, when we go into D2. D1, people can't even defend much other than to claim their cards or defend reasons for which they are being scum-read. Let's say we get 2 kills and 1 lynch today. What information are you expecting to generate based off the "analysis" of those flips? Are you thinking to maximize the probability that at least one of those 3 is scum? I am afraid I am not following the rationale for taking advantage of a larger quantity of "uninformed" shots D1 than a lower quantity of "more informed" shots D2. Also, as hollow indicated, past experience indicates alignment deductions from how players used their cards, so shouldn't we aim to allow more players to use their cards N1 instead of getting shot D1?
    I severely doubt that we get enough private chats to do any sort of town coordination outside of the main thread to any sort of strategic benefit. You do you on deciding what you want to share, but I'm going to try to plan ItT to find a strategy that maximizes town's chances while limiting scum's ability to mess with it.

    Sure, I kinda forgot about night actions, but meh... this is like confusing role-madness but worse, with lots of people who don't have good cards, so I would not count on night actions to just "solve them game". They will help, but unless someone gets lucky or has a really good card they use, we won't get tons of super important info from NAs. Sure, NAs can help, but reading people on play is important.

    The point of me not wanting to wait is to maximize the ratio of town-targeted kills to mafia-targeted kills. I think the benefit of this is self-evident.

  41. ISO #241

  42. ISO #242

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by hollowkatt View Post
    I like that seanzie is obvs town so I don't have to worry about him. I also like the Martin take on PQR given the talk of PQR being a policy push from others Martin working to town read him takes away a chop wolf?Martin might like to have for later
    Care to explain why I'm "obvtown"? I mean I am, but I also have TMI on myself... hmm...

  43. ISO #243

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by NotPaopan View Post
    ISO links are broken so faaaaaaaaaaak this is gonna be harsh
    Hmmm. Two of the links are wrong (stealth & brad).

    Woops. My bad. I made them before alignments were randed, but couldn't test them.
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  44. ISO #244

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by NotPaopan View Post

    PQRnHack
    Just meh. When I was town and you are scum (with MM)
    On day 1, you buddied with me but even though I knew it was obvious.
    I like having friends on day 1, but I also hate that's one of the reasons why we lost as a town on day 2.
    Using that as a reference, right now, I am scum-leaning you but I want you to change my mind. We still have 40h or so~
    My comments regarding you are truthful regardless of alignment. Integrity is important to me. Why is the burden on me to change your mind, when your only reason for scum-leaning me seems to be that I am capable of pocketing you via my defense of you as I did that one game where i was scum and you were town? You also know very well that you won as Scum against Town~me when I expressed similar thoughts that there was no solid lead to lynch you. You cannot cherry pick one case over the other and produce a scum-leaning assessment of me when you are well aware that I have expressed similar thoughts from either alignment.

    But now you have some things to change my mind:
    1. What prompted you to post the 13-player readslist this early?
    2. You seem to view me as scum-lean based on one of several past games in which I kicked your butt. You also commented to deathworlds that they must have gotten fooled by scum~MM in the past and, perhaps, that is why they voted MM. It is silly to assume that Town players (except, maybe, you) would vote based on past losses. You do know that as town, we must set aside prejudice and bias and play to win THIS game, right?
    3. Just so other people don't read much into this, I believe you referred to SB16 as "fellow" scum because you (scum)guys spanked me and Town in Politico. Correct me if I am wrong, and we have ourselves a two-fer

  45. ISO #245

  46. ISO #246

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by NotPaopan View Post
    MartinGG99
    Hello. This is our first time playing with each other I believe (you are just an host before)
    Instead of parrying other players' opinions. Might be your playstyle I don't know yet.
    But tell me what do you personally think about PQ and Gikkle??

    PQ is probably town as I've said.

    Gikkle I haven't really analyzed at all. My instinct is that all he has done so far is NAI; seems fairly standard Gikkle to me and not really >rand one way or another.
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  47. ISO #247

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    My comments regarding you are truthful regardless of alignment. Integrity is important to me. Why is the burden on me to change your mind, when your only reason for scum-leaning me seems to be that I am capable of pocketing you via my defense of you as I did that one game where i was scum and you were town? You also know very well that you won as Scum against Town~me when I expressed similar thoughts that there was no solid lead to lynch you. You cannot cherry pick one case over the other and produce a scum-leaning assessment of me when you are well aware that I have expressed similar thoughts from either alignment.

    But now you have some things to change my mind:
    1. What prompted you to post the 13-player readslist this early?
    I can post my reads individually, but I want to keep the thread clean as much as possible.

    It's not entirely a read list. As you can see I wasn't talking from a third point of perspective view (in which read lists are normally constructed). Rather, I target the players individually and was hoping to quote my remarks on them and start a conversation, just like you did


    2. You seem to view me as scum-lean based on one of several past games in which I kicked your butt. You also commented to deathworlds that they must have gotten fooled by scum~MM in the past and, perhaps, that is why they voted MM. It is silly to assume that Town players (except, maybe, you) would vote based on past losses. You do know that as town, we must set aside prejudice and bias and play to win THIS game, right?

