Mini 521 (SMSM, Ended)

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

Fiasco

Do you think this subgame matters?(in terms of winning the game)

If so how?

[Fiasco]

If a side with more townies wins, townies have a better chance of meta-lynching scum. I agree the stakes aren't as high as normal, but why not make some attempt at playing the game if we've signed up anyway? How else are we going to judge meta-alignments?

[Fiasco]

Signing up for a speed game that says "post something relevant every day if not more" and then not saying anything relevant the first, what, five? days the thread is open, is just plain rude.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

That statement isn't even true.

I will be going after your metalynch hard.

The only question now is which "side" you are on in terms of this subgame. I suggest the mafia now out themselves because I think we have our metalynches now.

Our best bets are Fiasco/Sarcastro

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

Don't try to change the subject, I have my reasons for my actions.

[Fiasco]

What statement isn't true?

I suggest the mafia now out themselves because I think we have our metalynches now.

Quoted for embarrassment.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

If a side with more townies wins, townies have a better chance of meta-lynching scum. I agree the stakes aren't as high as normal, but why not make some attempt at playing the game if we've signed up anyway? How else are we going to judge meta-alignments?

For example, if there are 9 protown subgame players and 3 mafia subgame players, but the metamafia are all in the "town" section of the subgame, then if the side with more "metatownies" which would be the "subgameTown" won, the chances for the metatownies to lynch metamafia would not be "better", it would be zero since there are no metamafia in the subgameMafia for them to lynch.

If you think for a second what Subgames actually do, I would argue that they do nothing but decide who is up for lynch. Given that we have no real information to go on, why limit our choices for metalynching to the smaller group rather than the larger group?

[Fiasco]

I think I pretty much explained all this in pregame.

For example, if there are 9 protown subgame players and 3 mafia subgame players, but the metamafia are all in the "town" section of the subgame, then if the side with more "metatownies" which would be the "subgameTown" won, the chances for the metatownies to lynch metamafia would not be "better", it would be zero since there are no metamafia in the subgameMafia for them to lynch.

Obviously by "more" I meant a greater fraction, not a greater total number. To a metatownie, being subtown is weak evidence that subtown contains more metatown; being subscum is weak evidence that subscum contains more metatown.

If you think for a second what Subgames actually do, I would argue that they do nothing but decide who is up for lynch.

Yes, and if you're a metatownie you have no business putting yourself up for lynch. If the subgames were completely useless mith wouldn't have put them in.

Also, why Sarcastro?

[Fiasco]

Actually maybe you're right -- sorry. Putting yourself up for lynch may be a sort of "bad play", but as long as it's a sort of "bad play" that you can force everyone else to participate in, that doesn't matter.

One thing we can say for sure is scum have a better idea who they want to win than town.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

How do you choose who to eliminate if the town loses?

[Fiasco]

Same as usual? Not sure why you're asking.

I'm thinking about your proposal of skipping the subgame entirely. How would you handle it if scum just refused to give themselves away? We have to vote off two players -- how do we choose them, especially considering we can't eliminate two that are on different teams? Will the possibility of a serial killer screw things up?

Certainly your plan doesn't seem like any fun. I can't prove at the moment that it's not slightly better play.

[kabenon007]

I am of the mindset that this first subgame is just to narrow our choices for the first metalynch. But after that, we will have information about the metagame, which we can use to affect our decisions in the subsequent subgames. Like, if we metalynch this person, then we can say, oh look! This person could have been bussing, or this person could have been overreaching with their accusations, or whatever. Then our next subgames have more meaning, as we know who exactly we want to win each subgame.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

when you say same as usual, what do you mean?

What qualities would you look for in order to decide who to vote off?

Would you decide to vote off those who played the worst? the best? looked scummiest? looked most innocent?

[ryan]

Pooky: Wouldn't you go after the scummiest player, I mean in the grand scheme of things isn't that how you win the game?

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

but what do you use to determine who is scummy and who isn't?

[Fiasco]

You could treat it mostly as a standard nightless game and pay special attention to any attempts to bend the subgames in anti-town ways.

There are complications to your proposal and I'm not really happy with how you tried to implement it without discussion.

How would you handle it if scum just refused to give themselves away? We have to vote off two players -- how do we choose them, especially considering we can't eliminate two that are on different teams? Will the possibility of a serial killer screw things up?

[Fiasco]

By "your proposal", what I mean is: 1) ask the scum to out themselves, 2) everyone vote on metagame lynches, 3) ask whatever side the lynches are on to lose the subgame intentionally. Tell me if I misunderstood.

[ryan]

but what do you use to determine who is scummy and who isn't?

Evidence, questions, contradictions, behavior not townielike.

[Adele]

but what do you use to determine who is scummy and who isn't?

Evidence, questions, contradictions, behavior not townielike.

Sure, but we're mostly going to be playing subgames. Behaviour within a subgame may be a horrible indicator of scummyness in the metagame. Pooky raises a good point IMHO.

[Fiasco]

So could all the non-me, non-magical, non-kabe people please weigh in on whether we're going to play this subgame at all? If yes, may I suggest threatening Max?

unvote, vote Max

[Fiasco]

Under normal play scum wins about half the time. If we follow Pooky's plan, we need two lynchees on the same team, so the town almost certainly has to lose. Metascum have a much better idea than metatown as to which side they want to win. Discuss.

[ryan]

So could all the non-me, non-magical, non-kabe people please weigh in on whether we're going to play this subgame at all? If yes, may I suggest threatening Max?

unvote, vote Max

Wouldn't threatening some of the lurkers be a better choice?

[Adele]

If only one thing is clear, it's that this subgame requires a more confrontational style. I know this post is unlike me, but I think it's necessary to be a bit shoutier. For the record, I am

not

going to turn into Fritzler

__

Boo hoo. "Suggestion" is not that different from "idea". I didn't even say it was scummy, just asked other people. Fact is that you proposed something that would have outed most vanillas in the game even if it didn't seem that way at first. If one or two people followed it because they couldn't see the harm, that would still have been damaging.

yeah, if I'd not made a point of saying it might be unutterably dumb, and asked specifically for thoughts.

When Adele asked for comments on her idea, Fiasco said,

'Everyone, do you think Adele's "let's all say whether we have the same role" suggestion was scummy?'

. (BTW, points against Adele here for attempting to benefit from the mod's mistake. While this isn't necessarily scummy, it is, in my opinion, poor sportsmanship). More importantly, I noticed that Fiasco doesn't give his opinion on the idea, but asks everyone else first. It would have been less suspicious if he had said

"Does anybody ELSE think Adele's suggestion was scummy?"

, but it seems that he was leading everybody else into it and waiting for anybody else to start gunning for Adele.

YAUS. Asking everybody else if something's scummy so, if anyone (like Joe-average) says "maybe, yeah", you can later say "Um, I think I agree with Joe-average that Adele was scummy" = scummy.

So could all the non-me, non-magical, non-kabe people please weigh in on whether we're going to play this subgame at all? If yes, may I suggest threatening Max?

unvote, vote Max

"Look at me, I'm the only one who cares about the game, look how many posts I've entered (bickering off-topic), follow me in bandwagoning this guy cause what else are you gonna do?"

I'll do this.

Vote: Fiasco

[Sammich]

No can do Fiasco.
Although.

Mod: Prod Max

THERE'S A BETTER SOLUTION DUH

[WaterboyWaldo]

Eh, not really feeling like there's much point to the subgames myself.

Don't know why Fiasco is pushing so much for Max. I might join Adele in voting him soon.