Also dislike this.
Looking to dip the toes in the pond.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:02 pm
by Vedith
In post 353, Xtoxm wrote:there we go
took longer than usual for someone to call me scum
You can rely on me.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:16 pm
by Extrapolated Eagle
@Shoshin
Spoiler:
1. Let's make this very clear. When I say policy lynching is good because it gets rid of half-wits, I'm talking about plays where people just self-vote because "you never expected that, did you?"
2. I'm going to limit my discussion on PLs in general, because it's becoming obvious you're trying to divert from the stupidity that was 298, but what I will say is that you're committing fallacies by saying "good players do this, therefore it is acceptable." And when I say that I want policy lynches back, I say it because I want to be rid of players who are going to troll, who are going to make dumb moves (intentionally or unintentionally) or who are going to blame their very bad play on being bad at mafia or VI. I believe there are exceptions to be made for the rule when thought is applied - policy lynches are for when thought is not applied at all, like what you did earlier.
3. I read a few games to catch up on site and saw some of the crappiest play I have ever seen before. Town players pushing people to claim PR when all they really needed was a crumb. People playing rashly and quickly without any thought at all applied. If you want to continue to play with this group of people, that's fine. I'd rather push policy lynches until I get players who care about the game and are going to pay attention to what's going on and try.
4. Don't make the argument "no one knows what is and isn't optimal." If you push for a claimed and confirmed town PR to be lynched, that's sub optimal. If you push for mass claims in newbie games (or newbie setups) that is irrefutably sub-optimal. If you hammer yourself as a town PR (or really for any reason as town whatsoever except with a few exceptions), that's sub-optimal. If you see players trying to get reads and you distract from it by voting yourself or starting a 1v1 with another player, that's sub-optimal (as town). If you disagree on any of these points, I'd rather you replaced out, honestly. There are so many other things that you can say are absolutely sub-optimal and anyone worth their salt will agree with you. So don't give me this "you don't know what is and isn't acceptable" pile of crap.
5. You and I have very different definitions of "strong town players."
6. Let's talk about your self-vote specifically, instead of going back and forth about hypothetical policy lynches. Your self-vote was bad. It was horrible. It detracted from the state of the game by leading to discussion about your wagon and distracting from things people had been doing to catch up, and it lead to the disassembly of your wagon. If you legitimately think your self-vote was good, I challenge you to re-examine yourself with maybe a little bit less of a conceited view. Your best friends calling you "MVP" doesn't mean anything to me.
7. I don't know who you are. Congratulations if you have a 75% winrate. I'm glad. For that to mean anything though, you have to give numbers of games played (4 is not impressive), and it matters what kind of games they are as well. I'm not particularly interested in hearing your description of how good you think you are at mafia, however, so once you get those numbers, feel free to keep them to yourself. I will question your results, particularly because the lack of thought put into the self-vote shown earlier baffles me.
Can you sell me on it?
I quite like DT and the only time I haven't seen him more vocal or maybe as more of an aggressive stance is when he was Scum in the dance thingy.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:24 pm
by Xtoxm
he also said that was his worst performance ever as scum
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:26 pm
by Vedith
In post 359, Xtoxm wrote:he also said that was his worst performance ever as scum
To see why anti-town behavior is counter-productive.
I am sure this is just one example out of hundreds of games. It certainly wasn't my first experience with it.
I am playing on this account so you'll excuse me if I don't get into a debate I've had too many times. Just posting a very recent and specifically relevant perspective as this us just a larger version of that game.
And yes town did win. But it wasn't because town self-voted. We won LUCKILY
despite
the self-votes.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:39 pm
by Shoshin
I've never seen a town lose because of a self-vote.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:41 pm
by Vedith
That wasn't luck, that was me and RC trusting in BuJ as town correctly.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:42 pm
by Vedith
Wait you are BuJ.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:52 pm
by Extrapolated Eagle
In post 362, Shoshin wrote:I've never seen a town lose because of a self-vote.
That's not a great way to push a "self-voting isn't bad" argument.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:53 pm
by Karmeleon
In post 362, Shoshin wrote:I've never seen a town lose because of a self-vote.
Regardless it's a different situation and not at a stage where a self vote loses the game.
BuJ, what's your selling point on it?
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 2:19 pm
by Shoshin
Response to EE:
Spoiler:
1. As I said before, if someone isn't making a good faith effort to win, the mod should intervene. But if they're making a good faith effort to win, don't PL them. As long as players are making a good faith effort to win, it's extremely arrogant of anyone to assume they know better than anyone else what's good/bad in ongoing games.
2. Your description of my self-vote is inaccurate. For starters, my self-vote didn't disassemble the wagon on me. The same people who were voting me before the self-vote are still voting me. Second, my self-vote didn't prevent anyone from catching up or from commenting on things that happened before the self-vote. Third, it wasn't my "best friends" calling me "MVP," it was people who didn't know me, calling me "atrocious," "shamelessly bad" during the game. The fact that they changed their view after the game is what I'm drawing your attention to. We have incomplete knowledge during the game, so you might call something "bad" that actually was "game-winning." Fourth, how can you say I'm "conceited" when I'm just asking you to reserve judgment until post-game? What's "conceited" about that? If it causes actual harm, I'll reevaluate. If it doesn't, I hope you'll reevaluate. Thus far, I think it injected adrenaline into the gamestate in positive ways. I've already refined my reads as a result and I believe others will too.
3. I have won a lot of games as town. The fact I mentioned "alts" should clue you in that it wasn't just four games. I take issue with the fact that you question my results without even knowing anything about me. And why would you question the results instead of yourself? I guess you don't re-examine your views when confronted with actual evidence, huh? Isn't that what you were calling me "conceited" for, not re-examining? To be clear, results are objective evidence. A win is a win. And not many players do it consistently. I strongly suggest that instead of questioning the wins, you question why they're winning. If they're doing things that you think bad, maybe you need to reevaluate whether those things are actually bad. Again, your understanding of mafia is incomplete. The game's too complex for you to pretend like you know the truth about what's optimal/suboptimal. Acting otherwise is the height of arrogance, and you're embarrassing yourself by projecting that arrogance onto me.
Defense of self-voting:
Spoiler:
1. Self-votes have different impacts depending on context. If I self-vote at L-6, it doesn't put me anywhere close to getting lynched. Thus, it causes no actual harm if I remove the vote long before I'm lynched. If I hammer myself, that obviously causes harm because I've helped cause my own lynching. But these are two different things. Context matters.
2. Harmless self-votes still create wagons & reactions. And wagons/reactions can be sorted into town/scum. Thus, harmless self-votes help town scumhunt, especially in situations where there's a lack of information (e.g. early D1).
3. The impact of self-voting largely turns on how other players react. If all the townies decide to PL the self-voter instead of sorting her, then self-voting becomes harmful. But the issue here isn't the self-vote, it's how other players responded. If players don't PL the self-voter, the self-vote becomes harmless. Ironically, self-voting only becomes harmful because of PLing (i.e. when it comes to self-voting, PLing is entirely circular in its justification).
Conclusion: self-voting is like drinking wine, whether it's beneficial or harmful largely depends on other factors that have nothing to do with the vote (or drink) itself.
Buj thanking RC for the win when RC self-votes more than anyone on the site is somewhat funny.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 2:33 pm
by Shoshin
Buj, why are you voting me if the self-voter in that game flipped town?
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 2:35 pm
by Extrapolated Eagle
I'm calling you conceited because you're justifying bad play with "My friends say I'm good at this game." Your self vote does cause actual harm. It did cause actual harm. You attacking me personally and building yourself up personally instead of discussing your actual play is the problem here. Stop trying to change the subject. Bad players making a "good faith" effort won't learn not to make those mistakes if they're pampered. Which is why I'm not pampering your already massive ego.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 2:37 pm
by Extrapolated Eagle
In post 368, Shoshin wrote:1. Self-votes have different impacts depending on context. If I self-vote at L-6, it doesn't put me anywhere close to getting lynched. Thus, it causes no actual harm if I remove the vote long before I'm lynched. If I hammer myself, that obviously causes harm because I've helped cause my own lynching. But these are two different things. Context matters.
2. Harmless self-votes still create wagons & reactions. And wagons/reactions can be sorted into town/scum. Thus, harmless self-votes help town scumhunt, especially in situations where there's a lack of information (e.g. early D1).
3. The impact of self-voting largely turns on how other players react. If all the townies decide to PL the self-voter instead of sorting her, then self-voting becomes harmful. But the issue here isn't the self-vote, it's how other players responded. If players don't PL the self-voter, the self-vote becomes harmless. Ironically, self-voting only becomes harmful because of PLing (i.e. when it comes to self-voting, PLing is entirely circular in its justification).
Conclusion: self-voting is like drinking wine, whether it's beneficial or harmful largely depends on other factors that have nothing to do with the vote (or drink) itself.
It's almost like I said "there are exceptions to this rule."
Your self-vote distracted from other things that were going on in the game and was not in any way "harmless."
Congratulations, you have discovered the victim mentality. My play isn't my problem, it's the people around me that cause my play to be a problem.
Draw a conclusion without testing your hypothesis and all you've done is make a fool of yourself.
In post 368, Shoshin wrote:1. Self-votes have different impacts depending on context. If I self-vote at L-6, it doesn't put me anywhere close to getting lynched. Thus, it causes no actual harm if I remove the vote long before I'm lynched. If I hammer myself, that obviously causes harm because I've helped cause my own lynching. But these are two different things. Context matters.
2. Harmless self-votes still create wagons & reactions. And wagons/reactions can be sorted into town/scum. Thus, harmless self-votes help town scumhunt, especially in situations where there's a lack of information (e.g. early D1).
3. The impact of self-voting largely turns on how other players react. If all the townies decide to PL the self-voter instead of sorting her, then self-voting becomes harmful. But the issue here isn't the self-vote, it's how other players responded. If players don't PL the self-voter, the self-vote becomes harmless. Ironically, self-voting only becomes harmful because of PLing (i.e. when it comes to self-voting, PLing is entirely circular in its justification).
Conclusion: self-voting is like drinking wine, whether it's beneficial or harmful largely depends on other factors that have nothing to do with the vote (or drink) itself.
It's almost like I said "there are exceptions to this rule."
Your self-vote distracted from other things that were going on in the game and was not in any way "harmless."
Congratulations, you have discovered the victim mentality. "My play isn't my problem, it's the people around me that cause my play to be a problem."
Draw a conclusion without testing your hypothesis and all you've done is make a fool of yourself.
EBWOP.
No amount of "what ifs" and special exceptions will convince me that your rash and unthinking self-vote was anything but that.
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 2:42 pm
by Extrapolated Eagle
I don't know how you can honestly bring up "mafia is a complex game and no one knows why or what is optimal and suboptimal" and "my play is optimal" simultaneously.
I want to push your lynch right now but I'm not going to, because I'm still trying to get responses for the things that I did earlier that you so neatly detracted from with your "harmless" self vote. And if you think your wagon will stay assembled, you have a gross understanding of what mafia is and how it works. It will likely meander around whatever it's at now. I highly doubt anyone will get a policy lynch off of you. And I'd be super curious to see how your reads have changed because of your self vote, since it was so useful to you.