Mafia CLIV: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia (Town Win)

Moderators: Zoomzip, Telleo, bkbkbk, condude1, sjg11

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 04:18

Happymeal wrote:
Jordan767 wrote:
If we reveal, we all vote as if we had one vote, then with a certain amount of time left until deadline we consolidate in a way that's representative of the majority views. If we don't reveal, I guess this could work but it's cruder and we get less size info on people (which I guess isn't an entirely bad thing if we decided not to reveal anyway).



No matter what my size is, I will not change my vote to represent the majority. No matter how wrong I may be, adherence to what I actually think gives us the most information and it should be priority of everyone here to be as transparent as possible. Why did you suggest people change their votes based upon what the majority think?


Still on read through. Other thoughts within the next ~3 hours. But I wanted to respond to this.

This is a way we lynch who we, as a town, want to lynch as opposed to who the smalls in the town want to lynch. Also, not my idea originally. It was a response to a question from Zoomzip.
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 05:08

Happymeal wrote:
Jordan767 wrote:
Still on read through. Other thoughts within the next ~3 hours. But I wanted to respond to this.

This is a way we lynch who we, as a town, want to lynch as opposed to who the smalls in the town want to lynch. Also, not my idea originally. It was a response to a question from Zoomzip.


Whose idea was it originally? I reread through page one (the page before you made the response) and no one else stated the idea prior to you. Here was the original quote prior to your response right now:

Jordan767 wrote:
Zoomzip wrote:I think you are close to an important truth here. Everyone's vote counts the same -- Given the game mechanics, is there a way we can make this happen anyways?


If we reveal, we all vote as if we had one vote, then with a certain amount of time left until deadline we consolidate in a way that's representative of the majority views. If we don't reveal, I guess this could work but it's cruder and we get less size info on people (which I guess isn't an entirely bad thing if we decided not to reveal anyway).



It was a response to a question, but you were the first one to make up the idea. Why is it that you thought someone else had this idea?


Maybe I miscommunicated this. I meant that I came up with the draft plan, but it was mostly at Zoomzip's request. I never endorsed the plan either (still haven't decided whether I should), I was simply putting it on the table. And actually, based on what he posted about dogpiling after, he seems to have given it plenty of thought himself. It seems to me like he was trying to push discussion in that direction.

Why is it that you didn't quote the full post originally? Are you trying to misrepresent me, or are you simply not making the connections here?
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 05:09

EBWOP: I said "making the connections" but I literally can't think of a second reason to include my response but not what I was responding to. If someone else can, feel free to share.
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 05:52

Housekeeping things:

I am MEDIUM. I picked this to minimize accidental NK damage, as I feared a situation without a good mix might eventually lead to smalls without safe visit options. Medium provides smalls a safe target and can target large or medium safely. I hadn't revealed before now because I wanted to wait to see if UDC's concerns were addressed or others decided to proceed with the reveal regardless. By now scum have plenty of targets anyway, so my reveal shouldn't be helping them anyway.

Zoomzip, I haven't paid that much attention to sjg's vote on you because it doesn't strike me as too helpful to read too much into early votes which are very liable to change anyway. That said, I think sjg's vote could be plausibly read as either distancing (unlikely as I'm getting not getting bad vibes off either of you) or simply a vote to start discussion. His lack of actual justification indicates that he'll likely (hopefully) either improve his rationale or abandon it, so it hasn't seemed that important.

As to your reaction, I think your lack of concern is more likely to come from town than scum.

What do you think of Happymeal's vote on you?
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 05:56

Jordan767 wrote:(unlikely as I'm getting not getting bad vibes off either of you)
should read "I'm not getting bad vibes". It's been a long day week month.
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 06:24

My current top scumread is Happymeal.

I dislike his mechanical discussion (plans are bad, he won't follow a plan even if the rest of the town wants/needs him to, we're all making way too many assumptions, passive-aggressively threatens to not read much of the plans in question, all followed by not having any better alternative plan than a total free-for-all).

His general involvement with many players (justy, UDC, Don Juan, me) reads as selective. Especially in this post. Picks one line of one or two posts and drills on that exclusively. Seems like a good way to avoid potentially perilous discussions while still looking like he's looking for scum.

He also seems to be buddying up to sjg and Harb to some degree. It doesn't seem that towny to pick sides so starkly. Especially over mechanics.

However, I especially don't like his vote on and interaction with Zoomzip. He comes in, votes a town leader, and criticizes everything he's done up to that point. He moves immediately into tunnel vision on Zoomzip and refuses to discuss mechanics with him. This despite (most of?--I haven't looked specifically) the rest of the town agreeing to do so and the fact that scum are still 100% capable of fostering useful mechanics discussion. Even if you don't like the questions, your answers will still help the rest of us read you. He could even be scum trying to avoid those questions, which he has no good answers to. He also misrepresents just about every mechanical argument Zoomzip has made as flawed, based on faulty assumptions, and pro-mafia. Do they deserve evaluation? Sure. But they deserve fair evaluation, not such biased evaluation that, further, leads to a vote. I've been told to avoid lynching on mechanics and I feel like that's at least partially what Happymeal is doing here.

