Never self vote, it is always against your Wincon and is lazy.
I fundamentally disagree with this...
Just saying.
I hope you only fundamentally disagree in the case of scum gambitting, otherwise I’m curious as to why you think it’s okay?
Self-voting as town mislynches someone who scum would probably be less likely to kill, as well as allowing a player to stick by convictions (e.g. "I'm town, I'll prove it to you [before/after], lynch X")... Basically, it lowers the mislynch pool while lending some credence to your posts coming from a town perspective. Also, a town win does not exclude dead town players. If you think you're likely to be mislynched, and you aren't super worried about LyLo, self-voting is not completely unreasonable strategically. It's not the best strategy, or even a great strategy, most of the time, but it is not completely illegitimate.
Note: I still think that your idea of always lynching self-votes is perfectly reasonable, though as I brought up in the case of Wisp, it shouldn't feel like rewarding a tantrum.
Oh if I had been playing on my main I would never have let wisp or last get away with that crap.
But I’m general let me argue the counterpoint, even if you are going to be mislynched, self voting robs the town of potentially letting scum make a mistake. Take Az, he was at L-1 and by all rights looked to be the lynch. However, he didn’t self vote, and kaba came back and ended up taking a ton of heat and eventually getting lynched. If Az resigned himself to getting lynched and said “just heed my words” town wouldn’t have. At least not in the same way that he did.
Self voting as town as a strategic option is not ever the case, it’s an emotional option that people need to have better self control over.
On the flip side, it is an option, and inherently is only as bad as we assign value to it. Inherently, a town player shouldn't be lying, and sticking to your convictions and self-voting if promised as an action is reasonable. To be fair, it also opens up anti-town lines of play, but that's what makes the game interesting. The more options you add to town, the more options you almost always add to scum.
@ALL: What'd people think about me lying about my choice to lie about my ability? I tried some misdirection, but not sure if it ended up being counter productive at all.
It is possible that I have a stronger aversion to these things than most, but a large part of my game is analyzing the claims and deciding what fits/sounds right vs. what doesn't. Your claim didn't sound right and didn't seem to fit with what had been claimed so far, and was the primary reason I turned on you. I'm also not sure what we really gained. Like, I can almost understand leaving out the last ability. You would have no reason to think the Mafia had a role-cop and knew it already, and you could have theoretically got them with a surprise Doc protect, I suppose. But making up a 5 BP cost for the terribad "delay-a-kill for 1/2 a day" ability just muddied the waters for me.
I can't rightly say what I would have felt if you had claimed truthfully, but I feel like there was a much higher chance I would have believed it. Given we lynched Kaba that day anyway and then you got NK'd, I don't think it ended up affecting too much long term. But it might have.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
Tom town Turkey
You are a talking turkey. Undoubtedly, you get a bit paranoid this time of year, especially locked in a kill room with other people. Normally, you are charismatic and quite approachable, but in this situation people read your twitchiness and constant gobbling as a sign of nervousness and probably guilt. You know there's ways to get people to trust you, but haven't quite put your finger on it.
You have the following abilities:
Passive Abilities: Tryptophan: If you are targeted, the player targeting you can't use BP during the next night. Winner winner Turkey Dinner: If you die, each other player gets 3 BP, but can't use any abilities the next night.
Active Abilities: Induce Hunger (1): Target a player. If they were to target tonight, you will be their tare instead.
You start the game with 3 BP.
You win when there are no threats remaining.
This was another fun moment, especially because people thought I was serious. What’s more believable, Tom Town Turkey or Boner Checking Prostitute?
Oh if I had been playing on my main I would never have let wisp or last get away with that crap.
But I’m general let me argue the counterpoint, even if you are going to be mislynched, self voting robs the town of potentially letting scum make a mistake. Take Az, he was at L-1 and by all rights looked to be the lynch. However, he didn’t self vote, and kaba came back and ended up taking a ton of heat and eventually getting lynched. If Az resigned himself to getting lynched and said “just heed my words” town wouldn’t have. At least not in the same way that he did.
Self voting as town as a strategic option is not ever the case, it’s an emotional option that people need to have better self control over.
Self-voting as town mislynches someone who scum would probably be less likely to kill, as well as allowing a player to stick by convictions (e.g. "I'm town, I'll prove it to you [before/after], lynch X")... Basically, it lowers the mislynch pool while lending some credence to your posts coming from a town perspective. Also, a town win does not exclude dead town players. If you think you're likely to be mislynched, and you aren't super worried about LyLo, self-voting is not completely unreasonable strategically. It's not the best strategy, or even a great strategy, most of the time, but it is not completely illegitimate.
