Town should never quickhammer

This forum is for discussion related to the game.
AnonymousGhost
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: October 28, 2017
Pronoun: She

Post Post #50  (ISO)  » Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 pm

The takeaway shouldn't be "all quick hammers are bad, thus we should make a way to prevent them" because sometimes quick hammers can, strategically, be a good thing.

The takeaway should be "some people have this play style, so the rest of the players need to either adapt and treat L-2 like L-1 or push a PL on them". Anything else beyond letting players figure out how to handle a potential lolquickhamer with the tool's they're already given is too much moderator interference.
Talk Fast, Think Faster

BE LOUD! BE PROUD! BE ANTI-TOWN!

Invisibility
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: April 17, 2018
Pronoun: He

Post Post #51  (ISO)  » Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:29 pm

hello from now on i will truthfully claim my alignment at the beginning of D1 no matter what alignment i am
"invisibility is actually braindead" -- RadiantCowbells

join my region in nationstates

Irrelephant11
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: April 09, 2018
Location: looking into deep, clear water
Pronoun: He

Post Post #52  (ISO)  » Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:26 am

yes that will help

Also I misspoke, anyone who quickhammers doesn't die, they just have to truthfully state their alignment in the same post (makes it fair)

callforjudgement
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: September 01, 2011

Post Post #53  (ISO)  » Wed Oct 24, 2018 12:34 pm

Wouldn't that allow townies to use quickhammers to confirm themself as town?

As a corollary, any hammer other than a quickhammer would become incredibly bad play, as it'd be denying town the free investigation.

(The fun thing about this, as opposed to most public-town-investigation mechanics, is that you couldn't decide on a player to quickhammer in advance, because then it by definition wouldn't be a quickhammer.)
scum · scam · seam · team · term · tern · torn · town

vonflare
doot
 
User avatar
Joined: January 01, 2014
Location: underground space jail
Pronoun: He

Post Post #54  (ISO)  » Wed Oct 24, 2018 1:16 pm

In post 52, Irrelephant11 wrote:yes that will help

Also I misspoke, anyone who quickhammers doesn't die, they just have to truthfully state their alignment in the same post (makes it fair)

This is a joke right?
inanity is the spice of life

Irrelephant11
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: April 09, 2018
Location: looking into deep, clear water
Pronoun: He

Post Post #55  (ISO)  » Wed Oct 24, 2018 1:25 pm

as was 47, yes :P

Ectomancer
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: January 05, 2007
Location: Middle of the road

Post Post #56  (ISO)  » Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:18 pm

People who drag out game days to be unnecessarily long by suggesting that we ban quickhammers should be banned and quickhammered and then lynched several times over. Games that drag on kill more games than any quickhammer ever did.
I have a degree in bullshit. I have patents on entire lines of bullshit. So don't sit here and feed me a line of bullshit and think that I'm not going to recognize it as one.

This unsupported statement brought to you by the Anti-Supported Statement League of the United States and Territories (ASSLUST)

Psyche
mr. personality
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2011
Location: pacing the road to damascus
Pronoun: He

Post Post #57  (ISO)  » Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:34 pm

...How?
If I am only for myself, what am I?

Psyche
mr. personality
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2011
Location: pacing the road to damascus
Pronoun: He

Post Post #58  (ISO)  » Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:36 pm

id really like to understand how you could think quickhammering doesnt worsen games
i need to know whether you're just a troll or wrong
If I am only for myself, what am I?

Alisae
lolbalance
 
User avatar
Joined: October 31, 2016
Location: Cali~ (PST)
Pronoun: E (e/em/eir/eirs/emself)

Post Post #59  (ISO)  » Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:25 pm

In post 56, Ectomancer wrote:People who drag out game days to be unnecessarily long by suggesting that we ban quickhammers should be banned and quickhammered and then lynched several times over. Games that drag on kill more games than any quickhammer ever did.
True Fax
I play the yugioh TCG now.
Feel free to approach me on discord: Alisae#3438
I wanna get to know an Alisae! Part 1 | Part 2

Ectomancer
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: January 05, 2007
Location: Middle of the road

Post Post #60  (ISO)  » Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:24 am

In post 58, Psyche wrote:id really like to understand how you could think quickhammering doesnt worsen games
i need to know whether you're just a troll or wrong


Now you are trolling.
I have a degree in bullshit. I have patents on entire lines of bullshit. So don't sit here and feed me a line of bullshit and think that I'm not going to recognize it as one.

This unsupported statement brought to you by the Anti-Supported Statement League of the United States and Territories (ASSLUST)

ManateeDude
Goon
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2018

Post Post #61  (ISO)  » Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:03 pm

where we dropping boys?

Gamma Emerald
Survivor
 
User avatar
Joined: August 09, 2016
Location: The Sea Kingdom
Pronoun: She

Post Post #62  (ISO)  » Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:37 am

In post 29, Flubbernugget wrote:
In post 27, AnonymousGhost wrote:@Flubber - How'd that work?

Dunno

Let's throw some ideas around

My immediate one is an in thread VOTE: override that gets counted for some period of time (24-48 hours) after a lynch. Day continues as if the lynch never happened up to the already established deadline

There should probably also be a penalty for having your hammer overridden

This gives hammering much less weight
I’d suggest to add the person must be brought down to L-2 and following the override that player is Hated for the rest of the Day.
Get to know an Emerald! Stop by sometime, would you kindly? ♪
I love the sea! (Himiko told me to say hi and that she’s having a great time at the witch world!)
i would unironically put mafia loyal vigs in games for the record - Acidphoenix

Persivul
His Majesty the King
 
User avatar
Joined: May 04, 2015
Pronoun: He

Post Post #63  (ISO)  » Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:28 am

"Quickhammering should be a bannable offense." Sounds debatable.

"Voting within the rules created by mod should be a bannable offense." Doesn't sound debatable - but it's the same thing.

If mod wants to put a 24-hour waiting period for example on hammers, they can do that. If they don't, quickhammers are acceptable play.

Zachrulez
Jack of All Trades
 
User avatar
Joined: December 05, 2008
Location: Minnesota
Pronoun: He

Post Post #64  (ISO)  » Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:37 pm

It's absurd to suggest that the rules should change to accommodate risky play. Putting a player at lynch -1 is risky if you don't want an actual lynch. Why exactly should there be rules in place to prevent a lynch when you've played a part in carrying a wagon that helps lead to it forward? People are prone to quickhammers? Don't put a player at L-1 then.

Psyche
mr. personality
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2011
Location: pacing the road to damascus
Pronoun: He

Post Post #65  (ISO)  » Tue Nov 27, 2018 7:04 pm

Think you two are missing the point. The fact is that a lot of quickhammers are indeed against game rules because they plainly operate against the voters’ win conditions.
If I am only for myself, what am I?

Zachrulez
Jack of All Trades
 
User avatar
Joined: December 05, 2008
Location: Minnesota
Pronoun: He

Post Post #66  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:08 am

In post 65, Psyche wrote:Think you two are missing the point. The fact is that a lot of quickhammers are indeed against game rules because they plainly operate against the voters’ win conditions.


How's that? Because you say it is?

Psyche
mr. personality
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2011
Location: pacing the road to damascus
Pronoun: He

Post Post #67  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:28 am

what could possibly be the downside of hammering someone before they or other players are given a final opportunity to speak w/ the knowledge that a lynch is likely
is that a serious question??

think the most prominent answer is that it's usually impossible for the quickhammerer to be sure that decision-relevant but costly-to-reveal game information isn't held by some other townie to be revealed only when absolutely necessary; the guy at L-1 or someone off his wagon might wanna claim cop or mason or some other informative PR, for example?

these players with decision-relevant information might not know it's necessary to reveal it in at L-2 when a lynch is far from certain

ending a day without making sure your faction's ducks are in a row is reckless and often game-throwing in really concrete, inarguable ways and it just boggles my mind that there's any controversy in saying this
If I am only for myself, what am I?

Irrelephant11
Mafia Scum
 
User avatar
Joined: April 09, 2018
Location: looking into deep, clear water
Pronoun: He

Post Post #68  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:12 am

but sometimes town quickhammers scum

Flubbernugget
Survivor
 
User avatar
Joined: June 26, 2014
Pronoun: He

Post Post #69  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:33 am

Not lynching near deadline and quickhammering are two different things

Zachrulez
Jack of All Trades
 
User avatar
Joined: December 05, 2008
Location: Minnesota
Pronoun: He

Post Post #70  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 12:24 pm

In post 67, Psyche wrote:what could possibly be the downside of hammering someone before they or other players are given a final opportunity to speak w/ the knowledge that a lynch is likely
is that a serious question??


Talking you out of the lynch if they are scum for one. (I know you're going to disagree but it's a valid counterpoint.)

In post 67, Psyche wrote:think the most prominent answer is that it's usually impossible for the quickhammerer to be sure that decision-relevant but costly-to-reveal game information isn't held by some other townie to be revealed only when absolutely necessary; the guy at L-1 or someone off his wagon might wanna claim cop or mason or some other informative PR, for example?


If they have information to share that requires claiming they should surely be doing it before a lynch is potentially imminent?

