|
I have not played Mafia in some time and I seem to recall not being especially good at it so naturally this seems like a great game for me to jump right into, sign me up please
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
derp posted:lowercase is pLayed out now. time for rAndom cap AnCap does not mean Anarchy in Capitalization also it is stupid
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
PM received, confirming, all that jazz, it was very well-written and atmospheric too, good job Somberbrero.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2017 09:00
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Good morrow ye wondrous folk. I am confirming my PM has a lot of text I have not yet read, for tis early yet! lynch this man
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
cut out the middleman of pretending to be a team player and just skip straight to FYGM, sounds like a solid strategy
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:I am not scum lol Sounds like something scum would say ....but maybe that's just what they WANT us to think this is a hard game
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
I think the whole premise of this game is that the witches are, in fact, the government Town government, which is pretty weaksauce as governments go, but still.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
2 penny bottle imp posted:Ahhh I thought there was an implication of government corruption in the theme but read through all the flavour again, you are correct. Admission of potential error is a town move, scum doubles down because they can never be caught out sharing bad info without being suspect
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
flerp posted:like what the gently caress is this? It looks to me like someone making a joke, having forgotten that Day One Of Mafia Games Are SRS BZNSS and that their joke will inevitably be picked apart in search of meaning by players who have no information and are starving for more and they will by God get it even if they have to get it from your cold, dead corpse, and then said joke being picked apart by information-starved players as a tenuous excuse to lynch. Honestly, given the pattern I'd usually suspect anyone who's starting to accuse and ringlead on D1 of scumness, but it's hard to be certain because it seems like every SA Mafia game (that I've seen, at least) starts the same way; someone tries to be funny, someone deliberately fails to get the joke, and before you know it there's a slapfight; I haven't figured out which is scummier, "displaying a (often bad) sense of humor" or "being aggressively thickheaded." Meanwhile I'm trying to remember what game it was that fixated Kashuno in my head as "dude on the other team" but, like, he wasn't in Candy Land or anything... hmm.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
I hate to say it man but your material just isn't clicking with the audience, maybe you should workshop that poo poo in the comedy clubs before busting it out for the Netflix special
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Without any kind of concrete information, I'd argue that not voting at all on Day 1 is the significantly lesser sin, IMHO. It's (much) worse on subsequent days, but a D1 vote is almost never illustrative of anything more than "that person made a joke I didn't like" and/or "look what a funny crazy guy I am" (or, occasionally, "oh poo poo it's a bandwagon I better hop on board so they don't come after me next"). Having said that, I am also out of the current meta, since it's been a while since my last Mafia game, so I could be out of touch on that one - but I can't really see how. A Day 1 informationless lynch - barring some sort of egregious slipup on the scum's part - is statistically much more likely to be beneficial to the scum than the town. To what degree it's more likely is unknown, since we don't know what roles are present and how many scum there are in this variant, but it's still a pretty safe bet IMHO that the game isn't divided 50/50 between town and scum. (unless there are mutually opposing scum factions, but that sounds like a fuckin' headache) That's my read, anyways; if someone thinks I'm wrong they can feel free to try and convince me.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Flamander posted:Jokevotes vs no votes as a measure of scumminess is a useless debate imo; because you're using meaningless criteria to define whether a person is scum or town D1, when a lot of people either jokevote or don't vote early on. Seconding this sentiment. IMO if anything's a good indicator of scumminess it's calling for blood D1, given the likelihood for D1 lynches to hurt town more than scum.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
You know the kind of thing town players hate just as much as scum? Losing. And killing off other townies is a great way to make that happen faster. You know what's a great way for scum to get a leg up early in the game? Pointing and shouting "Hey I think this guy must be scum" on the flimsiest bullshit excuse and hoping town is dumb enough to latch on. If we were on Day 3 you'd have a case, but on Day 1 a lynch based on a faint whiff is vastly more likely to catch a townie than scum. I wonder, oh how I wonder, if you could possibly be missing this fact somehow. Strangely I don't think you are.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Honestly - and I can clearly see that this isn't a popular position, clearly, but so be it - I'm not certain that a D1 no-lynch isn't better than grabbing someone on the flimsiest of evidence and just hoping they're actually scum. Because they usually aren't. At least by D2 investigative roles have some data and there's some vague hope that we're going on more than just blind gut instinct. It has been some time since I was in a SA Mafia Game, but I do still remember the fairly ridiculous number of times town ended up lynching their Doctor or something on D1 and everyone going "well that sucked but at least we learned something, right guys?" Yeah, what you learned is that you lost a valuable role and the chances of a scum victory increased significantly because you did their loving job for them. Keep telling yourself it was a net positive that you cost Town a potentially useful player on the basis of thinking their jokes weren't funny; maybe you can convince yourself. There's a reason a bunch of non-SA mafia-type games (I'm thinking specifically at the moment of Town of Salem, which no one should play because it's terrible and full of idiots) just skip D1 entirely; it's because a blind lynch is worse than no lynch at all. Obviously that is very much not the current meta - I don't know what I was expecting but it wasn't the degree of vehemence with which people have disagreed - but that's where I'm coming from. Having said all of that, that entire premise only works if there are people on D1 who are disagreeing with me and trying to stir the pot by posting and voting, so gently caress, I don't know. A game in which everyone agreed with what I'm saying would probably have a pretty quiet and boring D1, so maybe I'm not as close to a Universal Theory Of Mafia as I think; doesn't change the fact that on Day One I would rather be thought of as terrible for not voting than actually be terrible by costing Town a player.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
this is a stickup posted:let's kill one of the people actively pushing for a no lynch that would starve this game starved of information of information When the information you gain is "well, that was a townie, and no one can even call the votes scummy because we were all baying for someone's blood because for some reason we love to murder," how exactly is that a benefit?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:It's a benefit because I don't automatically assume I can't find scum on day 1 for no reason besides defeatism. It's not that I assume I can't find scum D1, it's that I haven't found scum D1; I don't find any of the cases that've been made on anyone particularly compelling and I'm not a big fan of jumping on a bandwagon because "killing someone is better than killing no one," personally. If there was a case on someone that I thought was actually convincing, I'd vote for it - but I'm not seeing one. You do want an active D1 - I admit that in my last post, I'm honestly not sure how to reconcile that with my general D1 conservatism - but even after an inactive D1 you can't apply all the same reasoning because on N1 we get investigative roles gathering data, night actions firing (or being blocked), and at least some players go into D2 actually knowing poo poo. So no, you can't apply anything I'm saying to D2 after a quiet D1, but it's a nice effort.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Retro Futurist posted:It is better, in the grand scheme of things, to kill town D1. No kills get you no info, and killing scum is unlikely to help you draw any connections. No kills gets you no info - but it also costs you no townies. This is what I'm saying. Maybe I'm overreacting after having been burned in prior games, but I think the loss of "get no info" is offset by the gain of "didn't lose a townie." I am, obviously, not in the majority with that opinion, but it's what I think.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:DivineCoffeeBinge's last post of the day. This is pretty close to hammer, DCB argues for a day 1 no lynch and abstains from voting. What amazes me about DCB's post history is how many words are devoted to explaining why day 1 is a worthless day while exactly 0 of them are talking about the game at hand or specific players. I also think the general doomsaying about the day 1 execution hitting town without mentioning Opop's name is a scummy way of getting credit for being right in hindsight. Oh yes absolutely it's vastly scummy of me to start arguing that a D1 no-lynch is nothing to fear and actually preferable to lynching on a lovely non-case back when RF had two votes on him and then actually hold that position instead of just going 'oh okay guys I guess you've convinced me that low info lynches are a good thing' and dropping the hammer the way I had a chance to for twenty solid minutes. Jesus gently caress you are dumb. Your case sucked and you managed to drum up enough support to kill a townie anyway, I