DEFCON Mafia Thread 2 (Game Over)

[I have no name]

Values of winning/drawing in chess do not equal values of winning/drawing in Mafia.
Human beings are not always rational.

[Edible]

I played to my win con.

You lost the right to say this when you attempted to force a draw instead of a win.  Unless your wincon mentioned a draw somewhere?  Feel free to quote it.

[Raikaria]

I played to my win con.  My posts were meant and tailored to give a vaguely town impression of my alignment while shutting down avenues to discourse with me.   Everyone was quite capable of pressuring me, and asking me questions, as you did.  When I hardly bothered, that was a case enough to push for my lynch, which you did.  The hard part is convincing others to vote with you.

Secondly, what are BT and Neko to you? They seem to get no consideration at all even though they were an integral part of the scum team

Unfortunately, I never read either of them as scum at any point in the game, I was too blinded by the slips I saw from Shadoweh and PX, and then I got lynched D2. I tunnel visioned.

Also I find it amusing that after someone who flipped town was so convinced Serela was town that he self-hammered, and saved him from the noose twice... Serela then gets instantly nuked by a townie.

And, I guess the alternative to trying to get a draw was the town hammering you over the SK anyway, since town probobly wouldn't have let you win with your lack of trying. So I guess going for a draw was your best option, rather than just giving town a hammer with SK/Maf Crossvote.

[ActionDan]

Values of winning/drawing in chess do not equal values of winning/drawing in Mafia.
Human beings are not always rational.

They do since both are strategic games.  Game theory defines games as a set of strategies and payoffs.

[Conqueror]

After I asked both Pesco and Conq whether what I was about to do was playing towards my wincon, Conq answered in the affirmative and Pesco didn't mind. 

Saying anything but "yes" would have told you about any potential flaws in your plan. It was a nice effort but it backfired. I think you did have a pretty good chance of winning if you had stuck it out and hoped for the double crosskill and Dormio focusing on the other townies. Not a sure thing of course, but what is? Probabilities are cool but even if a revolver only has a 1/6 chance of firing the bullet that probability becomes 100% when your head explodes. The draw plan was interesting and it had the potential to maybe be something but in the end it was a gambit you took that failed, so...

If everyone played mafia logically then theoretically a language parsing bot with enough info would school all you scrubs.

Edit:
I don't blame Zak since he was in a losing position either way, and there's nothing in the ruleset to say how the mod would have resolved draws. Maybe I would have autolossed everyone, who knows. Would have been fitting for a game flavoured on nuclear war.

[ActionDan]

You lost the right to say this when you attempted to force a draw instead of a win.  Unless your wincon mentioned a draw somewhere?  Feel free to quote it.

Well considering I had asked Conq about it and he said my action was playing to win, which I had said earlier, I am not sure what would satisfy you unless I quoted the PMs.  Would you like me to quote them?

[Conqueror]

Dan, just drop it. I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here. Better luck next time?

[Pesco]

If everyone played mafia logically then theoretically a language parsing bot with enough info would school all you scrubs.

Oh man so meta theoretical :V

[ActionDan]

I think the insults over both my play, my performance, and my character during and immediately after the game ended were juvenile, unwarranted, petty, and disgraceful from this playerbase.  I regret my heightened response, but I don't think anyone should have the right to walk over my face without me speaking up about it.

That's my grievance.  Am I so not respected that I am treated with barely any human decency here.

[Dr Rawr]

wut

[I have no name]

To be honest Dan, your play did leave a lot to be desired.  Your character was fine.  Your plan could have worked but it had flaws and said flaws were exploited to turn your potential draw into a loss.

[Conqueror]

You're definitely overreacting. Just chill.

Unless I missed something, I didn't see any overtly personal attacks, just complaints that people disliked certain aspects of your play.

[Edible]

I think the insults over both my play, my performance, and my character during and immediately after the game ended were juvenile, unwarranted, petty, and disgraceful from this playerbase.  I regret my heightened response, but I don't think anyone should have the right to walk over my face without me speaking up about it.

That's my grievance.  Am I so not respected that I am treated with barely any human decency here.

Criticism of your play is justified as it is justified of anyone who lurks through games.

Criticism of your performance is justified as you failed to play towards your wincon.

Criticism of your character is justified as you profess logical superiority over your fellow players in this very thread, despite misconceptions of how said logic is applied towards the very game you're playing.  It is further justified because you apparently have extremely thin skin.

Real talk time.

Given that, essentially, the entire playerbase is against you on this, you should probably look very closely on all of the above factors - your play, your performance, your character - and determine where you went wrong and why we are nigh-universally opposed to your beliefs in this matter.

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

I neither agree nor like playing with people who think winning is everything.  I am doing what I think is right to try to at least challenge a unhealthy game environment.

Also, something about this was pointed out to me that I feel like saying.
You say that you do not agree with the "winning is everything" mentality and you do not like playing with people that have this mentality.
And, yet, in this game you basically refused to play during the earlier parts of the game as you have admitted that you deliberately lurked in order to simply avoid conversation.
How is that not employing a dubious tactic that lessens the enjoyment of every party involved to win, which implies that you carry a "winning is everything" attitude yourself?

Anyway, I'm done here.

[Shadoweh]

Also I find it amusing that after someone who flipped town was so convinced Serela was town that he self-hammered, and saved him from the noose twice... Serela then gets instantly nuked by a townie.

I know you were dead by the time this happened but Serela was not nuked by a townie. :V

Edit for Dan: I don't actually have a problem with lurking as scum or going for a draw, I just accept that not everyone else plays that way and if as a chessmaster you had read up on Dormio's other SK game you could have known how Dormio would react. It seems like the error in judgement here is that you expected people to play the way -you- would play, instead of considering how they were likely to react being themselves.

[Raikaria]

I thought you nuked Serela.

*Goes to find who launched the nuke*

[NekoNekoRex]

really next time i'm hosting a mafia game i'm just including a rule saying "a draw means everybody loses"

Guess what rule I edited into my setup after this game?

Anyway Dan, as a fellow scumbuddy I also think your play was sub-par. Revealing you intentionally lurked through half the game makes me a little bit annoyed. I've slowed down my activity as scum sometimes but I've never put whole days off to lurk. I personally thought you could have won since there was no suspicion on you , I was pretty annoyed when you basically outed the entire scumteam just before we died to try and PoE scum, but outing yourself for a draw just seemed like a pointless effort (which I made clear when I said you were playing to the SK wincon, and in the graveyard) since there was zero suspicion on you and no obligation for Dormio to NK you thanks to your implied immunity.

Playing to a draw is NOT playing to a wincon. Your wincon stated you needed to "eliminate all threats to Russians".

Anyway I think you're taking that criticism way too personally. I value criticism myself since it can be hard for me to see exactly what I'm doing wrong. I wanted to see if Dormio had any writeups for anyone else, myself, since I thought it was a response to my 100% not-angry mafia satire post.
Anyways learn to take some heat. People bitch about me all the time and I don't care. Hell, I'll take cracks at myself if I feel like it, case and point numerous times in that quicktopic. All the better if it gets funny reaction.

(PS PX if you got mad over that comment on your play then the above applies to you also)

[NekoNekoRex]

Also all the instances of "let's break the setup, yeah!" (see: prims, dan) actually did really tick me off, enough to put a big rule warning against it in my setup as well. Really sucked as scum when I realized I claimed myself into a corner and was going to be hosed by D3 (although it let me toy with the players a lot and earned a few laughs so in the end I guess it was worth it).

[GMOFucker: Makin' GMOs To Fuck 'Em]

well attempts to break the set-up are generally par for the course in open set-up games and here it really did work to town's advantage in the end so i don't see the problem

[Omba]

i don't see the problem

And neither do I see a problem with lurking if it works towards your wincon.

Also Neko, how exactly do you intend to prohibit setup breaking via a rule?

[Serela]

Also all the instances of "let's break the setup, yeah!" (see: prims, dan) actually did really tick me off, enough to put a big rule warning against it in my setup as well. Really sucked as scum when I realized I claimed myself into a corner and was going to be hosed by D3 (although it let me toy with the players a lot and earned a few laughs so in the end I guess it was worth it).

Trying to break the setup in a not-open setup works against the town much more often then it works out, true facts.

If your setup itself is breakable then you can fix it. There's not much of a way to try to put a rule in for it unless you want an open setup without letting people try to break it at the same time.

Lurking strategically as not-town is fine, but iirc d2 wasn't Dan lurking enough that the mod started talking about replacing him? -This- is the point where it turns into a bad thing.

[Shadoweh]

I thought you nuked Serela.

FFSGDFGHFGHFGAASFGQDDGK

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

FFSGDFGHFGHFGAASFGQDDGK

[Bardiche]

I guess I should "Noclaim Mafia", where none of the roles are revealed and no one may even so much as HINT at their role's power. Of course, no one is vanilla, and everyone has gamebreaking powers.

LET'S SEE YOU TRY TO BREAK THE SETUP NOW FOLKS.

[NekoNekoRex]

And neither do I see a problem with lurking if it works towards your wincon.

Also Neko, how exactly do you intend to prohibit setup breaking via a rule?

The exact wording I put for the rule is "This game setup was not created to be "solved". Attempts to exploit or "game" the setup to achieve your wincon or otherwise ruin the game will result in serious mod backlash. "

I mean something akin to "follow the cop" where the town can use roles in a combination to find the scumteam without actually looking for them, while rendering the scumteam helpless to stop it,

To be fair though it's set up with gamebreaking in mind so I don't actually expect it to be an issue. I guess having the rule makes me feel safer about the issue?

As for the lurking I think it's a cheap way to deny town information rather then trying to make yourself look town through actual scumhunting, and makes you look like you don't actually care about the game. I'd personally frown upon it if used extensively. You're not playing to win if you're not actually playing.

[Bardiche]

To be absolutely fair, MOTK Mafia has time and again proven that anyone who lurks, refuses to contribute, is entirely terse and refuses to explain themselves will survive to LYLO. Because Town will always refuse to policylynch the Kaori.

Chiding people for playing in this way is silly; It's a time-tested method to get to the end game. Don't like it? Then learn to finally punish people for playing Mafia badly and killing them when they are a detriment to Town. IS THIS LETTING SCUM WIN? Yeah, probably. But TownMOTK needs to learn to play the goddamn game instead of opt for a strategy of survival. The Townie goal isn't survival.

[NekoNekoRex]

The Townie goal isn't survival.

Except that surviving has been the townie wincon since Mafia as a game was created

[Kilgamayan]

The town wincon is to eliminate all threats to town. Nothing more, nothing less.

[NekoNekoRex]

You can't eliminate threats if you're dead

[Kilgamayan]

Counterexample: Adorable Game of Mafia.