In post 67, Psyche wrote:these players with decision-relevant information might not know it's necessary to reveal it in at L-2 when a lynch is far from certain


If for example I had a cop innocent on a player who's at lynch -2 I would just go ahead and claim the innocent there. Waiting until they are at lynch -1 is needlessly risky. If there was a quicklynch I would blame the role for not claiming more than the person who quickhammered.

In post 67, Psyche wrote:ending a day without making sure your faction's ducks are in a row is reckless and often game-throwing in really concrete, inarguable ways and it just boggles my mind that there's any controversy in saying this


Or those ducks you have in a row are playing perfectly into scum's hands and the person who quickhammers has a legitimate reason for thinking a player is scum and potentially turns the game around for the town. Just because such things don't fit your accepted worldview of game theory doesn't mean they aren't legitimate ways to play the game.

... and yes I've dealt with players who were prone to quickhammers and were known to be prone to quickhammering. If you're a good player you account for that. If you're not then I guess you post in mafia discussion demanding the rules be changed to accommodate your own flaws in your own play. (Because it's not just the person you're complaining about who quickhammers that's the problem. It's also you (in this I mean the town) for giving the quickhammer the opportunity to do so.

Are we really at a point where we want moderation telling people how to play and how not to play? (Other than just generally not being dickishly abusive to other players.) Kind of reminds me why I retired.

Psyche
mr. personality
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2011
Location: pacing the road to damascus
Pronoun: He

Post Post #71  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 3:45 pm

In post 70, Zachrulez wrote:(I know you're going to disagree but it's a valid counterpoint.)

no it isn't, geez
If I am only for myself, what am I?

Psyche
mr. personality
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2011
Location: pacing the road to damascus
Pronoun: He

Post Post #72  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 3:46 pm

In post 70, Zachrulez wrote:If they have information to share that requires claiming they should surely be doing it before a lynch is potentially imminent?

you understand that town pays a steep cost when its PRs claim, right?
If I am only for myself, what am I?

Psyche
mr. personality
 
User avatar
Joined: April 28, 2011
Location: pacing the road to damascus
Pronoun: He

Post Post #73  (ISO)  » Wed Nov 28, 2018 3:59 pm

In post 70, Zachrulez wrote:Kind of reminds me why I retired.

and a big reason i've retired is because it's exhausting having to hedge for and play around the possibility that my own teammates will do things that plainly hurt their odds of winning and throw away games that take many hours and weeks from dozens of peoples' lives to happen

At some point, shitty justifications for shitty play need to be acknowledged for what they are. The idea that mods should micromanage how their players play is obviously wrong, but on the other hand mods do have a responsibility to make their games enjoyable and satisfying to play. This conversation about ways to achieve that is totally appropriate. Honestly my preferred solution is just to hope discussions like these make people think about how shitty plays like quickhammering are.
If I am only for myself, what am I?

Zachrulez
Jack of All Trades
 
User avatar
Joined: December 05, 2008
Location: Minnesota
Pronoun: He

Post Post #74  (ISO)  » Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:04 am

In post 72, Psyche wrote:
In post 70, Zachrulez wrote:If they have information to share that requires claiming they should surely be doing it before a lynch is potentially imminent?

you understand that town pays a steep cost when its PRs claim, right?


Sure, but my philosophy has been not to depend on power roles to win games. It's really easy to allow scum to get away with fakeclaims when you take that approach.

In post 73, Psyche wrote:
In post 70, Zachrulez wrote:Kind of reminds me why I retired.

and a big reason i've retired is because it's exhausting having to hedge for and play around the possibility that my own teammates will do things that plainly hurt their odds of winning and throw away games that take many hours and weeks from dozens of peoples' lives to happen

At some point, shitty justifications for shitty play need to be acknowledged for what they are. The idea that mods should micromanage how their players play is obviously wrong, but on the other hand mods do have a responsibility to make their games enjoyable and satisfying to play. This conversation about ways to achieve that is totally appropriate. Honestly my preferred solution is just to hope discussions like these make people think about how shitty plays like quickhammering are.


No matter what there is a limited amount of influence you are ever going to have over a game as town. The entire point of the game is that you don't know how someone else is going to react to a vote or a wagon reaching lynch -1. I just end up shaking my head when I read a thread that suggests we ban a certain kind of quickhammer because the town has taken the risk of putting a player at lynch -1 without the intent or imminent intent of actually lynching the player. When I started here you just didn't do that because of the risks and now people are seemingly wanting the rules changes so they can continue to play like that consequence free?

PreviousNext
[ + ]

Return to Mafia Discussion