Gamethrowing - Apparently a discussion on discord

[Cirque]

Afaik claiming a fake role as town on stand is also gamethrowing unless you absolutely have to claim another role to get voted inno

So claiming Jailor as Medium is okay? lmao

[BurtGummer]

Afaik claiming a fake role as town on stand is also gamethrowing unless you absolutely have to claim another role to get voted inno

So claiming Jailor as Medium is okay? lmao

debatable

[Cirque]

Afaik claiming a fake role as town on stand is also gamethrowing unless you absolutely have to claim another role to get voted inno

So claiming Jailor as Medium is okay? lmao

debatable

True, actually

[Shilster]

To some of this entire thread; y'all got fucking bodied by yamichan LOL.

lmao no

[Shilster]

To some of this entire thread; y'all got fucking bodied by yamichan LOL.

Nothing to back up your claim? lmao

Shilster. My man. There doesn't need back up because yamichan speak logic and logic cant ever be wrong. This man, Yami, killing it. Also that game-throwing appeal he proved them mods and dumb forum users wrong by getting appealed. Y'all got bodied, I'd delete ma forum acc if I were in their shoes.

I'll listen to you after you start looking at the facts before sucking Yami's cock

[Amythyr]

Let us stop personal attacks and get long with each other.


That said everyone is entitled to their own opinion. As far as i see , i am not seeing anyone chaing their opinions.

I will keep guiltying reports where user does not claim on stand.

[Shilster]

I will keep guiltying reports where user does not claim on stand.

Everyone will.

[mdb1023]

To some of this entire thread; y'all got fucking bodied by yamichan LOL.

Nothing to back up your claim? lmao

Shilster. My man. There doesn't need back up because yamichan speak logic and logic cant ever be wrong. This man, Yami, killing it. Also that game-throwing appeal he proved them mods and dumb forum users wrong by getting appealed. Y'all got bodied, I'd delete ma forum acc if I were in their shoes.

The only thing he "proved" was that it you throw a big enough tantrum, you'll eventually get what you want. Oh well, I don't play TOS anymore so I don't care anymore.

[kosmo16]

I want to say that if you guys think that you should always vote guilty on a report for not claiming on stand as a Town member you are wrong.

Let's imagine 2 real life situations.
1. A person grabbed very expensive item from a shop and ran away.
2. A person was absent-minded and forget to pay for an item. When security caught them, they paid.

We can't treat these 2 cases the same way.
When I see a report for not claiming on trial. I always check how the guy played. Are they a newbie, who doesn't know what is going on, or a renegade who doesn't want to claim, because they are against vfr. The newbie is innocent, the renegade is guilty. Number of games played by the suspect is crucial here. Someone who plays the first ranked game can make such a mistake.

[LeoIvanov]

In my personal opinion, Gamethrowing is intentionally harming your team's chances of winning. Since it's difficult if not impossible to check the intent of the player when they refuse to claim on stand, objectively it should not be basis for marking a report as guilty, regardless of how many people think (in their minds) that it's harmful to their team.

If YOU know that you harm your team by not claiming, and don't claim on purpose, you're gamethrowing. Is it possible for the others to prove that you're doing it on purpose? No, because they can't read your mind. Marking everyone as "Guilty" just because they refused to claim on the stand just puts everyone in a very grim scenario of "Guilty until proven innocent".

"You didn't claim when you were voted up, you threw the game! Now you'll be banned until you prove to us that you actually meant no harm and you did it just to have more chances of your team winning!"

Focus on objective instances of gamethrowing and stop forcing people to play a specific way. Something you can actually objectively prove.

[ObiWanCumnobi]

Afaik claiming a fake role as town on stand is also gamethrowing unless you absolutely have to claim another role to get voted inno

So claiming Jailor as Medium is okay? lmao

Use logic. If you're an evil role, it's okay to lie.
If you're a vig and there's a witch, it's okay to lie.
If you're a vig who's going to die anyway, you can lie and claim jailor or whatever to get them on you and save the town a night.
The list goes on and on. There's times where it's fine to lie, and times where it's obviously not.

This is a game of deception, and if you need to mislead people for the win, it's fine. If you mislead them to just get yourself lynched, that's obviously throwing.



And if you don't claim at all, that's throwing. *cough*Yamichan*cough*

[Joacgroso]

But was he appealed? Who appealed him and why?

[SpellChecker]

Moderator Message: This will be the first and final reminder to read the rules and abide by them. Not following the rules shall be deemed as unsatisfactory to the cause of the thread and warnings shall be issued followed by closure of the thread.

[iggyvolz]

I want to say that if you guys think that you should always vote guilty on a report for not claiming on stand as a Town member you are wrong.

Let's imagine 2 real life situations.
1. A person grabbed very expensive item from a shop and ran away.
2. A person was absent-minded and forget to pay for an item. When security caught them, they paid.

We can't treat these 2 cases the same way.
When I see a report for not claiming on trial. I always check how the guy played. Are they a newbie, who doesn't know what is going on, or a renegade who doesn't want to claim, because they are against vfr. The newbie is innocent, the renegade is guilty. Number of games played by the suspect is crucial here. Someone who plays the first ranked game can make such a mistake.

My problem with this is that the ruling that was handed down was a blanket "you must always inno people who don't claim", which is horrible. I agree there are some circumstances (not knowing what you're doing, or being afk, for example) that would warrant not claiming on the stand. But there are times when people just don't claim on the stand because they don't want to - there's clearly no tactical reason for it, and those should be guiltied.

[Joacgroso]

But you still guiltying that reports, right? I mean, didn't Turdpile say so?

[abizoey]

Yes, they're still being guiltied and people are still being suspended for it.

[Joacgroso]

Nice.

[Jesoko]

I think a lot of people in this thread are trying to make a very complex issue very simple, and none you are listening to the each other. Here's the deal; if any of you in this thread think that Shapeshifter's statement has nothing to do with VFR, then you are wrong.

What follows here is 100% my opinion and is based 100% on what I've read on here and what I already know, and not on something that someone has said to me behind the scenes. I don't know anyone behind the scenes or anyone who knows anyone behind the scenes. However, I do strive to put myself into both sides of an argument before I form an opinion (and even sometimes after), and this is what I believe is going on.

TOS is not a unique game. Sure, the aesthetics are unique, but at its core, it's based on Mafia. All Mafia games are the same in a very general sense; the good guys are trying to find the evil guys and eliminate them one by one. What makes TOS stand out is the amount of distinct roles in the game. Almost every single one has some form of night action, meaning every single one is important to their faction. Every single one gives their faction a chance at winning. In most other Mafia based games (with the exception of One Night iterations), there are few distinct roles and a bulk of bystanders.

A strategy like VFR undermines how the game is supposed to be played. It's a metagame because it bypasses the player roles and the normal gameplay. It's quick, it's effective, but it's also unequivocally lazy.

The thing is, despite the fact there there are lots of Mafia based type games out there, VFR as a strategy is really only popular in TOS. In all the other versions I've seen, players trying to employ VFR in their Mafia-type games are viewed almost universally as absolutely suspicious. Even if there is a jester type character involved, savvy players will scum-read the vote happy player as this jester type character who is trying to look suspicious. VFR is generally seen as a waste of time, because it doesn't rely on proof and generally wastes a day, because once trials end in these games, the day also ends, leaving the town with either a dead townie (or two if one is killed the next night), a dead mafia member (and maybe a dead townie the next night), or a free kill for the mafia (if a town member does not get saved). That's only a 1/3 chance of progressing the game in the town's favor by pure chance. In any other Mafia based game, besides TOS, VFR is viewed a suspicious way for scum or trolls to waste time and kill off the town.

If you need examples, go to Youtube. I've watched a lot of them because I'm becoming something of a party/board game nerd. There are plenty to see.

Here's where our situation comes in.

We've established that TOS is Mafia based and that VFR is a metagame that undermines/breaks that game. We also know that the developers are not a fan of VFR and have taken steps to lesson its effects, like nerfing the mayor and limiting the trials per day from infinite to only 3.

What Shapeshifter is doing here is nothing more than furthering that idea. By saying that players who refuse to claim on the stand are not gamethrowing, the developers are providing protection to players who refuse to participate in what the developers view as a gamebreaking strategy.

The problem is the VFR is not something they can banish. It has its usefulness, especially late in the game or when information gathering roles are dead. So they can't punish people for using it. What they can do is refuse to punish people for not participating.

