I Don't Like a Lot of the Guides
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2016 5:30 am
play what works best for you
In post 5, itlepip wrote:Guides provide a good framework for players to deviate from while simultaneously giving tells that are decent on newbies and are at least a start on better players. Trust me if you don't have any tells a). You can't ever read anything b). You flake out because you can't actually scumhunt. Which has happened to me when I reject too many of what I view as scummy at a time. Your idea of a guide is just to achieve whatever ideal you like the most rather than to help new players get a decent grasp of the game. Also some of the advice is really useful, like a miller claiming as such after they get investigated is such bad EV that even if it is 'linear thinking' its bad.
In post 6, Killthestory wrote:In post 5, itlepip wrote:Guides provide a good framework for players to deviate from while simultaneously giving tells that are decent on newbies and are at least a start on better players. Trust me if you don't have any tells a). You can't ever read anything b). You flake out because you can't actually scumhunt. Which has happened to me when I reject too many of what I view as scummy at a time. Your idea of a guide is just to achieve whatever ideal you like the most rather than to help new players get a decent grasp of the game. Also some of the advice is really useful, like a miller claiming as such after they get investigated is such bad EV that even if it is 'linear thinking' its bad.
Man, you misinterpreted everything I said so perfectly, wow.
My idea of a guide is to facilitate a new player into a proper playstyle that compliments them, and their personality.It is not to direct them into a playstyle most commonly used.The fact of the matter is that these guides are leading them too much into a generic townie playstyle when everyone's different in how they play. There is no right and wrong with playstyles as long as you are actively giving out your opinions.
Also I love the passive aggressiveness. Fuck off my dick if you can't say shit up front
In post 9, zoraster wrote:In post 6, Killthestory wrote:In post 5, itlepip wrote:Guides provide a good framework for players to deviate from while simultaneously giving tells that are decent on newbies and are at least a start on better players. Trust me if you don't have any tells a). You can't ever read anything b). You flake out because you can't actually scumhunt. Which has happened to me when I reject too many of what I view as scummy at a time. Your idea of a guide is just to achieve whatever ideal you like the most rather than to help new players get a decent grasp of the game. Also some of the advice is really useful, like a miller claiming as such after they get investigated is such bad EV that even if it is 'linear thinking' its bad.
Man, you misinterpreted everything I said so perfectly, wow.
My idea of a guide is to facilitate a new player into a proper playstyle that compliments them, and their personality.It is not to direct them into a playstyle most commonly used.The fact of the matter is that these guides are leading them too much into a generic townie playstyle when everyone's different in how they play. There is no right and wrong with playstyles as long as you are actively giving out your opinions.
Also I love the passive aggressiveness. Fuck off my dick if you can't say shit up front
I think he did say what he meant to say. I don't read this as passive aggressive. On the other hand, I see your response as ridiculously defensive.
So here's the thing. You don't like the guides that are out there? Write one of your own. This thread isn't very persuasive.
In post 0, Killthestory wrote:My take on shit regarding mafia basically.
Play whatever works best for you. A playstyle should be a direct imitation of you in real life. Why should you have to all super tense and serious and shit and just pretend to be what you aren't? If your friends know you, they will have the easiest time townreading you. There's also the fact that there's nothing hindering you in playing to the best of your ability because you simply are just playing. There's no strategies on "should I bus?" "Should I defend?" Whatever you'd normally do, just do it and you'll be completely good my guys. Maybe you'll get lynched the first couple of games for being unnatural with how you play, but with time people will come to be able to easily see which alignment, you are, or so they think. It works in two different ways. If you're always playing a direct imitation of your self, no strategies or anything involved, then how the fuck is someone supposed to be able to read you? How can they read you if you're simply always acting the same, and the tone behind your posts is generally the same. The only way they can read you is based on correlations, but even then you can generally say you were just targeting who you scumread or you defended them because you thought they were town. There's absolutely no downplay to just playing by yourself in regards to playstyles. Trying to imitate someone's playstyle is just silly in general because your acting someone you're not. You're not typically extremely aggressive or pushy, so why act like that? It just hinders you.