Shadow has the right of it here. No one will listen to your reads any more than they would while you were alive, if you self-vote to kill yourself and prove your alignment. They'll almost always listen to you less than if you're alive, because they will view it as poor control over your emotions, and you're no longer around to help clarify your argument, push it forward, and keep it on the town's agenda. So, dying in order to make a correct lynch happen is not going to work.
If I'd died, I really don't think Phoenix or Tom would have been caught any sooner. I was obviously wrong so many times while I was alive and townie, why would being dead and townie make such a huge difference? Occasionally if someone is just pummeling the entire scum team and they're NK'd people will pay a little more attention to what you said for half a second, but even then, they usually forget about what you were saying very, very quickly.
I'm also not sure why mislynching someone the scum are less likely to nightkill is supposed to be advantageous. Nor how decreasing the mislynch pool is supposed to a good thing. Yes it, decreases the mislynch pool...by killing townies! I mean, should the scum refrain from NKing because it will decrease the mislynch pool? Should they lynch their own scum players because it will decrease the mislynch pool? Obviously not! Because that's simply a distraction to achieving the far more important overriding objective: killing every last one of the scum with the very limited number of lynches you have available.
What matters is whether you killed a townie or a scum with the lynch. Period. Not information gathering. Not lowering the mislynch pool. Whether you kill town, or kill scum, is far more critical than any other rationale for the lynch.
Apparently, merely the sole fact that I prevented my own likely mislynch was enough to earn town MVP this game. It's kind of a statement to how shaky the town's analysis was overall that that was kind of the deciding factor, I didn't contribute that much to nabbing many of the scum, my big contribution was apparently just stubbornly refusing to die, but it does illustrate the importance of that. Stubbornly fighting to the bitter end to preserve lynches for the town helps your team. If Grape claimed his role, he probably lives, and someone else would have died. Fighting off a mislynch is a free vig and a doc protect rolled into one. If you didn't self-vote, maybe the scum never would have gotten so close to the end-game, because we could have lynched Phoenix or Tom instead. Any time that you secure a mislynch for the scum, or an Az-wolg, that is just about the worst harm you can do to the town's chances. It's not only a town death that moves the scum closer to winning, it's also the destruction of one of your few chances to take scum off the board. You HAVE to fight those tooth and nail, for the sake of your team.
DBS, I know there was stuff I wanted to talk to you about post game, but I forgot what that was. A couple things to help towards your improvement. Never self vote, it is always against your Wincon and is lazy. Be more careful with your claims. You were too fast to claim. I still feel like the night we both thought we blocked the shot my logic was better and you kind of lucked out, but as the game went on I felt like you kept improving and I hope you stick around. We need more high volume posters like you.
maybe the fact I'm triggering to talk to? lol. I get that a lot.
and well, that was the only time in my entire mafia life that I ever selfvoted. scum got town ignoring me by saying I was tpr or an annoying poster, and town (like Jenna/Shin) were off in their own little world, so I had to shake things up. claim case was similar. if you notice, I removed the selfvote quickly. it isn't against wincon imo, it garners trust, and isn't a loss if you end up flipping town due to townies still ignoring you - they learn a lesson and will work together more. scum selfvoting usually means a suicidal gambit.. I remember doing a similar 'selfvote' joke as scum, and it was actually a warning to NOT vote me if they think I'm scum, since I WOULD mess with the setup (and I did lol). selfvoting is not against wincons imo, and my style of winning is always via death, since I'm popular lynch material. only way that I lose is unless I didn't prepare for my death. as for the night actions, hmm... your logic made sense from your perspective but I didn't want to say it - mostly cuz I thought your plan would have scum siding you no matter what alignment you were and that was bad. I was acting~
but glad you think I improved. hopefully I won't be this crazy a poster in future games though. I'm just bad at handling myself, like how to convey my thoughts, but I'm fairly good at handling others (through gamestate or other means).
@ALL: What'd people think about me lying about my choice to lie about my ability? I tried some misdirection, but not sure if it ended up being counter productive at all.
I'm used to town lying about their abilities by now. it's just a very throwoff'ish gambit, but not a bad one.
the only bad thing is that you intended to CC Azrael when you flip... that can be misused by scum, like "if you who had such a role, didn't suspect a similar claim, means there's reason to believe there's similar roles in a setup".
