Let's improve how we play "Mafia."

The Game Room
81

Funny you should say this, because one of my favorite moves, and one I’ve been fairly successful with, is to deliberately pursue somewhat poor logic. It’s dangerous, regardless of my alignment, but it’s one of the best ways to get a lot of information. The thing is, if one pursues only solid logic, there’s no differentiation between how town and scum will react to it. The town will see the obvious logic, asign the appropriate alignment, and vote accordingly; the scum will see the obvious logic, perhaps with a bit of confirmation bias, and realize they have to agree with it. Sometimes even obvious logic will have a little bit of dissension, but that doesn’t really tell you much because there’s always that one guy who disagrees.

Instead, having somewhat spurious logic forces people to take sides in the discussion. Hell, I’ve taken straight up bad logic and pursued it for days, as both town and scum. As town, I got great reads on both the person I was pursuing and any other people who really decided to take part in the discussion. It will often get me under a lot of suspicion, for very much the reasons you outline, but that’s as much a blessing as it is a curse because I can then see how people pursue me and, of course, people under suspicion are less likely to be targetted by scum. One game, in fact, I deliberately played that way because I had a power role, so I figured it would be a great way to avoid night kills and give me a few days to use my power before I’d have to claim to prevent a lynch.

I’ve also pursued bad logic deliberately as scum, because it can be a great way to distract from meaningful conversation. If pursued properly, one can even drive a townie lynch that way, then fall back on the idea that one was just an overly aggressive townie. I don’t think I’ve ever quite successfully pulled that off, at least to the point of actual victory, but I’ve gotten really close with it a couple of times.

82

Personally, I don’t see my case-building as a way to find Scum; I see it as a way to get Scum killed once I think I’ve already found them. I use other methods to try to find them, but once I’m voting for someone, it’s because I want to see them swing. And seeing them swing requires that I get other people voting for them, too, hence an outline of the logic behind my decision. If Scum agree with the logic, too, that’s fine: Their votes count the same as everyone else’s.

Even there, though, you can still sometimes catch Scum by their reactions to such arguments. In my experience, it’s fairly common for Scum to disagree with the logical arguments, but vote that way anyway.

83

This is where I call “cite?” I’m not even disagreeing, it is more that I don’t find particular patterns in scum and with you saying that you have, I’d like to see some examples. Especially if we can’t counter-example many townies doing the same behavior.

I actually tend to go with vibes and what I see as possible motivations. I probably am viewing things through how I would handle them in the same place. Also, I have a tendency to look for anyone that is overly in agreement with me. I find that suspicious.

84

Oh, yeah, absolutely. That’s a great point.

85

I can’t really provide a cite, but one behavior I have seen is scum doing something to the effect of “I’m not sure I buy this argument, but it’s the best we have”. The idea being that they can shrug off some responsibility of the mislynch because the natural reaction to a mislynch is to blame the people who are most responsible.

86

Vote: Chronos

87

A post in which Meeko argues against Claiming of any and all sorts.

If I’m needed for any marginal part of this thread, please re-read the bold.

88

Wow.

Can someone please strap me down, I might go off on this one, in a million directions, because of its 1000% truth. [Yes, one thousand]

Idiocracy gave us 500 years, I give us under 50.

89

But seriously:

We need to PLAY mafia more than SOLVE mafia. This would include, but is not limited to Claims, Handshakes, Breadcrumbs*, and [Sorry Chronos] voting analysis programs.

If we spent HALF the time just playing the game, instead of finding ways to circumvent the game, or abandon the game (On purpose, or otherwise) it would improve mafia play immensely.

  • However, of this list, I actually kinda like Breadcrumbs… if not for the sheer fun of it, as opposed to the cut and dry, black and white nature of everything else. Breadcrumbs, by their definition aren’t blunt. After all, one definition of “Playing Games” is the polar opposite of Bluntness.
90

Can you explain what you mean by “play”?

91

a lot people have already mentioned what i feel but i’ll repeat what i think is most important.

first of all, there does seem to be hostility to new players. some newcomers play one game and never play here again and, some become ultra-aggressive and return the hostility.

next, there has been a closed-mindedness by players here when new but experienced players play here for the first time. their methods or ideas are often disregarded or even ridiculed. there is a sense here and perhaps in other boards that the way Mafia is played by each board is the right way to play the game. for example, the last game the use of PMs were frowned upon by a number of players. i have played in boards where this is commonplace. in fact i was considered suspicious for not PMing enough.

another example is the negative view of neutrals. the traditional neutral in SDMB, GB and Idle is the survivor. neutrals with powers are viewed as threats. players were okay with lynching neutrals because they weren’t town even if it didn’t further their wincon.

finally, there’s the idea that OMGUS is bad. scum vote too so OMGUS may target scum. this is not to say that OMGUS by itself is sufficient to convince anyone else but an OMGUS shouldn’t be scoffed at just because it is OMGUS.

now having said that natives to SDMB have been less than friendly at times, i must say that newcomers should make an effort to try to get to know the culture and playstyle of people here. should they differ the newcomer can disagree but it can be done politely. sometimes newcomers believe their playstyle is THE way to play as well. often they fail because their style does work but on their boards.

as for the most recent game, it certainly could have been smoother, however it was admittedly experimental as was wanted by most players. it was certainly creative and a lot effort was made into its creation. while the mod even by his admission would have liked his moderation to be better, i’m troubled by some, not all, of the criticism thrown his way. to say that he had no respect for the players was a disservice to him. the actions in the game required a lot of time to process. that coupled with RL issues made the game stagnant. but that to brand a person as disrespectful was out of line. he obviously put in the effort.

to sum, i would like therefore some more friendliness and open-mindedness to new players and respect for the ways of this board from new players.

in the end, i like that players take the game seriously and participate. it’s more enjoyable that way even if you lose. however, i get the feeling some players have mafia in their brains the whole day and night. perhaps they are young and don’t have the responsibilities others here have. let’s not forget that it is just a game. if it becomes too serious and then personal it’s time to stop playing.

92

On the participation thing, I think people need to be a bit better at realising the commitment they’re making when they sign up. It’s always easy to say, “Yay Mafia! I like that, so I’ll say I’ll play”. What people ought to mean when they sign up is, “Yay Mafia! I like that, and I commit to giving, on average, an hour of my day every day for up to the next two months.” Obviously people sometimes get blindsided by real life, but most experienced players should know what’s being asked of them: if you’ve got a holiday coming up, or exams looming, or a project due at work then you should know that you won’t be able to commit much time. If you’re up front about that, and the mod and other players are cool with it, fine. But if you know you won’t really be available in, say, four weeks time - you shouldn’t be playing.

The excuse for poor participation that always, always drives me mental is “I’m really involved in one of my other games.” If you’re devoting x hours a week to one game, the chance that you actually have another x hours to devote to another is vanishingly small. So the only upshot is that at least one game doesn’t get your full attention. Which sucks either for the game you semi-abandon, or for the one you only took on as insurance against getting killed in the first. It might be a back-up game for you, but it’s not for anyone else. It’s better - for other people, if not for you - to play one game well than two - or three! - badly.

The flip-side to this is that mods need to remember that most players have only limited time to play in a given week, and design games that can be played within that time. I think we’ve tripped up a few times by having wonderfully complex games that would be fascinating to play if we could devote six hours a day to them; sadly, they just overwhelm people who are squeezing Mafia into their normal work/eat/sleep/socialise schedule. This ties into the Phere experience - both Mod and players thought a complex, experimental game would be fun; and it would have been, but “complex, experimental” also means “difficult, confusing and time-consuming” and I don’t think anyone was really prepared for the reality of that.

93

On actual gameplay, if I can stop pontificating a bit, I think as Town we can improve by:

  1. Showing more tenacity. As scum, the easiest way to survive to the endgame is to get a few votes early on without being leader or runner-up. Then you seem to be filed as completed business for a while and Town look for someone else. Of the four people who voted for you, three will probably not even talk about you the next Day. Town needs to be more resolute about following through on cases - especially on cases that other people make.

  2. Being willing to accept that you will be voted for. In my best games I’ve made cases against as many people as I could; this often led to accusations of mud-flinging/pot-stirring. In fact, it’s a willingness to scrutinise everybody, and to be scrutinised, that will make Town win. Making cases shouldn’t be seen as anti-Town behaviour.

As Scum, the only thing I’ve noticed is that people still have a blind-spot about bussing. It’s difficult not to give people credit for lynching Scum, but you should be aware that once a band-wagon builds on one Scum, the others have very few options: bus, defend, distract. Bussing obviously comes at a cost, but the pay-off can still be very high.

94

I’m in total agreement with Stanislaus’ last couple posts, has saved me some time as I wanted to say something similar.

In terms of participation, it’s unfair on the other players to coast through the game, you should be prepared to share your thoughts. Players who fail to do so are simply a black-hole to everyone else. I think people should aim for a minimum of one content post a day (actual, not game Day) on average, and also should also make an effort to comment on the main lynch wagons each Day. Doing so makes for a functioning town and a much more interesting game.

The converse to this is that people should review before they post and ask whether it actually adds anything contructive to the game. Having one or more players spamming the game thread can be fatiguing, and damage participation by the others. I’m going to try and reign in my posting a little in the next one.

It’s not necessary to win every argument or get everyone thinking the same way as you. Sometimes it’s better to put your ideas on the table and leave them there, rather than investing too much in them.

95

The benefit of votes is twofold: One, by casting a vote, you make it more likely that that person (whom you think is Scum) will be lynched. Two, votes and the reasons behind them provide information to other players. OMGUS votes serve both of these purposes only poorly: They provide very little information, and they have no chance of convincing other players. They’re not completely worthless: An OMGUS vote makes sense when you get down to three players, for instance. But they’re worth a lot less than votes based on information everyone has available.

96

Emphasis added. This is doubly true for cases that people who have since died make. It’s not always true that the scum will kill off people who are suspicious of them, but it does tend to work.

97

And if nothing else, once someone has died, you at least know that their cases were sincere.

98

My only suggestion: make it Werewolf instead. It’s the far superior game flavor. :smiley:

99

A vote for someone who is voting you isn’t always OMGUS, it can be based on an actual case. And if a case made against you is equally bad as a case made against another player, you might even consider voting for the first player as a tie-breaker, on the basis that the latter could be voting for scum.

100

I think it’s natural to react more to other players who are engaging you, including voting you. You are going to spend more time thinking about them, so you may end up with a better read. OMGUS is not a great vote, but it’s not automatically terrible to be voting someone who is voting you.

I like idea that people should check in to the thread at least once a day. Sometimes when you wagon someone, they react in a way that clears themself, and you want to change the wagon. If people only post once a Day, that’s much harder to do.