I will go back and re-read UDC, I'll see whether or not there's anything there beyond mechanics quibbles.
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 06:38

Happymeal wrote:
Jordan767 wrote:Maybe I miscommunicated this. I meant that I came up with the draft plan, but it was mostly at Zoomzip's request. I never endorsed the plan either (still haven't decided whether I should), I was simply putting it on the table. And actually, based on what he posted about dogpiling after, he seems to have given it plenty of thought himself. It seems to me like he was trying to push discussion in that direction.

Why is it that you didn't quote the full post originally? Are you trying to misrepresent me, or are you simply not making the connections here?


Zoomzip's request? What request? He solely asked Harb about, not you:

Zoomzip wrote:
Harb wrote:No one can squish one another, everyone's vote counts the same. Play the game vanilla and life is good.


I think you are close to an important truth here. Everyone's vote counts the same -- Given the game mechanics, is there a way we can make this happen anyways?


Why did you decide to respond to a question directed at Harb? What was your purpose there?

Jordan767 wrote:Zoomzip--

1. I think the town's best outcome is if everyone's the same size. Removes vote weighting and harmful NK effects. Failing that, larges seem like the most dangerous of the the 3 to have in a mix due to them having the most NK effects.


As a secondary thing, you had already endorsed the plan. You claimed here that the optimal outcome is to"remove weighting and harmful NK effects" as well as everyone being the same size. Does his plan not do exactly that?

But, on top of that, you did endorse the plan on page 4 (instead of inferences based on words, this is a direct endorsement):

Jordan767 wrote:I'm fine with the blue preference vote option.


On top of that, you also have out the times that you had available in order for the plan to go through:

Jordan767 wrote:I like that sjg. Deadline is 1530 for me in Mountain time. Makes it 1730 on the east coast and 1430 on the west coast. So 2-5 hours works. And with the blue voting plan not everyone has to be available to consolidate anyway.


If you did not endorse the plan, why did you do all of the above?


Jordan767

You have made so many contradictions here, it's insane. Please clarify them so I can switch my vote back to Zoom.

Jordan767 wrote:Why is it that you didn't quote the full post originally? Are you trying to misrepresent me, or are you simply not making the connections here?


No, it's just the way I do things. I tend to respond to the entire post, but I want the meat of it to be focused on while also craving that not a significant amount of space is taken up when I'm typically going through pages worth of material.


About me suggesting the plan:

He asked the whole town:

Zoomzip wrote:A couple of questions for you (or anyone, if they want to jump in) -- I am more worried about townies killing townies at night than mafia killing townies. Am I wrong in this?

Also, you wrote...

Harb wrote: No one can squish one another, everyone's vote counts the same. Play the game vanilla and life is good.



I think you are close to an important truth here. Everyone's vote counts the same -- Given the game mechanics, is there a way we can make this happen anyways?


I wanted to jump in. So I did.

About me "endorsing" the plan:

To my mind, me being fine with the plan meant that I would accept it and follow it, but that I would continue to discuss and refine it. I was also confirming sjg's assumptions about American time zones and how timing would/could/should go down, as part of that discussion and refinement.

I think we're arguing in circles about semantics here: I viewed "endorse" as "accept the plan as is" while what I was doing was accepting it while refining it; you viewed "endorse" as "support" which is what I was (cautiously) doing. I will admit it's not perfect and obscures potentially important vote data and vote moves, but I think it preserves the lynch as a predictable town tool which is a higher priority for me.

If there's anything else you want me to address let me know.
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 14:46

Don Juan-- the liar claiming to be medium/small while actually being large could be anyone who's revealed as medium or small. To stay safe, smalls should visit the safe target they townread most to avoid killing themselves.

Incidentally, if I'm scum, why would I lie and claim medium if it's a unique claim at this point? Wouldn't I want to blend in?

At this point I see enough medium/small reveals that the scum have plenty of NK targets anyway, I don't see the harm in revealing at this point. And it may benefit the town to have a little more information on you. Why not reveal?
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 02 Nov 2016, 21:41

Harb wrote:
Jordan767 wrote:Zoomzip and Harb-

Briefly, he doesn't seem that concerned about keeping townie alive. I realize it's not that strong, but I'm on mobile so that's the best I can do. When I get home I'll expand on this and do a reread. I know bad plans aren't necessarily scummy, but it's the best I have at this point on a 5 inch screen.


Okay, so why do you think he's not concerned with keeping townies alive? His whole discussion has been about preventing townies from getting night killed more easily. What are you seeing that makes you think he's not worried about townie lives?



He didn't want to continue reveals. When I got that impression sjg still needed a safe target. By now I see where he's coming from there (although I still think we're better off full revealing).
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia Day 1

Postby Jordan767 » 03 Nov 2016, 01:55

More thoughts to come later (my vote feels a little stale, among other things) but I wanted to ask whether Chuck had revealed yet and whether or not that was at all indicative.
Silver Classicist.
Jordan767
 
Posts: 780
Joined: 21 Mar 2016, 06:35
Location: Colorado
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (947)
All-game rating: (958)
Timezone: GMT-7

PreviousNext

Return to Game Threads

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests