Page 4 of 22
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:34 pm
by mv_gimmick
In post 52, xRECKONERx wrote: In post 49, CuddlyCaucasian wrote:Those are good points Reck! I hadn't thought about how juries lately have been punishing risky play, although that may be a result of jury members not caring as much and voting for who they like more. Either way, a large part of it is jurors making everything about themselves. I think this could be countered by only allowing each jury member 1-3 questions like we did in RSX.
Yeah, I considered this today. I think limiting FTC speeches to a wordcount and limiting jury questions and responses would be a good start so people dont feel the need to ahve 10 page long bitchfests.
I think this is a good note to have. I think originally I just asked more questions because there was a lot of time to kill and I wanted to touch a lot of bases. I'll keep it to 2 or 3 for a next time so that you guys can do the talking.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:34 pm
by Vijarada
Yeah one player lay in the background for a while and made nearly 1st. Others like Steve rizzo etc really didn't. This winner made the biggest moves in the game! We all thought she overplayed! This season was big moves orama.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:35 pm
by Vijarada
In post 75, mv_gimmick wrote: In post 52, xRECKONERx wrote: In post 49, CuddlyCaucasian wrote:Those are good points Reck! I hadn't thought about how juries lately have been punishing risky play, although that may be a result of jury members not caring as much and voting for who they like more. Either way, a large part of it is jurors making everything about themselves. I think this could be countered by only allowing each jury member 1-3 questions like we did in RSX.
Yeah, I considered this today. I think limiting FTC speeches to a wordcount and limiting jury questions and responses would be a good start so people dont feel the need to ahve 10 page long bitchfests.
I think this is a good note to have. I think originally I just asked more questions because there was a lot of time to kill and I wanted to touch a lot of bases. I'll keep it to 2 or 3 for a next time so that you guys can do the talking.
Sko you ain't quitting? Hallelujah
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:36 pm
by Shadoweh
In post 68, xRECKONERx wrote:I'll say that Nexus also made me want to leave. I do tend to get a bit more emotional at times though.
The way this is being equated to Nexus is probably the source of my scorn slash why I can't talk seriously about this because it makes me upset and it would be me expressing the same things I've already expressed. I don't think it's conductive to the problems School had which were different.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:37 pm
by CuddlyCaucasian
In post 73, BROseidon wrote: In post 72, hiplop wrote:Im quitting because the meta sucks right now and Juno doing so well confirmed that to me. Nothing against juno.
Kilby, I'm going to be nice when I say this.
You're part of the problem.
good thing he's leaving then, we're already one step closer
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:38 pm
by hiplop
Ya dont worry bro if im the problem you did a good job getting rid of me.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:39 pm
by hiplop
Vanquisher of toxicity bro
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:39 pm
by Vijarada
This ain't no argument bout karass. Let's not do that again.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:39 pm
by CuddlyCaucasian
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:39 pm
by BROseidon
In post 79, CuddlyCaucasian wrote: In post 73, BROseidon wrote: In post 72, hiplop wrote:Im quitting because the meta sucks right now and Juno doing so well confirmed that to me. Nothing against juno.
Kilby, I'm going to be nice when I say this.
You're part of the problem.
good thing he's leaving then, we're already one step closer
In post 80, hiplop wrote:Ya dont worry bro if im the problem you did a good job getting rid of me.
Alternatively, you could be less sanctimonious about objectivity in a game where everything is contextual and not get actively upset when people don't play the way you think the game "should" be played.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:40 pm
by SensFan
Well, glad to know how everyone feels about me I guess (both from here + spec threads).
Don't worry. I won't ruin another game by playing in it.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:40 pm
by xRECKONERx
In post 71, BROseidon wrote:This isn't about turning this into another argument.
This is about diagnosing what the problem is so that we can deal with it the correct way.
In post 71, BROseidon wrote:This isn't about turning this into another argument.
This is about diagnosing what the problem is so that we can deal with it the correct way.
Okay.
The problem is, at its core, that people who spend months in these games aren't given the due treatment they deserve.
I think it's maybe that F3s are the problem, honestly.
F3s work well on the show but here I think there have been better winners produced by F2s than by F3s.
And I think it's because if you have a grudge against someone or don't like someone, even if you're not trying to give off that vibe, it can be interpreted that way.
Consider this: maybe me, CC, hiplop, and the rest of the specs & jury people who didn't appreciate Juno are wrong, okay. Sure.
The existence of the F3 made it possible to interpret it that way. If it was straight up a F2 between Juno and someone else and those people were wrong, it would be clear.
The fact there's this much controversy over it means, to me, that it wasn't as clear cut as people thought.
Perhaps it's that Dan and I didn't consider that we would split votes like that. If that's the case, maybe people aren't playing around F3s in terms of "who would I split votes with on the jury". Maybe people need to think less about "who can I beat" and instead think about "based on what limited knowledge I have of the jury's bitterness/leanings, who would be less likely to steal votes away from me in a vote?" It's possible. But I don't think introducing complexity is the way to beat that.
Binary choices are good, I think. At least for settling this meta into something more palatable. It's an up and down referendum. People can discuss whether so-and-so would've won against so-and-so, but there's not a chance of vote siphoning. I don't think vote siphoning is bad, but I think if you look at recent F3s, they were the sources of the most controversy, whereas a F2 would've sealed the case and it wouldn't be an argument.
I'm not saying F3s are inherently a bad thing. I'm saying F3s, on Mafiascum, tend to introduce more bullshit.
We have to consider that people are going to be playing for the future here. Voting certain ways, trying to make certain points, etc that carry on to future games.
On the show, that isn't a problem.
Here, it is. And people wanting to make a statement or change future metas or make statements with their votes (which I'm guilty of too) is inherently a negative thing because it means the winner won't ever feel like a TRUE winner or the person who got their vote won't really feel like they deserved it if there was some meta statement behind it.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:41 pm
by hiplop
Bro i dont want to play anymore because the meta of the site is rewarding play that is anti risk. Please dont attack me for not wanting to participate in a game i no longer find fun.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:41 pm
by hiplop
In post 85, SensFan wrote:Well, glad to know how everyone feels about me I guess (both from here + spec threads).
Don't worry. I won't ruin another game by playing in it.
You were fine. We talked about this. I think your game was 80 percent of the way there to a great game.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:42 pm
by xRECKONERx
In post 85, SensFan wrote:Well, glad to know how everyone feels about me I guess (both from here + spec threads).
Don't worry. I won't ruin another game by playing in it.
eyeroll
if you had gone thru with stabbing me or aria at f5/f6 you would've had this game locked up in the fucking bag
it was so close to being astounding
i just happen to think that dan played a fucking great game and that i did too and that it would be a shame for either of us to lose
the games werent perfect
i just thought they were better
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:43 pm
by SensFan
In post 88, hiplop wrote: In post 85, SensFan wrote:Well, glad to know how everyone feels about me I guess (both from here + spec threads).
Don't worry. I won't ruin another game by playing in it.
You were fine. We talked about this. I think your game was 80 percent of the way there to a great game.
None of that is the impression I got from reading spec threads. Literally none of it.
It's pretty clear people think I ruined the game. That I'm the reason the game was negative in tone. That the fucking board being deleted would be a better result than me winning.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:43 pm
by Save The Dragons
In post 85, SensFan wrote:Well, glad to know how everyone feels about me I guess (both from here + spec threads).
Don't worry. I won't ruin another game by playing in it.
I thought you played fine. I wished we saw more of what you specifically did but I did like a lot of your insight with regards to comparisons to the show. I hope you consider playing again if you found it fun.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:44 pm
by hiplop
Everything reck says i agree with. Don't use final 3s and figure out the problems
Peace.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:44 pm
by CuddlyCaucasian
Sens I've told you that you were playing an incredible game up until final five when you shit the bed, and I'm pretty sure that one mistake is why a lot of spectators were confused by you being so close to winning. None of that was anything personal against you.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:45 pm
by Vijarada
Hey I said players would swear at us post game. /gloats while my house is on fire because I predicted it.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:45 pm
by xRECKONERx
In post 90, SensFan wrote:None of that is the impression I got from reading spec threads. Literally none of it.
It's pretty clear people think I ruined the game. That I'm the reason the game was negative in tone. That the fucking board being deleted would be a better result than me winning.
Okay, listen.
Specs get overreactionary.
Mods do too.
Players do too.
Don't take someone's words at their most emotional moment personally. People feed off each other's energy.
I did think you played the worst game out of the F6. BUT you were up against a super tough F6 and then backed down.
When you say you wanted to play a certain game (lay low then backstab) but then do not capitalize on the second part, it hurts your cred. That's all.
Had you flipped on me with Cam/Dan at F6 or gone thru with your Aria vote at F5, nobody would have a single problem with your game, I think.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:46 pm
by CuddlyCaucasian
I think my biggest problem is everyone taking everything so seriously to the point where it isn't fun at all to be involved in, and makes people feel like shit afterward. That's why I had such a good time with Spookz and RSX, cause no one gave a shit. Like hiplop said, people aren't leaving to send some message, people leave because it stopped being fun.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:47 pm
by BROseidon
In post 87, hiplop wrote:Bro i dont want to play anymore because the meta of the site is rewarding play that is anti risk. Please dont attack me for not wanting to participate in a game i no longer find fun.
This is a far cry from saying "the meta sucks and Juno's near-win proves it"
So, yeah.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:49 pm
by xRECKONERx
In post 96, CuddlyCaucasian wrote:I think my biggest problem is everyone taking everything so seriously to the point where it isn't fun at all to be involved in, and makes people feel like shit afterward. That's why I had such a good time with Spookz and RSX, cause no one gave a shit. Like hiplop said, people aren't leaving to send some message, people leave because it stopped being fun.
That's fair, too.
I've long been arguing for the "game is a game" mentality, but I see how that can be problematic too.
But I also think you're shining a dried turd in saying you loved Spookz because you didn't and you bitched on Skype to me about that, too. About how people weren't taking it seriously or trying and that bothered you.
On the one hand: if someone is being sorta emotional, that's part of the game we all play.
On the other hand: if someone is being too extra emotional and is being toxic, that saps the fun for everyone.
There is a middle ground that is hard to define.
I didn't think me jumping on the DAN IS SOOOO MEAN bandwagon would be bad because it helped my game to paint him that way.
After the fact? I see that Dan's perception in the game was a source of stress for you guys, and that makes me sad that I helped fuel that.
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:49 pm
by xRECKONERx
In post 97, BROseidon wrote: In post 87, hiplop wrote:Bro i dont want to play anymore because the meta of the site is rewarding play that is anti risk. Please dont attack me for not wanting to participate in a game i no longer find fun.
This is a far cry from saying "the meta sucks and Juno's near-win proves it"
So, yeah.
can you stop actively being cocky to people who are leaving a community they love because of the toxicity?
it'd really help