Whatever you guys may argue, not claiming on the stand as a result from VFR is not gamethrowing because the person on the stand is no longer speaking as their role but as the player. What they are doing is saying they don't agree with the metagame because it undermines their ability to play the way the developers intended the game to be played. In any other board or party game, everything could be paused and players could discuss whether or not a metagame strategy is relevant or warranted or even cheating. TOS, because the days are automated and timed, does not allow the players to do this.

Someone in here made the argument that all a player has to do to avoid participating in VFR is to not vote, however, this does not work when the person refusing to vote is also the victim of the vote. Lots of people say that players should be savvy enough to talk their way out of a VFR vote, but according to the official rules of the game, those players should not have necessarily been on the stand in the first place.

There are two sides of every coin. Sure, the rules don't say that VFR is forbidden, but it DOES say that players should use their roles to find proof of who is scum and who isn't. VFR bypasses those rules, bypasses the roles the rules state they SHOULD be using, and relies on catching players who haven't had time to provide proof of their role. This backfires as much as it works.

By refusing to claim on the stand as a result from VFR, the PLAYER, not the role, is saying they don't agree with the strategy being employed. Since gameplay can't stop and games don't have a moderator or a judge on hand to make a ruling, the majority wins and the player is often lynched or killed the next night.

Shapeshifter and the other developers, by choosing to view not claiming as not gamethrowing, are providing protections for those players who, in slower paced games, who have been allowed to voice their concerns on how the game is being played and have them weighed before the game continued.

My point here is that the developers don't view this strategy as the way the game should be played under normal circumstances, and the amount of games VFR is used in TOS is disproportionately high compared to other games of its type. Therefore, they have every right to make exceptions where they think the exception is warranted.

I know it looks like I am agreeing with Shapeshifter here, but to be honest, I view this type of thing on a case by case basis. I don't view not claiming as a result of VFR as gamethrowing unless it happens as a result of VFR when most of the group is dead/late game. By then, VFR is a legitimate strategy and a person should have had plenty of time to think of a claim. I also think there are other exceptions, such as when a scum role allows themselves to be hung to throw suspicion off the rest of their faction or when a townie asks to be jailed instead of hung. I do agree that these exceptions are rare, and the majority of no claim cases are gamethrowing.

So, in short, I think you guys are trying to make a grey issue very black and white. I think in the case of not claiming on the stand, context absolutely does matter and should be taken into account when judging reports.

[Jesoko]

I want to say that if you guys think that you should always vote guilty on a report for not claiming on stand as a Town member you are wrong.

Let's imagine 2 real life situations.
1. A person grabbed very expensive item from a shop and ran away.
2. A person was absent-minded and forget to pay for an item. When security caught them, they paid.

We can't treat these 2 cases the same way.
When I see a report for not claiming on trial. I always check how the guy played. Are they a newbie, who doesn't know what is going on, or a renegade who doesn't want to claim, because they are against vfr. The newbie is innocent, the renegade is guilty. Number of games played by the suspect is crucial here. Someone who plays the first ranked game can make such a mistake.

A better analogy would probably be the 5th Amendment in the United States Constitution. A part of the Amendment states that a person is protected from incriminating themselves by being forced to do so. So, an example would be if a thief is called to the witness stand to testify that they saw someone being murdered in a house. They could plead the 5th Amendment when questioned if the lawyer/prosecutor doing the questioning isn't aware that they were in the same house because they were stealing from it. Testifying under oath means they would have to incriminate themselves or lie, and the 5th Amendment protects them from doing either one. It looks suspicious, but the thief is absolutely within their rights to invoke this Amendment.

So, by being voted up in a VFR situation (i.e. without proof), a player has three choices; out their role, lie, or refuse to claim. Just like the thief; incriminate, lie, or plead the 5th Amendment. The only difference is that the court can't arrest you for pleading the 5th Amendment and in TOS, the mob has every right to hang you.

In my mind, refusing to claim for VFR shouldn't be an automatic guilty.

[Jesoko]

I think that the game takes place in a time period before the 5th amendment existed

But the punishment Shapeshifter is addressing, the players, and the person making the bad joke exist in a time where it does, so...

[Joacgroso]

FIrst of all, how do you know how the game is suposed to be played? Do you think town should do nothing until a TI appears and accuses someone? Because that's called being passive, and passive towns always lose.
Secondly, if ToS is the only game where vfr is applied, people who disagree with it should play another game where it is frowned upon and let us vfr if we want.
And finally, a game about deduction is more interesting that a game about night actions imo.

[ObiWanCumnobi]

This is an online game about mob mentality. Claim or die, it's that simple. If you don't claim, it's been stated many times that it's gamethrowing. If you don't like it, don't play.
There's no 5th amendment in ToS. Lmao.

[Jesoko]

FIrst of all, how do you know how the game is suposed to be played? Do you think town should do nothing until a TI appears and accuses someone? Because that's called being passive, and passive towns always lose.
Secondly, if ToS is the only game where vfr is applied, people who disagree with it should play another game where it is frowned upon and let us vfr if we want.
And finally, a game about deduction is more interesting that a game about night actions imo.

1. If the game was meant be played the way you are saying, they would not have given the players night actions at all. Instead, the game would rely soley on lie detection without proof, with voting people as literally the only way to gain information. Funny thing is, original Mafia works this way, except the emphasis is on player discussions before the voting process. The difference is that in Mafia, players are speaking face to face and have an advantage of hearing and seeing one another. TOS does not have that and so night actions serve as tools to help the players deduce more quickly.

If you are relying on VFR and bypassing roles, then you are simply not playing the way this version of the game is meant to be played. Relying soley on TI to bring in information is not good playing either, since they are not the only roles who have night actions and can bring in information. The game is meant to be played by collecting bits of information, sharing them, and using them to eliminate other players. If it wasn’t, there wouldn’t be so many roles.

2. The other games I mentioned are party games or board games, and need multiple players. Speaking from my own experience, I don’t know enough people who enjoy Mafia type games who want to play them as often as I do. Last time I brought it up, there was a lot of whining. TOS offers players like me the opportunity to play as often as we want for a small price.

And I never said it wasn’t applied; I said it wasn’t popular. This type of strategy in most Mafia type games is viewed as suspicious or poor sportsmanship/lazy playing, and instead players rely on people’s reactions, discussions, and the little information the few town roles bring in and let slip to the rest of the players in order to eliminate people.

3. As I mentioned before, deducing in this game is meant to be done using all the information at your disposal. Although I detest VFR when it is done too early, I understand it’s importance to the game, as I outlined in my obviously too long for you to read the whole thing post. What I am saying is that VFR should not be your ONLY strategy. You should not be using it EVERY game. I’ve been in plenty of games where so called “passive towns” have won, I’ve been in games where the town wasn’t passive but didn’t use VFR at all to win. Saying VFR is the only way you can win shows what a limited player you are. Quite frankly, the game itself is too short to rely on VFR alone, which the developers made very clear when they gave us all night actions, and nerfed the mayor and the amount of trials per day. If that wasn’t a huge hint to you, then I really don’t know what to say.

You’re talking about VFR as a way to beat a passive town, not play the game. Using VFR on day 2 doesn’t give your town a chance to be passive or not. The discussion part of the day is for sharing the information (or misinformation) you gathered during the night, not for accusing someone because they happened to be number 4 down the list and you had already tried to hang 1,2, and 3 yesterday.

Shapeshifter is protecting players who want to play the game the way the developers obviously intended, who are technically a minority, but still a significant part of the player base. Telling them all to go away because they want to be allowed to play the game in a different way is not only is a poor attitude to have, but also will not work.

Context and situation should matter when it comes to testifying on the lynch stand. Shapeshifter has the right to protect players who do refuse and Turdpile has the right to punish players who dont, but that is why context matters.

The developers can’t stop people from using VFR, but they can and have made their stance clear on how they prefer to game to be played, and they are giving players who prefer to play this way the right to choose it. That’s the bottom line. Protesting a metagame as a player is not gamethrowing in any other game and it’s not here, and that’s what the developers are saying.

[TGambitG]

what the heck that's so long I'm not reading that

Which shows you have the attention span of a rock and why you think VFR is the only way to play the game..


Could also be why you're sub-1200 ELO.

[Jesoko]

what the heck that's so long I'm not reading that

Which shows you have the attention span of a rock and why you think VFR is the only way to play the game..


Could also be why you're sub-1200 ELO.

Don’t. You’ll only bait her and get the thread shut down.

This a discussion that needs to be had but they won’t let us have it if we are constantly attacking each other on a personal level. Syanna’s past history and her ELO levels have nothing to do with this.

Just take a deep breath and ignore her. Please.