How do you figure that Masons would be easy IRL? It's difficult to allow them to talk at Night due to the fact that it would reveal their roles, given that everyone else would be there. Vengeful could be good.
I'd like your advice on something, being the resident mafia experts. I'm going to be running an In real life Mafia game. I have previously done so on one occasion before, though that was only two games for seven people, and one game for nine people.
I used the roles of Godfather/Roleblocker for Mafia, and 3x Vanilla Town with cop/doc for Town, with an extra Vanilla Town and a Serial Killer added for the nine-player game.
I'm expecting between 12-15 for my next few games, and I was wondering, what roles would you guys suggest for me to expand the setup with? Right now I just use playing cards to denote roles, with a cheat sheet to explain how the roles work. Once we hit 12, should I just add a third mafia (vanilla mafia) and a one-shot vig and another VT?
Is there any specific setups you guys think would be manageable for IRL which are a bit more complex?
Misting kinda beat me to it, but yeah I find this post hilarious. All this talk about meta being bad and yet it was in fact Stardust that brought the whole meta thing up, not me. I was pointing out the serious mistake in his reasoning.
Stardust: I asked you a question, and I want an answer. Why are you ignoring my question?
Right now Stardust feels really scummy for his strange, terribad meta vote, as well as ignoring my points / question about it. WoD also seems scummy, because it feels like he is working with Stardust (trying to get pressure on me while attempting to get pressure off of Stardust) and he is using awful logic.
Before I vote fore anyone, though, I really want to hear Stardust's response.
Once again, I have to say... wut?
Working with Stardust?
I don't even know who he is. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post, as I said, I took it at face value without understanding the context and went on a bit of a rant about meta.
You seem to be convieniently forgetting how this particualr meta got started, with Stardust voting Tom because he was acting the same whay he was in other games. What Tom is doing is pointing out that in those games, he was town, therefore Stardust's vote only makes sense if his reasoning is "Tom is acting the same as he does as town on purpose because he is scum", which is certainly not the argument.
In summary, Tom was defending against meta by pointing out the flaw with it.
This is so obvious to me, I have a hard time beliveing your not intentionally twisting it. Vote: Wrath of Dog
Wut... I was just pointing out why self-meta is bad. I was not attacking Tom. I was just calling out something he said which irritated me. As I said in my post, I don't know how it started.
Also: Bad news... I'm losing access to internet at work due to people being idiots, so I'm going to have to request replacement in this game, which is irritating.
I'm sorry guys, I was looking forward to playing in this game.
Perhaps you guys can have an Iso brought into this game at claim range
Why would you make a vote on me for acting the same way I did in the two games I had with you? In both of those games I was town.
It seems like you are aware of how easily I got killed those two games and are trying to make that happen again.
Self-meta is the worst kind of meta. It's not a good defense.
Please elaborate. What do you mean?
Does it make sense to you for person A to vote for person B based on the fact that person B's attitude is the same as it was in other games... in which person B was town?
No, it doesn't make sense for me to vote for anyone based exclusively on behaviour in past games, because meta is stupid.
And that's all I'm hearing from you here. You need to learn to defend yourself with something that isn't just "But I did it the same way this one time when I was town!"
Meta is stupid, because players play into their meta.
If a given player can play like they would as Town when in fact they are scum, and they can then point to games where they did the same "townie things" and everyone takes it as granted that they're town because they did certain "townie things they do every game", then it comes back to bite you in the ass if you give them a pass. It's even more dodgy and bad if they point to their own meta as a reason for poor play.
So, my summary is: Meta is a super weak tell at best, but if someone points to their own meta as excuse for poor play... It's lazy and no excuse for a proper defense.
Don't just say "I did it THIS WAY in that one game where I was Town". That's lazy.
Provide reasoning, tell us what you were thinking when you posted x or y. Honestly I don't even know why you are self-meta-ing right now, but it's a bad crutch for bad play.
unvote; vote maokun a little self-aware, aren't we?
Horribly self aware about what exactly? That he is new to the site so doesn't know the meta. Heck due to the crafters the same could be said of half the game.
Whats Maokan done to ping you so badly to sick a vote on him so quickly.
Unvote the crafters
What's with the white-knighting, yo?
Seems out of place since I thought I explained Maokun's retaliatory voting practices.
Very well, I'll stop with the jokey votes then if it's time to really start playing.
Unvote
Yes, this is my first official Mafia game so feel free to label me with whatever sort of noob Post-It notes you desire. Be sure not to consider me using humor or sarcasm as a tell in either direction, because that's how I always am 24/7. (Feel free to check back in any of my 10,000+ posts.)
It's way too early for me to get a read on anyone yet, and no, I'm not going to jump off a bridge just because everyone else is doing it.
One of my all-time pet peeves is people who commit to playing a game and then never show up to play it.
With that said, I'll place my official vote on whoever shows up LAST, between Seppel and captaineddie.
I got no anti-noob bias; you don't look confused here. I think you'll probably be good at this game, actually.
I do have anti-"please don't think I'm scummy if I do X" bias, though. And - for example - I haven't voted yet, but I'm not making a show of not voting yet. A lot of new players don't want to die early in their first game, so it could be that. On the other hand, it could be...
Oh I totally get that me posting so much already is putting a target sign on my back, from either townies willing to jump on the Kankwagon because I seem to be so scummy, or from nervous scummers worried that I might be too active and able to root them out.
That is not why I am voting you and not why I said I was voting you, fwiw
Anyway, with so many people (half of which are absent), it might be a while before we actually get a train going... Or if the noobs are too noobeh, then it won't be too long before we get this train wreck going...
Yes... we can pretty much expect a lot of scumtells to be null with all the new players in this normal... Thanks Kank...
You're welcome!
I checked back with all of the Normal Mafia games ran this year, and in every single one on Day 1, a townie was lynched.
The odds are that whoever everyone jumps on today will most likely be a townie as well.
I'm perfectly content with leaving my vote on the (currently) not-playing Iso.
If captaineddie ends up getting swapped out for Iso, then it will count at that time!
Why are you dodging? You looked up all the NORMALS in the past YEAR, that's a small fraction of the games played on this site and surely not enough to base reliable statistics off of, as I'm sure you're aware. So you are using this flawed logic as an excuse to steer clear of any incriminating vote history.
Also, there's nothing saying this game is a normal, it's got 23 people in it and there are strange new gender mechanics. This makes your research/justification even weaker. To support your stance, you would be better off researching specialities.
But yeah, this looks to me like dodging content in order to post safe things.
I checked back with all of the Normal Mafia games ran this year, and in every single one on Day 1, a townie was lynched.
The odds are that whoever everyone jumps on today will most likely be a townie as well.
Interesting! I know why it'd be 75/25 or so in favor of a townie getting lynched, but why do you think it's 100%? That's a lot.
Quote from Kankennon »
I'm perfectly content with leaving my vote on the (currently) not-playing Iso.
I don't think "because townies usually get lynched I'm not gonna vote for anyone" is very reasonable. Townies getting lynched day one lets you check the wagon for the weakest justifications, and helps you scumhunt. It's virtually always protown to lynch SOMEBODY. I think I remember you saying you're kinda new at Mafia, is that true?
Very well, I'll stop with the jokey votes then if it's time to really start playing.
Unvote
Yes, this is my first official Mafia game so feel free to label me with whatever sort of noob Post-It notes you desire. Be sure not to consider me using humor or sarcasm as a tell in either direction, because that's how I always am 24/7. (Feel free to check back in any of my 10,000+ posts.)
It's way too early for me to get a read on anyone yet, and no, I'm not going to jump off a bridge just because everyone else is doing it.
One of my all-time pet peeves is people who commit to playing a game and then never show up to play it.
With that said, I'll place my official vote on whoever shows up LAST, between Seppel and captaineddie.
If by any chance, I see that someone else strikes me as a better candidate before either one of them posts, then by all means, I'll reserve my option to change my mind at that time.
Once again this "I'll vote for whoever checks in last" is the kind of content dodging that get's my attention. It acts as an excuse for legitimate vote reasoning, it acts as an excuse to not vote until one of them shows up last and it acts as an excuse to provide much content
Also, there's a contradiction in this post. Kank agrees that it's time for the jokey votes to be finished with, but I take his "vote for the last guy in" to be jokey. Whether it's jokey or not, it's a problem with me, but if it was intended as a joke, it's more of a problem because of his statement previously in the post.
Lastly, Kank, to finish this post, you claim that you would change your vote if someone strikes you as a better candidate. What things are you looking for that would point more towards someone being scum? What are you watching out for?
Vote Kankennon
Kank is a noob, to be sure, but he's the more experienced level of noob. He's been around the site for a while, has played in clan games before I believe and has got the gist of mafia. I believe he's on of those players that really wanted to be prepared for what they were getting into when they sign up for mafia. That being said, I'm keeping the noob excuse in my mind, but I'm not giving it as much thought as I would others. Moving on...
Kank's track record so far this game has consisted of two things: voting for people outside the game and digging into old game information. In other words, he's playing for appearances. Given the fact that he's been trying to justify his non-important votes, I'm inclined to believe it's an attempt to seem active while keeping the heat off of him. Secondly, while digging up old game information may seem townie and productive, the hard facts are that any player, town or scum, has access to those old games and can post those things. Scum tend to like to do it more, because it allows them to keep posting things that appear to be content.
I believe that Kank is smart enough to know that he's not going to be able to lurk through this game. Because he knows this, he's trying to make frequent posts yet still make them safe posts things he's not going to step on toes with.
I would like to hear from Kank about these matters.
This I find hilarious actually. If someone hands you a dog and calls it a cat, are you going to believe it's a cat and preach that it's a cat, even though it's clear that what you have is a dog?
Compare that to this game. Yes, the title of the thread says "Normal". Does that mean it's a normal? Hell no. The true definition of a normal would be a 12 or 24 man game with basic roles and no strange mechanics for the town to worry about. However, during the course of mafia on this website, the definitions of the different types of games (Basic, Normal, Specialties and Mini), have become loosened to allow for variation in order to avoid game stagnation. Basics are 12 man games that are generally the same, basic roles with no strange mechanics. Normals are bigger games with a few strange mechanics. Specialties games are bigger games with vastly different mechanics and Mini's are basics that have gone the normal/specialty way.
What I'm saying is that while this game falls into the normal definition of the website, one would have to account for the game mechanic difference and research the normals, specialties and minis to do proper research.
That being said, while this game is called "Normal" it is in no way anything normal. For Kahedron to base information by only looking at previous normals and only within the past year, it means that he's making a flawed statistical analysis. I would be tempted to agree if he had looked at all games within a year or if he had looked at all normal's ever played, but my argument was that his sample size was flawed and he was looking too strictly at "Normal" games.
I'll end my statement with this: comparing one normal to another normal is like comparing apples and a swedish coffee table. They may both be "normal" but still have nothing in common.
I will also say that I didn't read the "normal" classification in the thread title. To me, those things mean very little, because the lines between Normals and Specialties is very thin and sometimes poorly defined.
As for the analysis on Kank, I'd say that Kank is true to his word in that he's trying to explore the world of mafia on these forums. Since this is his (and my) first game, I think an appropriate amount of slack should be allowed for us having no idea what we're really doing. I said earlier that a lot of scum tells will turn up null and I believe this to be one of them. And as Kank said, if this leads to our early graves, then so be it. It'll definitely be a learning experience.
I'm accounting for slack on Kank. Maybe not enough, but I'd like to see his responses. What I'm not going to do is not pressure half the town because of the possible noobieness of my targets. That gets us nowhere. So, because of the level of saturation of noobs in the game, I'm very close to throwing the noob card straight out the window.
I don't plan on lurking in any game ever. Since I don't have past games of my own to rely upon, I have to make use of the past games of others, and I found it numerically odd that so far every day one lynch in the 23/24 player Normal games this year have hit a townie.
I'll stop with the odds from other games and focus on the odds for this one.
We have 23 players.
12 are male characters, 11 are female.
Mafia history would tell us that 25% of these players are scum, and the rest are townsfolk.
If so, that would mean that 6 players are likely to be scum or evil (Gotham had 5 scum and a serial killer).
It would make sense for Arcadic to split the scum/SK into equal halves between the genders, even though in reality, they'd pretty much all be male, but this is a game based on an animated television series and anything goes in those.
So, lets say that there are 3 baddies in the men and 3 baddies in the women.
Right now the males outnumber the females, and if they wanted to, they could team up and wipe out all of the females and practically assure themselves of hitting half of the baddies in the process.
I doubt that Arcadic planned the game to operate like that, so let's not okay? (I'm playing a female after all.)
So the barns are on IB, Maokun, and myself is that right?
I'm not seeing IB behave any differently than the other games I watched him get lynched early in and flip town.
Maokun? No idea. I'm not seeing the guilt you've lain upon this person.
If y'all want me dead instead, then so be it. I'd be bummed, but I'd get over it. It would be a shame though, because I'd actually play the game as opposed to sit around and lurk.
Your assumption that there are 6 scum and 3 are male and 3 are female seems problematic for a number of reasons. Your reasoning from it also strikes me as spurious, because the order in which you kill people matters even if you do decide that it's 90% likely the scum are half-male and half-female - which is not the case.
Since we're gaming the setup a bit here, why do you think it is likely that there are an equal number of M/F scum, exactly?
Hitting half the baddies in 11 lynches is pretty horrible anyway, with nightkills included!
BUT ANYWAY, you're doing this thing through your posts where you're like "sorry I was really joking, sorry you couldn't tell, don't persecute me for making jokes!" If everything you say is half-serious this is a very convenient position for you, wouldn't you say?
Yes... you are bad at quoting... Perhaps you should proofread your posts more carefully since there was also confusion on what you meant with the slip that you knew more about the set up than you did.
Does that make it any better WoD?
Yep, that's far better. I'm glad you aren't going to become an Iso that makes wild accusations and refuses to justify them
I'm leaning GrickyTimmick and LampDwellr as scum on gut feeling. So don't ask for posts indicating such because it's just the feel I get from reading what they've posted thus far (so it's all their posts).
Try reading through their posts again, and quote any (or at least a couple) of their posts that gave you that feeling, then try to explain why.
"it's all their posts" is not reason enough, and it seems like you're just throwing suspicion at them without justification, which would be scummy if you weren't so new.
Triple post because I didn't quote WoD: Do you disagree with me? Is Kahedron bringing up my history of self-voting not a smear when it has nothing to do with the issue at hand?
That wasn't why I voted you.
You dismissing whatever he said about you (it was meta so I don't care if it's true or not, and have no inclination to find out... because meta is stupid) as a smear attempt is in fact smearing him, by attacking HIS credibility, by implying that he's being underhanded and trying to smear you.
Calling it a smear makes you seem jumpy, and is definitely an overreaction worth a vote.
Eron why the vote? Despite having a quote that is ultimately a barn to move the game on a bit your vote is nude. Of the pair why did you go for I.Baloth who merely agreed with the sentiment as opposed to Wessel who suggested it.
I can answer this, but I won't, since you addressed it to Eron.
@IB: I didn't read any more into Moakon's post than you attempting to explain away your self-voting habit thats got you into a few problems recently.
Nice smear attempt.
I self-vote. I do it in virtually every game I'm in. It's gotten me into trouble exactly once. I vote for myself during RVS because it's an easy way of checking in.
Your defense of Maokun and attempt to smear me with his scummy actions make me question your alignment pretty strongly.
Saying that is a smear attempt, is, in fact, a nice smear attempt.
Yeah, I don't actually have a self-sacrifice ability, and it is locked. I'd have tried harder to milk it, but really I didn't think anyone was falling for it.
It has a red lock, and a yellow lock, and allowed me (once unlocked) to each night kill any player who would try to kill me, but instantly I'd die if I was targeted with a non-killing ability.
So mine is one of those roles that could definitely go either way.
I'm actually pretty gutted that I was given a scum role in this game, it looked awesome, but I'm just so terribly bad at being Mafia.
I'd like your advice on something, being the resident mafia experts. I'm going to be running an In real life Mafia game. I have previously done so on one occasion before, though that was only two games for seven people, and one game for nine people.
I used the roles of Godfather/Roleblocker for Mafia, and 3x Vanilla Town with cop/doc for Town, with an extra Vanilla Town and a Serial Killer added for the nine-player game.
I'm expecting between 12-15 for my next few games, and I was wondering, what roles would you guys suggest for me to expand the setup with? Right now I just use playing cards to denote roles, with a cheat sheet to explain how the roles work. Once we hit 12, should I just add a third mafia (vanilla mafia) and a one-shot vig and another VT?
Is there any specific setups you guys think would be manageable for IRL which are a bit more complex?
I am all ears.
Thanks,
WoD
Working with Stardust?
I don't even know who he is. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post, as I said, I took it at face value without understanding the context and went on a bit of a rant about meta.
Also: Bad news... I'm losing access to internet at work due to people being idiots, so I'm going to have to request replacement in this game, which is irritating.
I'm sorry guys, I was looking forward to playing in this game.
Perhaps you guys can have an Iso brought into this game at claim range
And that's all I'm hearing from you here. You need to learn to defend yourself with something that isn't just "But I did it the same way this one time when I was town!"
Meta is stupid, because players play into their meta.
If a given player can play like they would as Town when in fact they are scum, and they can then point to games where they did the same "townie things" and everyone takes it as granted that they're town because they did certain "townie things they do every game", then it comes back to bite you in the ass if you give them a pass. It's even more dodgy and bad if they point to their own meta as a reason for poor play.
So, my summary is: Meta is a super weak tell at best, but if someone points to their own meta as excuse for poor play... It's lazy and no excuse for a proper defense.
Don't just say "I did it THIS WAY in that one game where I was Town". That's lazy.
Provide reasoning, tell us what you were thinking when you posted x or y. Honestly I don't even know why you are self-meta-ing right now, but it's a bad crutch for bad play.
"it's all their posts" is not reason enough, and it seems like you're just throwing suspicion at them without justification, which would be scummy if you weren't so new.
You dismissing whatever he said about you (it was meta so I don't care if it's true or not, and have no inclination to find out... because meta is stupid) as a smear attempt is in fact smearing him, by attacking HIS credibility, by implying that he's being underhanded and trying to smear you.
Calling it a smear makes you seem jumpy, and is definitely an overreaction worth a vote.
Unvote, Vote IB
Please don't judge me too hard on my recent posts, I'm liek totally town.
It has a red lock, and a yellow lock, and allowed me (once unlocked) to each night kill any player who would try to kill me, but instantly I'd die if I was targeted with a non-killing ability.
So mine is one of those roles that could definitely go either way.
I'm actually pretty gutted that I was given a scum role in this game, it looked awesome, but I'm just so terribly bad at being Mafia.