Anyway, there's two categories of playstyles that all mafia players should fall under. "but wait kill didnt you just say that we should play how we typically act" yes, but there should be some limitations my dear lad. Tight Aggressive and Loose Aggressive. Notice there's no passive, or the infamous lurker. Let me explain why. Imagine you're in a quite literal mob who wants to linch some bitch my man. The aggressive players are the ones calling for their heads, demanding they be put on a pike or some shit like that. Now, imagine the one guy, standing off to the corner proclaiming, "uh... can w-w-we please lynch kill-desu, nya~." That is a passive player. A passive player does not push their agenda or give any definitive opinions on anything. They are quite literally the doormat in the game, able to be walked over quite easily. You are basically a deterrent to whatever alignment because you're quite literally not doing anything, even if you post a lot. However, I'm willing to say that I have seen few passive players who have behaved like this that have played very well due to being able to coincide it with their personality. It's far and few between tho. If you think it would really imitate you as a person, then go for it. Then, you have the lurker style. Lurker is not a playstyle, but I'll humor you anyway. Lurkers basically aren't playing the game. The game mafia can be played in real life, and typically there's no prods and shit because it's real life motherfucking shit my man. So if you have a guy whos not saying shit irl, you're either gonna get annoyed and stop playing, or you're gonna lynch the bastard. This is typically the lurker "playstyle" over the forums, too. Lurker is really not even a playstyle, more activity, but like I said, I'd humor you dudes out there anyway.
Anyway, let me, before I get ahead of myself, explain the significance of Tight Aggressive and Loose Aggressive. Loose Aggressive players are players that are basically going balls to the walls in their scumreading tactics. If you're not complying, you're the enemy. They push their town agenda heavily and attack whoever they scumread fiercely. For example. "B-B-Baka, let's lynch this player!" "MOTHERFUCKER THATS SCUMMY AS FUCK IM ABOUT TO LYNCH YO ASS MY MAN." "Wait, no s-s-senpai, I'm sorry, please forgive me." "OH NOW YOURE BUDDYING UP TO MY ASS YOU LITTLE BITCH ASS PANSY, THAT DESERVES THE FUCKING VOTE MY DEAREST LAD. /vote this dude who cant play fo shit my man." That is Loose Aggressive in a nutshell.
Tight Aggressive is a whole different ballgame. They're the players who are coldly calculated and show little to no emotion, but they scumhunt hard, too, they just don't push their agenda so hard, and they're typically better at seeing someone else's perspective. They plan out what they want to do, or maybe they just try to be versatile, and they ask questions and pick apart their opponents defenses or posts systematically. For example, "B-B-Baka, let's lynch this player!" "Lad, didn't you actually just want to lynch the other player. Wouldn't you consider that vastly opportunistic yourself considering the fact that that man just accused this player of being scum, of which you quickly jumped on. And if I pulled your ISO from Day 2, you jumped from 5 different wagons to finally hammer yesterday's lynch target which flipped VT." "Well, uh...... I'm town?!" "That's what they all say, lad /vote player who dont know how to play for shit."
Maybe you fit in the middle, that's completely fine. As long as you can identify yourself as one or the other, you're good my man. Anyway, I mentioned subcategories too that fall under this shit, like maybe you townhunt, or maybe you gambit a lot, or you could regularly scumhunt, idk. Here's my take on that. If you tools available to you that you could easily use to find scum, why not use it? Whatever you have at your disposal, make good use of it. There's never a reason to not use a tool that could potentially help you, it's like saying, "No, Mr. Baggins, I will not take this armor because even if I get attacked by some ogre dude, I have all these experienced adventurers who can save my ass." Spoilers for y'all, that fucking armor saved Frodo's life. The gist is to use whatever tools you have available to you.
Also, I'd like to note that there are all these fancy abbreviations and strategies, but they really mean nothing overall. Just play how you feel my man. Although I will say that if you're an advanced player, you can go against meta like completely buddying up to your mafia members because going against meta is actually extremely strong, as one player showed me. The dude nearly one a game in a forum as an NK that was ridiculously bad. It was pretty impressive, actually, and it was all because he didn't play like how scum should play, he went against meta and played how he felt like.
In post 12, zoraster wrote:If some playstyles win more than others, isn't that a pretty good sign that they're better?
In post 14, zoraster wrote:No? The goal of the game is to win the game, not really to "be yourself" except in the context of how that helps you win.
In post 16, zMuffinMan wrote:there are definitely right and wrong ways to play
and using an example of someone whose town play is indistinguishable from their scum play because of how bad their town play is doesn't really prove the point i think you want it to prove
In post 18, zMuffinMan wrote:no, you're still wrong because good intentions doesn't necessarily translate to good (or correct) play
besides which, guides aren't the be all and end all, they're just meant toguidepeople, and there are two things to realise about this: one is that basically all guides fall within your "aggressive" spectrum, but you're claiming there's something wrong with that, and two, you could be an incredible player, regardless of your personality, by just sticking to a generic guide if that generic guide isn't dogshit
In post 22, Cheery Dog wrote:This thread is stuck on linear thinking with its hatred towards guides.
In post 21, Killthestory wrote:I'd rather not diss specific guides since I know from experience that can hurt. Especially a guide that has actual hard work put into it.
Just think of the generalizations I've listed.