Best player points and how to deprive competitors of them

In a tournament the fight is for first place, and it is not enough to simply win. To break away from the pursuers you need to get ahead of the players inside your own team. Without points for best moves it is extremely hard to take first place in present conditions: even a few awards can outweigh one game for the losing team.

First ask the judges

On arriving at a tournament the first thing to do is ask the judges and organisers what points are given for. Will you be given the best move for a break on a mafioso while being a civilian in round zero? And for a mafia on a civilian? Is the hosts' qualification enough to understand that you deliberately played mixed colours, focusing blackness on yourself, thanks to which the team won, or must you play only as a team? How do the hosts treat self-shots and prolonging the game (at eight and six leaving players instead of lifting two: the strategy wins for the town through collecting information, but judges may reward the one who sorted it out first)? Your lines of play must maximise points, and they are influenced both by actions and by their interpretation by judges. From the arsenal of devices choose the style that will be rewarded maximally. (There is also an opinion that the self-shot is weak play, since you leave instead of fighting.)

What best moves are usually given for

The biggest contribution to the team's win

Approach. Whoever did more for the win is rewarded: gathering hands against a candidate from the opposite team, buying the doubting, pointing to the right checks, saving civilians, covering the sheriff. The more you do for the win, the likelier the extra points.

Antipode. Points are not received by those who "rode along": they cling to a position stated earlier and vote with those who sorted it out. If a good speech sounded before you, you cannot simply give your vote to the speaker. Supplement the position with your own arguments, strengthen it, bring in your understanding from a new angle. The same goes for a good will: rework it as if the initiative comes from you, otherwise the best move will be given to the one whose position you used.

Created and/or realised the turning point

Approach. The right choice in the guessing round, buying the deciding vote (for either team), realising the plan for the win.

Antipode. Points are not given to the "riders along". Bare tournament points are received by the led. Those who create situations for the win are valued above those who just make decisions. The criterion overlaps with the previous one but is slightly different.

To the leader in the team

Approach. Whoever is the leader gets the points. One effective device for seizing leadership: guardianship of players. You can find the sheriff and show him whom to visit; you can persuade players of your line. Leadership implies that you do not let another player's influence stand above your own judgments.

Antipode. A led player who asks the discerning for advice gets nothing.

Played with the fewest blacks / the least suspected in the mafia team

Approach. Judges often reward the one who first voices the right variant of the correct team or line of play. If the black team is weak and wins, the points go to the least suspicious mafia player, if the best cannot be determined by other parameters.

Antipode. The earlier a player left the table and the more complaints there were about him, the lower the chance of being marked.

Best speeches / the most reasoned and thinking player

Approach. Whoever spoke, thought and analysed best gets the points. Speaking well is important, since the choosing side is rewarded. If in the guessing round the choice is between two suspicious players and the town wins, the one who chose will be rewarded sooner (other things being equal).

Antipode. Players who drifted away in round zero, muddled in position, mumbling are out of the picture. Speak so well that the blacks do not think of playing against you. Arguments must be clear and simple.

Annihilating the opponents' best move

It is not enough to break ahead yourself. Ideally you must not let rivals gather points. For this there are sly ways, effective and not so.

1. A kill on the first night. It is used but works weakly: the player killed on the first night gets points for voicing the black trio.
2. A kill on the second night. An excellent way to deprive a player of bonus points. By statistics, the contribution of exactly the one killed second is not remembered and is rewarded less often than others: the game goes on for several more rounds, in the critical round at seven many events happen and judges cannot leave them without attention, while our player played two minutes and a last word and is forgotten. Shoot competitors second. A player killed at night is less likely to get the best points. To compensate for the pattern, always give clear posthumous wills, whatever round you are shot in. You must not hand the decision about the outcome of the game to the survivors.
3. Removal at nine. A player removed at nine receives points more rarely than one killed that same night, because he is not remembered. A competitor can be removed by giving him as a checked black and starting a balance. He is good in any case and will play against you, so why not take him down at nine?

Practice

Make a table of five criteria and for each of your last three tournament games mark by which criteria you could have got a point and by which not. What should have been done differently?

Typical mistakes

• "Riding along" instead of creating.
• Not clarifying the judges' criteria.
• Handing the outcome of the game to the living in the will.

Source of the idea. The chapter "Points of the best" from Dmitry Novik's book "Mafia in the Style of Zen" (2020).