applaud your efforts to immediately start out D2 by immediately declaring "hey everyone look at these other posters who didn't allow themselves to be led into lynching a townie the way I said we should, clearly they must be scummy," it's clever and all, but it's also a pretty transparent attempt to avoid any consequences for the fact that you spent all of D1 bouncing your vote around until you found someone you could sorta vaguely make a tenuous case about; also it's pretty sweet how you signed up by saying "It will probably be a fairly low key game from me" and then you became the post leader; I'm sure you're not unleashing a shitton of "low key" posts because you're trying to be the scum's expendable bandleader at all, honest I'll work up some thoughts on other players in a bit, I just got up from a nap and I want to do some rereading and thinking, but I hope that's enough mentioning of at least one specific player for you. Also: Retro Futurist posted:Ok but after you idiots kill me please avenge me by killing TNL tomorrow ##vote tnl
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
derp posted:##vote dcb Pretty sure you're going to want to bold the name there, it doesn't look like Votefinder noticed. Anyways, a couple of initial thoughts, all of which are initial and subject to change, in no particular order: Tobbs Gnawed is a replacement, but it's not like he's gonna say anything that would contradict Saith's posts since Saith never posted, so it's hard to say yea or nay one way or another just yet. I'd like to check, though - I'm assuming that the claim of 'VT' means Veteran and not, like, Vermont or something? Because I don't know what Vermont would do in a Mafia game but I assume it involves maple trees. got some chores tonight posted some song lyrics, was virtually silent throughout all of D1 except when he popped in to drop the hammer with less than a minute left, that's... sure, that's a thing. It's not a thing I'm particularly keen on, in all honesty. Kashuno... at first I was thinking "hey how convenient that his vanishing coincided with having a few votes on him" but I went back and checked and actually, no, it didn't at all; by the time he dropped out of posting for the day he had no votes on him, so it reads to me like he actually did have poo poo go down and not, like, a dude falling silent because he doesn't want to arouse suspicion. Plus if he had been quiet out of fear there'd be no reason for him to bring attention to himself with his apology post. So right now I'm leaning town. I would like to hear how he went from voting TNL to being certain TNL is town, though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2017 09:18
|
|
|
2 penny bottle imp posted:VT = vanilla town. Ah, that makes sense, thank you. Kashuno posted:DCB tbh I lost my read on the game entirely and had to read it all again Fair enough. I wish I saw what you saw, but c'est la vie. derp posted:everyone should unvote though I think we need more discussion time, probably the next 2 or 3 lynches should be skipped until we have enough information to truly know whats going on Perhaps we could lynch more townies on flimsy and unconvincing evidence, would that cheer you up big guy Real talk - how in the hell does saying "maybe D1 no-lynches aren't inherently awful" infuriate you? I mean, we're going to end up lynching townies - it's inevitable, and besides which victory is unachievable without it barring the World's Greatest Investigative Role - but townies are a limited resource, and there will be a mostly-regular drain on our supply of them; all I'm saying is that maybe we shouldn't be eager to spend them even faster on a case that, virtually by definition, will be based on hazy gut feelings and barely educated guesses. If there's a case to make, make it, but "well I hate no-lynches" isn't a good one, not on the first drat day. How is that enough to make you rage, honestly? ...poo poo, is it that I'm not using random punctuation?!?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
derp posted:it infuriates me because inactive people infuriate me. there is a deadline to take action after which action will be taken against us. you're 'strategy' is to do nothing. doing nothing is always a terrible strategy when you are in a battle. if you think day one sucks, maybe work harder at getting people to post and getting people to say their thoughts on things instead of just calling for more time. If you can't see the difference between "let's actually post and discuss poo poo but if D1 comes out a no-lynch that's not such a bad thing, since 'well I guess we have to kill someone' helps scum more than town" and "let's just not do anything at all" then I don't know what to tell you, champ. There's being willing to kill a townie if it gets town a benefit, and then there's being eager to kill a townie in the hopes that maybe, just maybe, it might be useful. Insisting that we just have to kill someone D1, we just have to, is roughly the equivalent of blowing your paychecks on scratch tickets because you're just certain that you'll get the jackpot one of these days. poo poo, it even muddies the waters on any info you get from peoples' votes - the one useful D1 info source - because the response to "hey that vote seems scummy to me" is immediately "well you wouldn't want a day one no-lynch now would you" instead of making people take a fuckin' stand and actually say what they're thinking. Anyway, it's a moot point now, since it's no longer D1, so I'll drop it. As I said earlier, I'm not at all a fan of chores' D1 last-second hammer after a day of silence. The hammer isn't the thing that gets me, last-second though it was; it's the utter silence punctuated only by the occasional shitpost that reads to me like a dude desperately trying not to attract any attention. ##vote chores
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:the guy who argued we should spend day 1 doing nothing I know I addressed my last post to derp but you can read it too, it's okay don't be afraid of the words, they can't hurt you
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
So quiet. Do I need to make another effortpost questioning Mafia strategy just to get people to post again? Of the two posters with significant bandwagons, I like the case against Flamander more than the one against stickup; for a guy who makes a point of withholding a vote because he wants to have a good reason behind it, he immediately turns around and advances some pretty shaky reasoning about stickup to justify his vote. ##vote Flamander (yes I am aware that basically every charge that can be leveled against Flamander besides his general air of resignation and "oh well I guess I'll die I'm just not very good at this" can be leveled against me as well; c'est la guerre)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
2 penny bottle imp posted:Would you mind unvoting yourself then? Because there's no deadline, so there's no need to rush this. Well, I mean, there is, it's in a bit under 6 hours as I type this
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
this is a stickup posted:I have a clearly viewable history in previous games of being against lynching replacements with one exception: if it is possible to turbo them before they've even opened the thread. nothing I said in either of these posts is false or wrong. again, tobbs knows this. tobbs always thinks I am scum and he is never right. Anyone feel like verifying this? I'm certainly willing to believe it but I'm going to have to bow before the knowledge of other people who've played Mafia with stickup, because while I enjoy the game and all I'm not looking to do homework. Anyway if it turns out to be 100% true and verifiable and trustworthy, the second part of this post can probably be disregarded: I'm honestly not a huge fan of lengthy effortposts that are devoted to making a case about someone but spend half the time talking about the posting player's strategies and tendencies; they strike me as scummy (as much as I hate this term) virtue signalling.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
If anything makes it clear to me that there's a lot of Mafia meta that I have no recent experience with, it's the fact that several players are being referred to by their old names; I keep seeing people talk about Opop and needing to remind myself that that means Retro Futurist, likewise with Mr. F!. Ah well, I'll survive. The possibility of two scum factions is a worrying one, but it makes the N1 no-kill more inexplicable; I'd be more inclined to think at least one of them was a vigkill or a lover or some other role that I don't know the details of, because I have trouble believing that town was SO good that we stuffed both mafia and a serial killer on N1. So far we have three town flips to look at: Kashuno got votes from stickup, Mr. F!, and TNL on D1, and no one on D2. None of those votes stood all day. Tobbs Gnawed is tricky because he was a replacement for Saith, so I'm only going to look at the people who voted specifically for him and not Saith votes. Flerp, derp, Kash, TNL, chores, and stickup all voted for this slot, but everyone vacated that vote pretty quick once Tobbs subbed in (except stickup, who voted for him after the sub and then blamed the app, but he changed his vote in two minutes so that seems legit). No real info there, except possibly by inference. Retro Futurist was voted off the island by TNL, 2 penny bottle imp, Mr. F!, flerp, stickup, yronic, and chores with the last-second hammer. And one scum flip: Flamander was scum, and he was voted off by TNL, derp, chores, me, flerp, 2 penny bottle imp, and yronic with the hammer (and briefly by himself, oops). This means he was not voted for by Mr F!, Tobbs, himself, stickup, and Kash. So the people who have recorded votes for two known townies (omitting votes on Tobbs because of the replacement) and who did not vote for the one known scum are Mr. F! and stickup.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
got some chores tonight posted:i believe that the scum killed tobbs and kash was killed by a town player for extremely bad posting yesterday I could believe that, honestly. Also stickup what the hell are you talking about, Kash's actions would have only been informed by one set of night actions, he died before his second set of night actions went through, unless you're alleging that he had information at the game's start which, y'know, it'd be nice to know why you would think that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
