Posted January 07, 2020
It's more about odds and placement about the board.
I agree, for the most part, with Scene's general strategy. You want to find Liberals throughout the group so as the Liberal policies dwindle after the shuffle, you have reliable pairs you can jump to from one to the next. That said, I'm not in favor of mechanical play. We are Mafia players who play the game to read and react to posts. I believe we should try to establish Liberals spaced out throughout the draw, but also use our intuition to dodge players we don't trust from their posts.
Plus, I have a few questions about Scene. Namely, that his complaints about GameRager's choice still left open the jump to ZFR and back to GameRager which works to cross the group in the fewest steps as possible.
Also, the strategies as I've read say it's better to have one tested person in each selection. As to how this affects the odds, assuming 6 of the 8 players will pass Liberal policies at this stage (5 Liberals + Hitler), assuming Gamerager is also liberal leaves 4 out of 6. Meaning the odds of Joe/ZFR to be 2 Liberal/Hitlers was (4/6) * (3/5) = 2/5 or just 40%. I thought skipping Joe and the 40% chance would be preferable so we could move to the (4/6) - 67% chance I select someone who would pass a Liberal policy.
Now, I could have argued this, but at the same time, my reads of Joe and ZFR, I had no objection. Plus, it tested ZFR who I was going to select myself anyway. So I played the odds, but didn't want to push the issue because both players I have suspicions about were not part of that government.
I agree, for the most part, with Scene's general strategy. You want to find Liberals throughout the group so as the Liberal policies dwindle after the shuffle, you have reliable pairs you can jump to from one to the next. That said, I'm not in favor of mechanical play. We are Mafia players who play the game to read and react to posts. I believe we should try to establish Liberals spaced out throughout the draw, but also use our intuition to dodge players we don't trust from their posts.
Plus, I have a few questions about Scene. Namely, that his complaints about GameRager's choice still left open the jump to ZFR and back to GameRager which works to cross the group in the fewest steps as possible.
Also, the strategies as I've read say it's better to have one tested person in each selection. As to how this affects the odds, assuming 6 of the 8 players will pass Liberal policies at this stage (5 Liberals + Hitler), assuming Gamerager is also liberal leaves 4 out of 6. Meaning the odds of Joe/ZFR to be 2 Liberal/Hitlers was (4/6) * (3/5) = 2/5 or just 40%. I thought skipping Joe and the 40% chance would be preferable so we could move to the (4/6) - 67% chance I select someone who would pass a Liberal policy.
Now, I could have argued this, but at the same time, my reads of Joe and ZFR, I had no objection. Plus, it tested ZFR who I was going to select myself anyway. So I played the odds, but didn't want to push the issue because both players I have suspicions about were not part of that government.
