LogFAQs > #957582384

Right. Diplomacy is important when it influences votes on the right guy and doesn't have you making bad votes.

They're both bad outcomes, but diplomatically voting for the wrong guy is worse than voting for the right guy and convincing no one every time. Especially since you're likely to lose all that social capital you gained by being diplomatic by being wrong, and then getting lynched yourself is usually the worst outcome.

Obviously you'd like to vote for the right guy and convince everyone, but yeah, doesn't always work that way.

I guess where I'm at is I see people in game significantly more likely to be frustrated when someone is being abrasive than people outside the game, and sometimes being abrasive (within reason) is a better play than not, so yeah in those edge cases you're gonna have trouble with the judging process.

My thought would be ideally play along with bucket strategy until it comes to a conclusion you don't like (unless you think it's fundamentally a bad strategy, then you gotta pick the fight immediately otherwise you lose credibility when you do), THEN pick the fight with it. Not that I'd necessarily be able to have that restraint either-- seems like the exact kind of fight I'd pick in a mafia game <_<

But yeah it's hard to know. Anyway I was more out to discuss why I'm not sure the community has a good method for choosing which players advance than whether your play was good, which I can't really know as I didn't follow the game.

---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!