this is a stickup posted:wait, it is D3. day 1 he is informed of night 0, day 2 he is informed of night 1. what are you talking about? What the hell are you talking about? We get PMs and confirm, then we start with Day 1, and RF is lynched. Then there's night time, when Kash The Cop can do night actions, and no one is killed. Then Day 2, and Flamander is lynched. Then night 2, Kash might have investigated someone new but it doesn't matter because he gets killed. What the hell is this night 0 you're talking about? Hey, while we're at it, the one person we can definitively say Kashuno's opinion changed on between D1 and D2 is TNL, when he went from voting him D1 to being convinced he was town D2, so if we're going to start talking about who he might have investigated I think there's a pretty clear answer there. Incidentally I wonder if the reason stickup has been consistently voting yronic "all game" (read: all of D2, since no one at all voted for him D1) is related to the no-kill N1. I wonder this for Reasons. Hmmmmmm.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
this is a stickup posted:let me just quote this for you since you seem to be having trouble with it. night zero is a time pregame when some people with actions typically get to use them. we won't know if kashuno's ability worked night 0 until after the game, but given the existence of night zero, some people with actions have abilities to use on night zero Night zero was not mentioned in my role PM at all, and I have not played in a game that included it, so thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I didn't read the post you quoted carefully, somber announcing a short night 0 does suggest some actions but I'm still not going to presume any until I see one claimed. FWIW the phrasing of "it starts now and ends sometime around the point where i wake up or get bored" doesn't seem to me the kind of thing you say when you're inviting night zero actions; the reason that night phases usually last a while is to give everyone a chance to get actions in and for scum to have some discussions, and an irregularly-scheduled night phase seems like the kind of thing that would end up screwing over someone who wasn't around to send a PM until after Somberbrero "got bored" - and Somber doesn't strike me as the kind of dude who'd run their game that sloppily. This is of course entirely subjective and I could be terribly wrong, but still, this game's been run on a pretty tight ship so far and that just doesn't seem to fit, so I'm going to assume no n0 actions unless and until someone proves otherwise, I think. Anyways I'm leaning towards the theory that Mr. F! and stickup are scumbuddies, as it seems a little coincidental to me that just as discussion is turning towards stickup Mr. F! shows up, offers no defense to the fact that momentum is building for a vote against him, and instead throws out a single-line claim, like the posting equivalent of running over and shouting NINJA SMOKE BOMB to provide cover. That's tenuous as hell, but it's my current working theory.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
flerp posted:i dont see this. if youre a watcher and you got a result like the one mr. f is claiming, of course they would announce it. why would they try to defend themselves when theyve basically just discovered a scumbo? I can't speak for anyone else, obviously, but if I was a watcher I'd also note who I watched N1 so that there was some more info out there, figuring that I'd already blown my wad and put a bullseye on my head and wanting to get as many cards on the table as I could. This might be giving Mr. F! too much credit, I grant you. There's something else I want to bring up but I just realized that it could depend on an incorrect reading of my role PM, so I'm gonna shut up until I get a clarification from Somber
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Okay, got my clarification. So I'm going to write a short novel.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
To begin: I am a Lychford Bulletproof Bodyguard. This means that I can protect another player, and if they're targeted with a killing action, I will die in their place - but the first kill that targets me will fail. I do not get a message if that protection is triggered. (the clarification I wanted was to double-check that my protection applies if I'm intercepting a killing action on my protectee, which of course it does, but it was phrased with just the teensiest degree of ambiguity so I wanted to be 100% certain) No naturally, n1's no-kill piqued my interest, because hey, it could have been because I protected the person that scum was targeting! Mind you, that's very much not a guarantee - no message when the protection fires, remember - but still, it was a possibility. I feel okay claiming now because either the protection fired and now if I get killed at night it muddies the waters (people thinking 'oh this person must be scum because they had reason to want DCB dead' when actually no one wanted me dead in the first place, I just got in the way), so better to get that information out early, or the protection didn't fire and now scum has to be concerned about who I might protect, and anything that makes scum's lives harder is okay in my book. Point is, on n1 I protected yronic. Now, like I said, I don't know for certain that I was responsible for the n1 no-kill, but I did go into d2 thinking about what might follow from a no-kill; I decided that if I were scum and the person we wanted to kill didn't actually get killed, I would probably do my utmost to see that person get lynched, just in case they have some kind of bullshit nightkill immunity or whatever. (incidentally, I picked yronic because he was the only player to respond to my (entirely sincere, not a trap) "d1 no-lynches aren't inherently awful" post by not calling me a colossal fuckup, which was petty and silly but gently caress it, it was n1, it's not like there was anything solid to base a decision on) Which brings me to stickup, who opened up d2 by voting Saith, the safest of all possible votes, not realizing that Saith had been replaced by Tobbs, and then two minutes later switching his vote to yronic and keeping it there all day. This was hardly conclusive guilt - like I said, I can't be certain that yronic was the scum target n1 and even if he was I can't be certain that stickup would react to being blocked the way I did - but it was enough to get him on my radar. That only accentuated all the other pings; the "look at my posting history in these games where I was town" as though that had any meaning at all (because of course a scum player is going to try and fit within their established townie pattern), the laser fixation on yronic, the "I am supporting the case against Flamander even though I'm not voting for him with like fifteen minutes left because maybe there would be some sort of groundbreaking discussion at the last second" weaseling, et cetera; I've discussed this in several posts now. I'm not calling it proof, but this is why I've been pretty suspicious of stickup since early d2; dude reads to me like a guy trying to get town to do during the day what scum failed to do during the night. So that's where I'm coming from, and I'd like to see what the rest of town thinks about it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
derp posted:hello i am the doctor and can protect myself every night so that's what im gunna do. probably not the best strategy to claim but it seems like what my character would do Just gonna note that derp has been "claiming" self-protecting doc since role PMs dropped It sounded like a dumb jokeclaim to me then and it sounds like a dumb jokeclaim to me now, but since some of you have played mafia with derp before maybe you'll know whether that's the kind of thing he would do or whether upon being revealed by a watcher he cast about for the first BS claim that popped into his head
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
After kicking the current crop of cases around for a bit I've settled on the following: who in the gently caress ever heard of a Doc role that can self-heal two nights in a row? I don't think Somberbrero is going to put a role like that into the game. Accordingly, ##vote derp If I'm wrong and actually unlimited-self-healing-Docs are a Thing in SA Mafia games, I'll unvote, but I'm fairly sure no one's using a role quite so broken.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
I don't know, given D1 I think 2 hours to go is a little premature to start worrying about dead game. I'm still liking derp more than Mr. F!, if only because if Mr. F! is scum and is trying to bullshit claim to try and throw dirt on derp he could have picked so many better targets than derp. We'll see how things are looking in an hour, I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
I'm willing to switch my vote; is there any benefit to waiting a little while longer, or should I just get it over with?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
this is a stickup posted:please wait as I read, I have a minor crisis on my hands that I'm dealing with at the same time Can do.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
While meta shouldn't be ignored - indeed pretty much can't be ignored - it's important, IMHO, to recognize its limitations. A lot of tone or style in posts stems from responses to other posters; a different mix of players in a game will generally tend to change the style of a poster's responses to them. Meta can make for good supportive evidence, but it shouldn't be the foundation of a case, is what I'm saying; if your case depends on meta analysis to make sense then it's not a particularly good case and you should probably take a step back and examine your own biases. (said the guy who hasn't played Mafia for years and so has no meta to examine)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
In a fit of nostalgia I went and looked back through old Mafia games I was in (thanks Votefinder for keeping track of that stuff!). TNL and RF/Opop were players in my very first game of Mafia. That was six fuckin' years ago. I just thought that was neat.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 05:27
|
|