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I still remember the days I prayed for the things I have now.
Oh if I had been playing on my main I would never have let wisp or last get away with that crap.
But I’m general let me argue the counterpoint, even if you are going to be mislynched, self voting robs the town of potentially letting scum make a mistake. Take Az, he was at L-1 and by all rights looked to be the lynch. However, he didn’t self vote, and kaba came back and ended up taking a ton of heat and eventually getting lynched. If Az resigned himself to getting lynched and said “just heed my words” town wouldn’t have. At least not in the same way that he did.
Self voting as town as a strategic option is not ever the case, it’s an emotional option that people need to have better self control over.
Self-voting as town mislynches someone who scum would probably be less likely to kill, as well as allowing a player to stick by convictions (e.g. "I'm town, I'll prove it to you [before/after], lynch X")... Basically, it lowers the mislynch pool while lending some credence to your posts coming from a town perspective. Also, a town win does not exclude dead town players. If you think you're likely to be mislynched, and you aren't super worried about LyLo, self-voting is not completely unreasonable strategically. It's not the best strategy, or even a great strategy, most of the time, but it is not completely illegitimate.
Shadow has the right of it here. No one will listen to your reads any more than they would while you were alive, if you self-vote to kill yourself and prove your alignment. They'll almost always listen to you less than if you're alive, because they will view it as poor control over your emotions, and you're no longer around to help clarify your argument, push it forward, and keep it on the town's agenda. So, dying in order to make a correct lynch happen is not going to work.
I beg to digress. any attempt at sincerity always gives pause, and how others react to that is telling. removing yourself from the game also leads to less obstacles for scum to hide behind, like how I ended up lynching a townread as town - not cuz they were scum, but it leads to more surety at scumhunting. if you really want to trump scum in their logic, or perfect play, just remove the problematic obstacles, then it won't feel unjustified/unfair to have them in PoE over other 'scummy' players. the only way scum ever seem to worm out of a lynch is by saying someone else is scummier, and that is literally impossible to talk against, so "mislynch to win" is a viable tactic (at least for me).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I still remember the days I prayed for the things I have now.
I beg to digress. any attempt at sincerity always gives pause, and how others react to that is telling. removing yourself from the game also leads to less obstacles for scum to hide behind, like how I ended up lynching a townread as town - not cuz they were scum, but it leads to more surety at scumhunting. if you really want to trump scum in their logic, or perfect play, just remove the problematic obstacles, then it won't feel unjustified/unfair to have them in PoE over other 'scummy' players. the only way scum ever seem to worm out of a lynch is by saying someone else is scummier, and that is literally impossible to talk against, so "mislynch to win" is a viable tactic (at least for me).
Sincerity can help you be read correctly, yes. But self-voting for a hammer, or putting yourself in a position to be hammered? That would defeat the entire purpose of the sincerity tell, because at that point, no one can act upon it.
There is no such thing as "mislynch to win". The town is perfectly fine if it lynches nothing and no one but scum. No innocents must be killed in order to achieve victory. Yes, the town can win in spite of townie lynches, and build off of mistakes made, but I've never seen a situation where the town was better off because they lynched a townie over scum, except in the occasional weird role-based scenario.
I agree with doing your best each day to lynch scum. The Iso lynch was dumb, in my opinion. One because that ability could definitely have been on scum, and two, Iso wasn't fully paying attention, but even more than that is three, that he wasn't the best person to lynch to solve the game. Iso's lynch really didn't say much about who was on it, especially since it was being done for "towny" reasons. Any scum could've jumped on and used the excuse that Iso just had to die to test his ability, and that really hurts the vote analysis.
I didn't play great this game, but I was glad I defended Az when I did. *shrug* Paranoia and second-guessing always get to me way more than it should playing mafia.
I beg to digress. any attempt at sincerity always gives pause, and how others react to that is telling. removing yourself from the game also leads to less obstacles for scum to hide behind, like how I ended up lynching a townread as town - not cuz they were scum, but it leads to more surety at scumhunting. if you really want to trump scum in their logic, or perfect play, just remove the problematic obstacles, then it won't feel unjustified/unfair to have them in PoE over other 'scummy' players. the only way scum ever seem to worm out of a lynch is by saying someone else is scummier, and that is literally impossible to talk against, so "mislynch to win" is a viable tactic (at least for me).
Sincerity can help you be read correctly, yes. But self-voting for a hammer, or putting yourself in a position to be hammered? That would defeat the entire purpose of the sincerity tell, because at that point, no one can act upon it.
There is no such thing as "mislynch to win". The town is perfectly fine if it lynches nothing and no one but scum. No innocents must be killed in order to achieve victory. Yes, the town can win in spite of townie lynches, and build off of mistakes made, but I've never seen a situation where the town was better off because they lynched a townie over scum, except in the occasional weird role-based scenario.
overall... town have their uses in mislynching, just as much as scum have uses in their lynching/bussing.
besides, if we didn't try to hammer Iso, it might've been harder to consolidate on Phoenix on the long run. it was rather evident in the previous phase that our votes were scattered/disagreeing.
then again, I'm just an unconventional strategist.. and think in terms of dying.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I still remember the days I prayed for the things I have now.
Wagons against town, fine. Actual mislynches, no thank you.
not sure if I see a downside of it. if vigs can be useful in offing problematic townies, it should be the same for lynching. also, pushing a mislynch allows you some kind of control over who dies, instead of leaving it entirely up to scum.
if scum always NK the actives or townreads, the field could end up dominated by chaos in the end - in order to resolve that situation, mislynching a problematic town (or someone who won't be trusted) can be rewarding on the long run, when consolidating votes near end-game is important.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I still remember the days I prayed for the things I have now.
The town always has control over who dies, mislynching doesn't change that. However, killing the scum quickly ensures you never even get near the endgame situation where an unreliable townie can do damage.
Townie vigs misfiring into the POE at already-claimed players can often be more beneficial than if they do not fire at all, similar to how a mislynch is preferable to a no lynch. But a town vig hitting scum is also preferable to hitting town.
There are plenty of silver linings to killing townies with a lynch, but they're outweighed by the fact that you're getting derailed from your primary objective in the process and moving the scum significantly closer to winning. The scum typically need only 4 or 5 mislynches to win, so each mislynch gets them massively closer to their objective. The consolation prizes just don't come close to equalling out that damage.
What scum team ever says, hey, to prevent the town from mislynching that townie, we should get the town to lynch one of our mafia brothers today instead, because if they mislynch that townie, they will definitely beat us?
not sure if I can agree.. if you're one of the more insightful players, there's no guarantee you will survive the Night. downsizing the PoE, via mislynching, to the really suspicious players, is better for town to read later (in case you get killed). if we're dealing with a lynchlock mechanic, like this game, in Lylo, it's better to downsize the PoE than convince others. openly mislynching kinda defeats the purpose, but if you have an explanation for a bad hammer...it isn't a bad strat.
then again, I guess mislynching/selfvoting would be considered a 'desperate measure' which is better applied to desperate situations. if you're facing a bad game, desperate measures are appropriate. if you're bad at making your cases, desperate measures in the form of selfvoting should be understandable and a viable strat too. though...I guess, like in this game, Osie's selfhammer was to make himself be heard rather than fighting over needless arguments?
but... this is just me, since I prefer pushing my reads by action rather than words/explanation, partly as a way to adapt (to my bad casing cases).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I still remember the days I prayed for the things I have now.
But if the scum are in the POE, which they should be, lynching them also downsizes the POE - quite effectively. So there's no advantage over lynching scum. Just silver linings.
And if you feel you're bad at making cases, killing yourself won't make anyone listen to your corpse any more carefully than your living body. Did anyone go back and adopt Osie's reads because he self-hammered? No. And if we had, and we lynched me, game over. Dead townies can be wrong, too.
Did anyone go back and adopt Osie's reads because he self-hammered? No. And if we had, and we lynched me, game over. Dead townies can be wrong, too.
Actually, I wasn't focused on you as scum when I self-hammered.
And sure enough, pressure was put on LnGrrrR and Iso, as I suggested. And Iso was lynched next, leading to a Shinichi flip and allowing the remaining players to solve the game. So don't give me this ***** about how it was a meaningless lynch.
Besides, if I hadn't done that, the rest of the day would have been spent on thinking about teams that I fit in. Which would have been a waste.
Actually, I wasn't focused on you as scum when I self-hammered.
And sure enough, pressure was put on LnGrrrR and Iso, as I suggested. And Iso was lynched next, leading to a Shinichi flip and allowing the remaining players to solve the game. So don't give me this ***** about how it was a meaningless lynch.
Besides, if I hadn't done that, the rest of the day would have been spent on thinking about teams that I fit in. Which would have been a waste.
It's true that you did state that you changed your read on me.
I don't think it's at all your fault what happened to Iso. Iso's lynch was based on his A/B choice and rules-reading flub. As others have rightly argued, Shinichi was way outside the POE, and I also felt the Iso lynch was handled dreadfully by those of us who were alive. He should not have been insta-lynched for just a derpy failure to read, over Tom/Phoenix. There was very little sense behind killing you, or Iso, or Shinichi, as opposed to moving directly to killing Tom and Phoenix, who were effectively outed by that point.
Obviously, Lngrr would not have been a great wagon either, but I didn't see the slight pressure he received deriving from your analysis, so much as just a lingering failure of players to town-read him out of the POE. Don't think that's your fault, either.
Actually, I wasn't focused on you as scum when I self-hammered.
And sure enough, pressure was put on LnGrrrR and Iso, as I suggested. And Iso was lynched next, leading to a Shinichi flip and allowing the remaining players to solve the game. So don't give me this ***** about how it was a meaningless lynch.
Besides, if I hadn't done that, the rest of the day would have been spent on thinking about teams that I fit in. Which would have been a waste.
It's true that you did state that you changed your read on me.
I don't think it's at all your fault what happened to Iso. Iso's lynch was based on his A/B choice and rules-reading flub. As others have rightly argued, Shinichi was way outside the POE, and I also felt the Iso lynch was handled dreadfully by those of us who were alive. He should not have been insta-lynched for just a derpy failure to read, over Tom/Phoenix. There was very little sense behind killing you, or Iso, or Shinichi, as opposed to moving directly to killing Tom and Phoenix, who were effectively outed by that point.
Obviously, Lngrr would not have been a great wagon either, but I didn't see the slight pressure he received deriving from your analysis, so much as just a lingering failure of players to town-read him out of the POE. Don't think that's your fault, either.
I disagree with the part about it being a bad lynch.
If you had a player go "Oops" over something so basic. This late in the game how are you supposed to approach that? Would a player really by the "I was too lazy to go back and read the primer". How would you have approached that? It would still be a lynch. Yes it was fast. Maybe more information could have been squeezed out of the day. But how is a town supposed to react to a play like this?
I disagree with the part about it being a bad lynch.
If you had a player go "Oops" over something so basic. This late in the game how are you supposed to approach that? Would a player really by the "I was too lazy to go back and read the primer". How would you have approached that? It would still be a lynch. Yes it was fast. Maybe more information could have been squeezed out of the day. But how is a town supposed to react to a play like this?
It's Iso. He'd already derp counter-claimed a player and had to go back and read his role PM, and was clearly functioning on about 10% of the brainpower he used to dedicate to games. I mean, it was very, very silly. It's also not surprising to me, given what he had going on. I also think it's one of those times that WIFOM reasoning is useful to weigh in the balance. Even if you don't get insta-lynched, most players won't completely forgive and forget that kind of thing, so it costs you too many votes in end-game for scum to get excited about running that gambit.
Given time, I'd still have pushed hard for killing off Phoenix for being tracked to the kill, etc., and Tom, for behavior, than Iso for derping on his reading comprehension. It's a good example of why it's so dangerous to read a player off a single interaction instead of their entire history, I think.
I disagree with the part about it being a bad lynch.
If you had a player go "Oops" over something so basic. This late in the game how are you supposed to approach that? Would a player really by the "I was too lazy to go back and read the primer". How would you have approached that? It would still be a lynch. Yes it was fast. Maybe more information could have been squeezed out of the day. But how is a town supposed to react to a play like this?
It's Iso. He'd already derp counter-claimed a player and had to go back and read his role PM, and was clearly functioning on about 10% of the brainpower he used to dedicate to games. I mean, it was very, very silly. It's also not surprising, given what he had going on.
Given time, I'd still have pushed hard for killing off Phoenix for being tracked to the kill, etc., and Tom, for behavior, than Iso for derping on his reading comprehension. It's a good example of why it's so dangerous to read a player off a single interaction instead of their entire history, I think.
I just don't see how that makes it better. It makes it worse. How is a player being allowed to make such plays. Regardless of the rest of the play, they just don't make sense. I view this as akin to the Wildfire problem in Disheritance. Eventually you just gotta lynch stupid. Because those plays are anti town. The counter claim and this AB thing can be viewed as scum moves and these are purposeful plays. At the end of the day actions are more important than what they say. Which I agree is why Phoenix should have been lynched much sooner, that and the fact that the claim makes ZERO sense.
Also while on that I don't get why a single one of you guys didn't instantly message the mod and ask if it was a reveal game. At worst you get nothing at best you get to lynch scum.
Both actions and rationales are pretty important. On actions alone, I'd have been lynched earlier in the game. On rationales, you could clear both me and Iso.
The thing about Wildfire is you've got a pretty compelling scum rationale for him to go on public killing spree like he did, so both the action and rationale point the same way.
But if the scum are in the POE, which they should be, lynching them also downsizes the POE - quite effectively. So there's no advantage over lynching scum. Just silver linings.
And if you feel you're bad at making cases, killing yourself won't make anyone listen to your corpse any more carefully than your living body. Did anyone go back and adopt Osie's reads because he self-hammered? No. And if we had, and we lynched me, game over. Dead townies can be wrong, too.
scum might be in PoE, but if they got a team to spread confusion elsewhere, they'll usually, if not always, be last in line: "keep staying last in line until you win". lynching scum by PoE is effective only if you're up against 1.
tbh I think we listened to Osie more after the hammer. he did say you could be town after that.
Okay, in all seriousness, my death lowers the mislynch pool significantly, which is crucial, and about half of the reason that I stepped off of Azrael. The other half was realizing that Azrael might not be scum. I still am inclined to believe that Azrael is lying about something, but maybe not…
I might agree that Grape was off on some things, but it was early-game. we lynched Cythare partly thanks to Killjoy's suspicion of his wagon. I know I say corpses are useless, and they usually are, but I still believe in killer intent during 'final moments' lol. not all corpses are placeholders.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I still remember the days I prayed for the things I have now.
scum might be in PoE, but if they got a team to spread confusion elsewhere, they'll usually, if not always, be last in line: "keep staying last in line until you win". lynching scum by PoE is effective only if you're up against 1.
*shrugs* I've seen plenty of good towns polish off scum teams with POE by day 2 or day 3 or 4. If your playerbase is good, no reason you can't tromp all over 'em.
I fundamentally disagree with this...
Just saying.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
StaffSelf-voting as town mislynches someone who scum would probably be less likely to kill, as well as allowing a player to stick by convictions (e.g. "I'm town, I'll prove it to you [before/after], lynch X")... Basically, it lowers the mislynch pool while lending some credence to your posts coming from a town perspective. Also, a town win does not exclude dead town players. If you think you're likely to be mislynched, and you aren't super worried about LyLo, self-voting is not completely unreasonable strategically. It's not the best strategy, or even a great strategy, most of the time, but it is not completely illegitimate.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
StaffBut I’m general let me argue the counterpoint, even if you are going to be mislynched, self voting robs the town of potentially letting scum make a mistake. Take Az, he was at L-1 and by all rights looked to be the lynch. However, he didn’t self vote, and kaba came back and ended up taking a ton of heat and eventually getting lynched. If Az resigned himself to getting lynched and said “just heed my words” town wouldn’t have. At least not in the same way that he did.
Self voting as town as a strategic option is not ever the case, it’s an emotional option that people need to have better self control over.
It is possible that I have a stronger aversion to these things than most, but a large part of my game is analyzing the claims and deciding what fits/sounds right vs. what doesn't. Your claim didn't sound right and didn't seem to fit with what had been claimed so far, and was the primary reason I turned on you. I'm also not sure what we really gained. Like, I can almost understand leaving out the last ability. You would have no reason to think the Mafia had a role-cop and knew it already, and you could have theoretically got them with a surprise Doc protect, I suppose. But making up a 5 BP cost for the terribad "delay-a-kill for 1/2 a day" ability just muddied the waters for me.
I can't rightly say what I would have felt if you had claimed truthfully, but I feel like there was a much higher chance I would have believed it. Given we lynched Kaba that day anyway and then you got NK'd, I don't think it ended up affecting too much long term. But it might have.
Shadow has the right of it here. No one will listen to your reads any more than they would while you were alive, if you self-vote to kill yourself and prove your alignment. They'll almost always listen to you less than if you're alive, because they will view it as poor control over your emotions, and you're no longer around to help clarify your argument, push it forward, and keep it on the town's agenda. So, dying in order to make a correct lynch happen is not going to work.
If I'd died, I really don't think Phoenix or Tom would have been caught any sooner. I was obviously wrong so many times while I was alive and townie, why would being dead and townie make such a huge difference? Occasionally if someone is just pummeling the entire scum team and they're NK'd people will pay a little more attention to what you said for half a second, but even then, they usually forget about what you were saying very, very quickly.
I'm also not sure why mislynching someone the scum are less likely to nightkill is supposed to be advantageous. Nor how decreasing the mislynch pool is supposed to a good thing. Yes it, decreases the mislynch pool...by killing townies! I mean, should the scum refrain from NKing because it will decrease the mislynch pool? Should they lynch their own scum players because it will decrease the mislynch pool? Obviously not! Because that's simply a distraction to achieving the far more important overriding objective: killing every last one of the scum with the very limited number of lynches you have available.
What matters is whether you killed a townie or a scum with the lynch. Period. Not information gathering. Not lowering the mislynch pool. Whether you kill town, or kill scum, is far more critical than any other rationale for the lynch.
Apparently, merely the sole fact that I prevented my own likely mislynch was enough to earn town MVP this game. It's kind of a statement to how shaky the town's analysis was overall that that was kind of the deciding factor, I didn't contribute that much to nabbing many of the scum, my big contribution was apparently just stubbornly refusing to die, but it does illustrate the importance of that. Stubbornly fighting to the bitter end to preserve lynches for the town helps your team. If Grape claimed his role, he probably lives, and someone else would have died. Fighting off a mislynch is a free vig and a doc protect rolled into one. If you didn't self-vote, maybe the scum never would have gotten so close to the end-game, because we could have lynched Phoenix or Tom instead. Any time that you secure a mislynch for the scum, or an Az-wolg, that is just about the worst harm you can do to the town's chances. It's not only a town death that moves the scum closer to winning, it's also the destruction of one of your few chances to take scum off the board. You HAVE to fight those tooth and nail, for the sake of your team.
and well, that was the only time in my entire mafia life that I ever selfvoted. scum got town ignoring me by saying I was tpr or an annoying poster, and town (like Jenna/Shin) were off in their own little world, so I had to shake things up. claim case was similar. if you notice, I removed the selfvote quickly.
no matter what alignment you wereand that was bad. I was acting~but glad you think I improved. hopefully I won't be this crazy a poster in future games though. I'm just bad at handling myself, like how to convey my thoughts, but I'm fairly good at handling others (through gamestate or other means).
I'm used to town lying about their abilities by now. it's just a very throwoff'ish gambit, but not a bad one.
the only bad thing is that you intended to CC Azrael when you flip... that can be misused by scum, like "if you who had such a role, didn't suspect a similar claim, means there's reason to believe there's similar roles in a setup".
Be grateful, always."
Be grateful, always."
Sincerity can help you be read correctly, yes. But self-voting for a hammer, or putting yourself in a position to be hammered? That would defeat the entire purpose of the sincerity tell, because at that point, no one can act upon it.
There is no such thing as "mislynch to win". The town is perfectly fine if it lynches nothing and no one but scum. No innocents must be killed in order to achieve victory. Yes, the town can win in spite of townie lynches, and build off of mistakes made, but I've never seen a situation where the town was better off because they lynched a townie over scum, except in the occasional weird role-based scenario.
I didn't play great this game, but I was glad I defended Az when I did. *shrug* Paranoia and second-guessing always get to me way more than it should playing mafia.
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
1. attempting a mislynch can lead to scum outing themselves.
2. driving a mislynch always attracts scum even under pretense of a mistake (it's too tempting). Phoenix hammering Iso is proof of this.
overall... town have their uses in mislynching, just as much as scum have uses in their lynching/bussing.
besides, if we didn't try to hammer Iso, it might've been harder to consolidate on Phoenix on the long run. it was rather evident in the previous phase that our votes were scattered/disagreeing.
then again, I'm just an unconventional strategist.. and think in terms of dying.
Be grateful, always."
if scum always NK the actives or townreads, the field could end up dominated by chaos in the end - in order to resolve that situation, mislynching a problematic town (or someone who won't be trusted) can be rewarding on the long run, when consolidating votes near end-game is important.
Be grateful, always."
Townie vigs misfiring into the POE at already-claimed players can often be more beneficial than if they do not fire at all, similar to how a mislynch is preferable to a no lynch. But a town vig hitting scum is also preferable to hitting town.
There are plenty of silver linings to killing townies with a lynch, but they're outweighed by the fact that you're getting derailed from your primary objective in the process and moving the scum significantly closer to winning. The scum typically need only 4 or 5 mislynches to win, so each mislynch gets them massively closer to their objective. The consolation prizes just don't come close to equalling out that damage.
What scum team ever says, hey, to prevent the town from mislynching that townie, we should get the town to lynch one of our mafia brothers today instead, because if they mislynch that townie, they will definitely beat us?
then again, I guess mislynching/selfvoting would be considered a 'desperate measure' which is better applied to desperate situations. if you're facing a bad game, desperate measures are appropriate. if you're bad at making your cases, desperate measures in the form of selfvoting should be understandable and a viable strat too. though...I guess, like in this game, Osie's selfhammer was to make himself be heard rather than fighting over needless arguments?
but... this is just me, since I prefer pushing my reads by action rather than words/explanation, partly as a way to adapt (to my bad casing cases).
Be grateful, always."
And if you feel you're bad at making cases, killing yourself won't make anyone listen to your corpse any more carefully than your living body. Did anyone go back and adopt Osie's reads because he self-hammered? No. And if we had, and we lynched me, game over. Dead townies can be wrong, too.
Actually, I wasn't focused on you as scum when I self-hammered.
And sure enough, pressure was put on LnGrrrR and Iso, as I suggested. And Iso was lynched next, leading to a Shinichi flip and allowing the remaining players to solve the game. So don't give me this ***** about how it was a meaningless lynch.
Besides, if I hadn't done that, the rest of the day would have been spent on thinking about teams that I fit in. Which would have been a waste.
It's true that you did state that you changed your read on me.
I don't think it's at all your fault what happened to Iso. Iso's lynch was based on his A/B choice and rules-reading flub. As others have rightly argued, Shinichi was way outside the POE, and I also felt the Iso lynch was handled dreadfully by those of us who were alive. He should not have been insta-lynched for just a derpy failure to read, over Tom/Phoenix. There was very little sense behind killing you, or Iso, or Shinichi, as opposed to moving directly to killing Tom and Phoenix, who were effectively outed by that point.
Obviously, Lngrr would not have been a great wagon either, but I didn't see the slight pressure he received deriving from your analysis, so much as just a lingering failure of players to town-read him out of the POE. Don't think that's your fault, either.
I disagree with the part about it being a bad lynch.
If you had a player go "Oops" over something so basic. This late in the game how are you supposed to approach that? Would a player really by the "I was too lazy to go back and read the primer". How would you have approached that? It would still be a lynch. Yes it was fast. Maybe more information could have been squeezed out of the day. But how is a town supposed to react to a play like this?
It's Iso. He'd already derp counter-claimed a player and had to go back and read his role PM, and was clearly functioning on about 10% of the brainpower he used to dedicate to games. I mean, it was very, very silly. It's also not surprising to me, given what he had going on. I also think it's one of those times that WIFOM reasoning is useful to weigh in the balance. Even if you don't get insta-lynched, most players won't completely forgive and forget that kind of thing, so it costs you too many votes in end-game for scum to get excited about running that gambit.
Given time, I'd still have pushed hard for killing off Phoenix for being tracked to the kill, etc., and Tom, for behavior, than Iso for derping on his reading comprehension. It's a good example of why it's so dangerous to read a player off a single interaction instead of their entire history, I think.
I just don't see how that makes it better. It makes it worse. How is a player being allowed to make such plays. Regardless of the rest of the play, they just don't make sense. I view this as akin to the Wildfire problem in Disheritance. Eventually you just gotta lynch stupid. Because those plays are anti town. The counter claim and this AB thing can be viewed as scum moves and these are purposeful plays. At the end of the day actions are more important than what they say. Which I agree is why Phoenix should have been lynched much sooner, that and the fact that the claim makes ZERO sense.
Also while on that I don't get why a single one of you guys didn't instantly message the mod and ask if it was a reveal game. At worst you get nothing at best you get to lynch scum.
The thing about Wildfire is you've got a pretty compelling scum rationale for him to go on public killing spree like he did, so both the action and rationale point the same way.
The mod-question would have been smart.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Stafftbh I think we listened to Osie more after the hammer. he did say you could be town after that.
I might agree that Grape was off on some things, but it was early-game. we lynched Cythare partly thanks to Killjoy's suspicion of his wagon. I know I say corpses are useless, and they usually are, but I still believe in killer intent during 'final moments' lol. not all corpses are placeholders.
Be grateful, always."
*shrugs* I've seen plenty of good towns polish off scum teams with POE by day 2 or day 3 or 4. If your playerbase is good, no reason you can't tromp all over 'em.