Open 140 - Trendy and Subversive C9 v3 (OVER) before 781

[ekiM]

Just so everybody is completely clear on this: We have one power role and one backup. The power role was selected with 50% chance to be either a cop or a doc. The backup was selected with an independent 50% chance to be either a deputy or a nurse. This means we are guaranteed exactly one of Cop/Doc, but have only a 50% chance that the backup role corresponds to the power role.

The power role knows who they are, and that there is a 50% chance that if they are killed they will be backed up. One might be tempted to say that a potentially replaceable power role could be less concerned for their own safety than usual, but it's probably best to assume a worst-case scenario and play as normal. If threatened with a hammer, claim as usual. Counter-claim false power role claims as you see fit, but assume nothing if a backup is claimed.

The backup will know that they are the backup, and there is a 50% chance that the power role matches with them. One might be tempted to say that a potential power role replacement might take into account their own safety more than a vanilla townie would, but it's probably best to play as if you were a vanilla townie. If threatened with hammer, claim. Counter-claim false backup claims, but think carefully on the best course of action if a power role is claimed.

[ekiM]

I felt like explaining that because explicating the set-up was one of the few things worth doing when nobody had said anything. And it was worth getting it out there in case some people were confused.

I don't random vote because I think random voting is retarded.

So far nobody has contributed anything whatsoever to the game itself, in my opinion, including myself.

[ekiM]

It's best to play it by ear as we have no idea what the circumstances may be like, and in a game with more than one scum, claiming is beyond foolish as it will help the person's scum partner find the best NK -

Huh? There clearly are situations where claiming is the correct move, even if it will lead to your NK.

About this argument that's taken up a whole page: If a 'random vote' is one cast without any serious claim that the caster finds the target suspicious, then all the initial votes in this game were 'random'. I believe that would be the usual definition, and the one Empking intended. I'm not sure why AT thought it worth arguing the toss over a semantic point to try and accuse Empking of inconsistency.

You had a random vote? If it was random, why give a reason?

Vote: ekiM

For not random voting.

It's hardly random when you say "For..."

It was serious because you based it on someone's gameplay

This is just silly. It was clearly spurious.

Myself and another player have decided to nickname Emp "Little Guy" until he decides to play the game like an adult/rational person.

The irony is palpable.

I think this whole argument is a complete waste of time. Empking is right and AndyTony is wrong, but that doesn't make either of them scummy.

[ekiM]

The role claim position you have is a difference of opinions, I'd just prefer to stick to mine (though I'm open minded)

Well, no. You said "anyone who claims is beyond foolish", which is not open minded, and is also... wrong.

If a doctor is on the chopping block and someone is ready to hammer, he should totally claim to try and save himself for the day. He's probably going to die that night, but it's still better to use the lynch trying to find scum and force the scum to use their NK on the doc. I'm pretty sure this is well-established Mafia theory.

ekiM: It may be off-topic but I’m interested why you find random voting retarded.

Fairly off-topic I think, but I will aim for a concise answer. If it's the norm that every player places spurious votes initially, those votes are null-tells and cannot be used for serious scumfinding. Yet that's exactly what the RVS and the immediate follow up is - white noise, followed by trying to spot non-existant patterns in white noise.

I'd rather games start off with discussion of setup, strategy, tactics, previous experiences with similar games and players... anything other than trying to create meaning where there is none.

Also I'd like to retract the use of the pejorative 'retarded' because I know some people find it offensive to the mentally disabled.

You seemed pretty friendly to ekim's position on our set up and role claiming - - can you express your thoughts in detail on the subject and explain your idea on the pros and cons to claiming?



If you can't - - were you just agreeing with him to make nice?

This is just odd. My position on claiming is sensible and non-controversial. To try and insinuate someone is buddying up for agreeing with it is odd.

The sense I get is that AndyTony is trying very hard to initiate scumhunting in this game, but all his attempts seem weird to me. He's picking up on things I don't find scummy at all. I don't yet know whether this is because he has a different POV from me, or because he is arguing in bad faith.

Mod: Prod maadneet? It has been three days.

- maadneet prodded.

[ekiM]

You find planning ahead foolish? I would have thought the opposite belief would be more natural. As this is an open game we have been appraised of the set-up possibilities and can consider likely scenarios that may come up and good possible responses. Of course, circumstances may dictate a deviation from the plan, but that doesn't mean it's preferable to have no plan at all.

I also wanted to ensure we didn't have any unfortunate situations where someone claims Doc and is counter-claimed by a deputy, or similar slip-ups caused by not fully understanding the set-up and its implications.

[ekiM]

1. So are you against any action that might cast someone in a pro-town light? That seems so astoundingly backwards that I don't really know what to say. I offered my thoughts on the set-up, because I thought it would help. Other people were free to do the same. Or not.

2. It was a pretty general plan, dude. I'm not even sure it's worth calling a plan. More like "some observations on the implications of the set-up". It hardly precluded thinking about our options when it comes to it. Why is it a bad thing if we think a little bit about potential upcoming situations before they happen?

Does this "no plans, ever" philosophy apply only to Mafia or do you apply it in other walks of life?

[ekiM]

No. It's absurd to complain that someone has posted thoughts about the set-up and how best to play rather than issuing a pointless random vote.

I'm not interested in an inane semantic argument over what is and is not a plan.

[ekiM]

No. It doesn't matter to me whether you call it a plan or not, but I did do things --- analyse the set-up, suggest possible actions in certain situations --- that you have said you have a problem with.

It makes no sense to me that you have a problem with them, but apparently you do. So let's not pretend that you do not.

[ekiM]

What I meant by saying I don't want to get into a semantic argument is that I do not care, at all, if you use the word plan or not, and I am not interested in discussing it.

In my first post I said what the set-up was and what I think people should do in certain situations. You got a problem with that? Why?

If you think my suggestions might be malicious, try and explain why it's not good for the town to do what I suggest. Don't say "there's just no way to know!" --- exercise your judgement.

[ekiM]

@AndyTondy:

You say you are opposed to forming plans because it might narrow our minds to future possibilities. I asked if you apply this philosophy to other things besides Mafia. This is not a personal attack, it is a genuine question. I'd say in most human endeavors it's generally better to approach things with a plan you that are willing to update or deviate from as circumstances dictate than to have no plan at all. Why should the game of Mafia be any different?

You're also wary of players who post plans, because they may be scum. They may be trying to lead the town astray, or they may be trying to gain townie credibility for themselves.

When someone gives you advice, you should engage your critical faculties and try and determine whether you agree that it would be helpful to follow that path. If you determine that it would not, it may be that the advice giver was giving advice in bad faith, and that could be worth looking into. What makes no sense is discarding all advice on the grounds that it could potentially be coming from scum.

If you are concerned that a player is acting in a pro-town manner to curry favor with the town rather than out of a genuine desire to see the town succeed then you ought to be able to say

why

you think that is what is happening in that specific case. I, personally, do not see any need for a page of white noise before I start posting content.

Apparently you feel like I don't want you to express your opinion. I can't do anything to help you there, apart from to say that that isn't the case. Express away! I must warn you though, I can't promise that I will always find an opinion valid, well thought out, or immune from criticism. Everyone has a misguided opinion sometimes, and they should not be afraid to have people criticize them for it.

ekim lashed out at my logic, and personally attacked.

If you can't stand having your logic critiqued, you're going to have issues playing with me. I won't just accept someone's opinion as inviolate by virtue of it being an opinion. I call bad logic as I see it.

I haven't personally attacked you.

@Clu: I said I don't want to discuss semantic issues such as whether or not I was "planning" or not. I find it pointless. If you ever feel like I, or anyone else, am avoiding something that would be disadvantageous to discuss, don't hesitate to get on my, or their, case for it.

[ekiM]

ok

[ekiM]

Second that call for a vote count.

I would like to hear more from maad and emp.

[ekiM]

One doesn't need to be confident to place a vote. And you shouldn't be quaking in fear and resorting to appeals to emotion just because you're at L-1. Quicklynching would be moronic for town or for scum.

AndyTony, why do you take my explanations for my "planning" post at face value? Couldn't I just be lying about why I didn't random vote?

When reading post 87 I was surprised when UnclePain voted for AT. It seemed like his whole post up until that point was leading to the opposite conclusion.

Clu, if you had to decide right now whether AT would be lynched today or not, what would you choose?

Waiting on another post from maadneet.

[ekiM]

AT: Stop being a hypocrite, please.

Vote: UnclePain

AndyTony is obviously confused town and UP is opportunistically pushing for his lynch. Anyone disagree?

Mod: prod maadneet?

[ekiM]

I was getting a strong townie feeling from his belligerence and insistence on arguing a corner when nobody was agreeing with him. I couldn't see scum aggresively arguing positions that were so widely rejected by the rest of town. However I've just finished another game with him where he was scum and did exactly the same thing, so it's quite possible my read was flawed.

Unvote

.

I've actually been working from the assumption that Andy was town for quite a while now. Back to the drawing board, I guess.

Really really want to hear from maadneet.

[ekiM]

What the fuck? Why in the world would you self-hammer as cop? Self hammering as town is already breaking the site rule of playing to your win condition. Self hammering while claiming cop is just dumb; you wouldn't have been lynched after claiming unless there was a counter claim.

It doesn't matter that you're frustrated, that is not an excuse for behaving like a child and throwing your toys out of the pram. It's pretty damn ironic that you're calling everyone stupid while performing the worst play move I've seen since joining this site. You've let yourself get worked up and done the scum's job for them. That's terrible play.

And Clu could just be some idiot chick out to feel powerful and smart in the way her cubicle friends don't give her credit for around the water cooler.

I shouldn't have to point out why your misogynistic bullshit is inappropriate and deeply unpleasant. Please don't play with me ever again.

[ekiM]

Good game, scum.

Shame about AndyTony. He's now playing on the site as AA23, if you want to avoid him.

FWIW, I think Clu claiming with his investigation on Day 2 would've been a good idea. Would've narrowed down the possible lynch. Unless he investigated me?

Oh, and

Vote: UnclePain

AndyTony is obviously confused town and UP is opportunistically pushing for his lynch. Anyone disagree?

Mod: prod maadneet?

I don't disagree!

[ekiM]

Thanks for modding, Spoilum.