    Yes, that I why you still have 40h to change my mind. I'm also pretty sure what you would say to me will also affects other's player view on you. So don't think of it as a burden, but rather an opportunity to convince also other players that you are really indeed "town". As for the silly vote, not really. It's an RVS vote so I'm pretty sure it's silly all the time. But there are some votes that aren't RVS votes that I have seen by far.

    3. Just so other people don't read much into this, I believe you referred to SB16 as "fellow" scum because you (scum)guys spanked me and Town in Politico. Correct me if I am wrong, and we have ourselves a two-fer
    It's not really a spank. But on that game, you are the top-train the entire game. It was us, scums who resisted your train. To be honest, that's on you. Not me. But let's drop this topic because it's already a past game
    *answered in read inside the quote. I'm too lazy to fix it.

  48. ISO #248

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by PQRnHack View Post
    Hey, I was not defending myself. I was pointing out that it would be selfish and unfair for me to vote another player if the reasons proposed for voting that player are BS reasons that could be applied to me (even if to a different extent, if you go by Loldebite's percentages). And if I am an even better man, then it would be unfair to do so even if such reasons could not apply to me. But I can see it from the POV of strong/wolfy town players (better than me) that they can as easily vote off PQR as Paopan because each is not as strong of a player. I kind of know/suspect this from past games, because it is rather frequent to see Paopan or myself or other "policy" getting voted up early (the PoliticoII game I mentioned had me surviving a couple of tied vote situations, and I was town all along).

    Organized, professional wolves can push me, a less experienced player who randomed Town here. Historically, I find that it is other town players that push me when I am town (and the scum enjoy front-row seats to the show)! But of course, I will do my best, and it's a learning experience: another reason I don't want to push policy lynches is that people need the opportunity to learn and grow (myself included), and it is just not in my spirit to consider voting someone because they don't have as much online time (so are contributing less) or joke around too much. Each persona has a different character, personality, etc. Let's stick to legitimate scum-tells and reads, not "historically this player is 50% gut reads".

    With that said, do you think wolves would want to push a not-so-strong player? Or would they prefer to push lynches on strong players they view as a threat? I have my opinion on this, but tell me yours (not that I think your answer will help me read your alignment).
    I push people I think I can get away with pushing, pocket the ones I can pocket, and NK the ones I can't manage or mitigate in any other way.
    Like a strong player with bad reads, they get to hang around up til they start to re-evaluate, which is generally a hallmark of strong players anyways. Strong players with accurate reads get killed.

    Now that doesn't mean I NK the ones that suspect me specifically, it might be a partner, it might just be "this is a player that with enough time can solve the game and get others to go along with the solution", so they have to go.

  49. ISO #249

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    The fact that Pao has a bunch of people he does not know (in terms of having played with) but gives like 1 or 2 comments on each and every one of them with an occasional yet unique question without seemingly focusing on one player or another

    seems at best odds with how I do or approach things as town or at worst an appeasing wolf doing low-depth interactions
    A.K.A "That One Idiot"

  50. ISO #250

    Re: S-FM 338: Deck Mafia #008

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanzie View Post
    I severely doubt that we get enough private chats to do any sort of town coordination outside of the main thread to any sort of strategic benefit. You do you on deciding what you want to share, but I'm going to try to plan ItT to find a strategy that maximizes town's chances while limiting scum's ability to mess with it.

    Sure, I kinda forgot about night actions, but meh... this is like confusing role-madness but worse, with lots of people who don't have good cards, so I would not count on night actions to just "solve them game". They will help, but unless someone gets lucky or has a really good card they use, we won't get tons of super important info from NAs. Sure, NAs can help, but reading people on play is important.

    The point of me not wanting to wait is to maximize the ratio of town-targeted kills to mafia-targeted kills. I think the benefit of this is self-evident.
    Fair enough, as this is my first Deck game, I am not sure how frequent private chats are, guess we'll see from NA. I am exiting out of a game that had like 7 lol.

    I am in support of any reasonable derivative/variation of what you suggested, but let's hear more thoughts, and, frankly, I need to do some thinking to see if I can come up with something better. Good to have you on my team BTW (90% - we have had cases where I got fooled because scum revealed town-optimal strategies like this and then proceeded to take control). Whatever we end up on, you should recuse yourself from being a primary decision-maker. But I think you've already done that by suggesting we utilize votes. But let's also make sure scum do not mess us up by swinging the votes, which would, in turn, alter our strategy for ITA directly as a consequence of their vote alternations. So keep an eye on that and remember to pay.


    Kinda forgot? Sussy! I agree about town-chosen picks, but how good are those picks going to be D1? Please do pay me a visit n1. Welcome to the madness.

    Yeah reading people on play is important, but how solid is that analysis on D1 compared to later days? EOT

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •