Metagaming

[Jenter Brolincani]

How many people do it, how crucial is it, and is it lazy not to? I personally don't have time to metagame much and I think that good players will be fluctuating playstyle anyway so it's too hard to use as a tool, other players consider it to be the only really important tool in Mafia.

[Primate]

Very useful but very time consuming. Use when you can.

[Ectomancer]

The most prevelant use of meta in games that I've seen is to inform players who dont know about site members who have standard non-standard playstyles that they are not acting unusual (for them). It usually happens in the first few pages.
I've seen people try to use meta's to justify votes, but I dont think I've ever seen an effective one. The only truly good one I saw was concerning a mod and what their opinion might be on a topic (setup speculation was happening). A meta was found with the mod explicitly stating an opinion on the topic.

[Patrick]

I agree with Primate.

[The Jester]

I agree with Yosarian2.

I disagree with Shea.

[Zindaras]

Metagaming is important. You need to know how the other players play, so you can get a good feeling on them.

I tend to just remember the games I've played before with people. I don't really read games I'm not playing in. Only if it's directly relevant to the current game.

And while metagaming is important, it is also overused as an actual argument, in my opinion.

[Mr. Flay]

I agree with Zindy, especially the last.

[Guardian]

viewtopic.php?t=7888

My stance-- Ignore it.

[Oman]

There are times where it is usefull/effective/neccesary to back up an argument. But it isn't the be all and end all.

[Thok]

People who want metagaming ignored get mad when I lynch them correctly for metagame reasons (and avoid bandwagons on townies/defend bandwagonned townies for metagame reasons.)

Unless you believe that the players in the games are identical mafia playing robots, there's a benefit to metagaming.

[Yosarian2]

Eh. It's useful if you have a feel for people you've played with before. Trying to go back and read other games that person was in generally seems less useful to me, it's harder to really get a feel for how their play is then.

It's not the only thing to go on, though. You can still vote someone for anti-town actions, even if they insist they always act in an anti-town way.

[Lawrencelot]

It's useful to understand weird actions from people, and although it might help you find scum, there are enough players with no consistent playstyle. I vary my playstyle for example, there are some cases in which you can use metagaming as a attack/defense on me, but in some cases it leads to the wrong conclusions.

[shaft.ed]

I wish I could meta everyone I play with, but never have the time. I have on occasion picked up very noticable tells that were correct. But I will only meta if it's near endgame , or if there's a player that I find to be overly scummy/townie. Also if certain behavioral outliers that could be tells exist in their play like they haven't voted the entire game, or they're joking around a lot post-random stage.

[destructor]

I seem to have the unpopular opinion that you should ignore it completely.

I might actually be lying about that though. Depends on what metagaming really is. In Mini 497 I went a read a few posts from dusterhan in other games to see if he really was as bad at Mafia as it seemed. Does that count as meta-gaming?

But even in that case, I didn't think the way he was playing was telling either way and seeing that he was consistent across games didn't give me a hint to his alignment. I just wanted to get an idea of how to interpret his posts. I hear other people talk about having 'good metas' on players and knowing their tells. I don't really have much faith in that sort of thing. If they're being anti-town or scummy, then they're being anti-town or scummy. I don't understand how their behaviour in another game does anything to change that.

[Patrick]

I think the attitude of completely ignoring metagaming will lead you to stringing up more townies than necessary.

I might actually be lying about that though. Depends on what metagaming really is. In Mini 497 I went a read a few posts from dusterhan in other games to see if he really was as bad at Mafia as it seemed. Does that count as meta-gaming?

I would class that as meta-gaming.

I hear other people talk about having 'good metas' on players and knowing their tells. I don't really have much faith in that sort of thing. If they're being anti-town or scummy, then they're being anti-town or scummy. I don't understand how their behaviour in another game does anything to change that.

Any particular reason why you think this doesn't work? I've used it successfully countless times. In fact, the only time we played together, I discerned the alignments of a townie and a scum on day 1, based in part on meta.

[Incognito]

Someone remind me to comment on this thread at a later time, plx. Thanks.

[Max]

I would probably get lynched every time without meta but I try and treat every game differently, remember we are meant to be in a different town every time, not the same one.

[Kelly Chen]

Someone remind me to comment on this thread at a later time, plx. Thanks.

Done

[JDodge]

viewtopic.php?t=7888

My stance-- Ignore it.

I find it strange that stance of yours happened after you realized that I have a consistent meta-read on you. And that you can't stand being lynched, thus any way of getting out of it is better for you. Because you are a sore loser.

To the point - meta-gaming is absolutely crucial. Having a good feel of the players you're playing with allows you a greater degree of control and insight into the actions of others. Ignoring it is possibly the worst strategy I have ever heard - you have this great tool at your disposal, why ignore it? Why use a hammer and a chisel when you have a jackhammer?

[Guardian]

If you want to use meta-gaming, that's fine. I'm not going to, I feel it is largely not beneficial. I'm not going to argue against your use of metagaming.

[Incognito]

Someone remind me to comment on this thread at a later time, plx. Thanks.

Done

Lulz. Thanks. Now if only I could remember what I was gonna say. ;p

[Danix]

I would meta,if i at least knew any example of "a game in a game "

[The Fonz]

At one point i think i was in four different games, in each of which Oman was being wagonned on day one for being bandwagon-y and votehopping. So metagaming can be useful.

On the other hand, I believe to date every metagame argument someone's made in thread either for

or

against me has been incorrect. Which isn't to say that people haven't got a correct meta read on me and kept it quiet whilst presenting other points as evidence against me, but it's worth bearing in mind.

[Ythill]

I think meta is an important aspect of mafia but can also be misleading and I believe that proper use of meta requires a certain knowledge about how people change over time.

I think meta regarding a player you've actually played with is far superior than that based on reads of others' games; that meta is less reliable than game-specific information and therefore more important in the early game; and works better to help you make decisions rather than arguments.

As I've said before, I'm on a one man quest to make meta and set-up discussions replace the random vote.

I also believe we've talked about this a lot lately.

[destructor]

I might actually be lying about that though. Depends on what metagaming really is. In Mini 497 I went a read a few posts from dusterhan in other games to see if he really was as bad at Mafia as it seemed. Does that count as meta-gaming?

I would class that as meta-gaming.

Okay, so I don't ignore it completely. But I think there was a slight difference in what I was trying to do there. I wasn't really reading into dusterhan's playstyle as much as I was trying to get a handle on how much he knew about the game.

I hear other people talk about having 'good metas' on players and knowing their tells. I don't really have much faith in that sort of thing. If they're being anti-town or scummy, then they're being anti-town or scummy. I don't understand how their behaviour in another game does anything to change that.

Any particular reason why you think this doesn't work? I've used it successfully countless times. In fact, the only time we played together, I discerned the alignments of a townie and a scum on day 1, based in part on meta.

Hmm, I don't think it can't work, and in fact, during Vegetable Mafia I thought the way Crub played in a Newbie 516 could have been used as an argument against him (defending alphachick the way he was defending Bookitty). For me it felt more like a slight affirming nudge than any solid evidence.

The biggest issue for me is that I don't think tells based on meta are that reliable. I figure that there's no reason a player can't change their playstyle either subtly or dramatically and so the actual manner in which they provide content isn't very revealing. I suppose the only out-of-game knowledge of players I'm interested in is how experienced they are and so what level of content I can expect from them. If that's really considered metagaming then I guess I'm not so opposed to it, but I'm not going to be looking for personal "tells" anytime soon.


How do people who consider metagaming to be very important/useful feel about playing with unknown (experienced) players then? Do they have an unfair advantage because there's no precedent to judge them by? How would you approach a game full of unknown players differently? Do you avoid playing with new players because you don't have metas on them?