|
On January 22 2010 10:35 Zona wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2010 10:23 Nikoner wrote:At first I hadn't realised that Bill Murray has been posting so much... and most, if not all, of his posts are like this: On January 22 2010 08:24 Bill Murray wrote:
I vote for a double lynch on day 2 Which doesn't even make sense, since it will most likely lead to us lynching 2 townies, if anything... I don't want this point to get overlooked. A lot of Bill Murray's posts have not been useful. Many one-liners, and other posts asking for medic protection since for whatever reason he thinks he is a high profile target.
Well... not helpful is something to keep in mind, but then we shouldn't overlook Ng5...
|
On January 22 2010 10:40 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2010 08:32 Bill Murray wrote:
i was just going along with what i presumed to be the town's plan...
i really am not for it so much.
in lieu of this, i abstain from voting on that for now in reference for the double lynch on day two. anything else nikoner?
Thanks for clearing that one up... but as you're here... lynch vote?
|
On January 22 2010 10:42 Bill Murray wrote:
im voting on who to lynch?
Who you would see lynched, yes
|
On January 22 2010 10:42 Zona wrote:
In any case, I think meeple should make his (you are a he? I tire of typing his/her) own choice. That way later on his decisions can be examined, and he can't use the excuse of "I was just going along with the town's consensus" to explain away decisions.
Yes I'm a guy... If I'm elected, I will make my own decisions, but ultimately the mayor is there to serve the town, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Back on track?... we just snapped the neck of one of our own people...
|
There were a couple reasons... but he wasn't really being coherent. And the clues we had were pretty shaky and i guess noone beleived in them
|
Are all games of Mafia this intense? When I played in high school this was fun... now it seems personal
|
One of the things though... is that perhaps we should in the future look to base our votes on clues as well as actions... This was kinda a crapshoot and we lost
|
Well... hopefully our next choices are better. Sorry guys
|
On January 22 2010 11:25 Bill Murray wrote:
i would also like to request a detective to rolecheck me
Why?
Regardless, I'm out, cya...
|
In general... who is in the most danger? The inactive posters? The active ones?
|
On January 22 2010 12:54 ghote wrote:
can we pm people who are in game? about the game?
I think so, as far as I know...
|
On January 22 2010 12:53 Abenson wrote:
As of now I think we'll need some blue coordination or gathering of some sorts.
Right now the greens can only wait for the mafia to strike...
About this, are there any suggestions as to how the blues should meet?
|
On January 22 2010 13:03 Faronel wrote:I'm kind of the inactive player. I'll post about like 1 post a day... mostly voting for who or what not. My activity is constant by small. But yea I voted for t_co cause I liked the banner  , and "mafia experience" platform. Just a warning... there is going to be a certain degree of "would would mafia do in this situation?" reasoning. But in the end, the chances of actually hitting a mafia like this is really small, and each time you do lynch on a wifom decision it thins out the town's #'s, more so in the beginning due to more density of townies per mafia. So, I'm kind of advocating a wait for better than "that's exactly what mafia would do" proof, or like a MustLynch situation to lynch. Also, isn't there logic in lynch the mayor due to the massive # of votes he gets. Mafia has better use for that power than town because town already has a majority # of votes. Especially in days where the lynch vote is split b/w 3 people, the mayor essentially has the decision in his hands. The power gained by mafia is the mayor were mafia is so much greater than the power gained by the town if the mayor is indeed town. Unless the mayor abstains from voting most of the days?
What did you edit... just because you're not really allowed to edit by the rules of the game
|
Its still useful, we just need to wait to use it... like when we have more clues. My extra votes will be well explained. I'm still afraid that we won't have real coordination with the blues though. We can't really have them discussing plans out in the open can we?
|
On January 22 2010 13:51 Zona wrote:I really think detectives or medics should NOT reveal themselves to anyone else at this point in the game, except for detectives who have confirmed who they're talking to is town (even then, a tiny godfather risk). The risk of revealing to a mafia member is there. Actually I question the judgement of the detective that revealed him/herself to DrH, as there's no guarantee DrH is town. I agree with this, however: Show nested quote +On January 22 2010 13:11 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
As far as meeple's voting power, I think he really needs to justify his votes. Alternatively, we can demand that meeple reveals who he plans to vote for, then other townies adjust their votes so that his vote is effectively strength one. For example, if players A and B are lynch candidates, and meeple wants to vote for A, have him vote for A, but also switch one NORMAL voter from A to B, then meeple has effectively added one vote to A (as A gets +3 -1 vote, and B gets +1 vote, so the difference between them is greater by one). Of course if there's 3 people up for lynch it gets more complicated. Quickstriker, I would prefer if you didn't post in this thread - there's already so much to read and re-read when we want to re-examine things. Finally, if there were NO medics - then if I were mafia, I would want to eliminate the people who are generating the most discussion, regardless of who they are suspicious of, just to stop the town from generating more information. However, since there are medics, the mafia need to guess who will be medic-protected and adjust accordingly. And they also can't eliminate all town members who discuss a lot, because then any remaining active players will be exposed as mafia. Still, I hope the medics keep this in mind. There are some methods for coordination that don't require revealing. For example, one idea is that detectives rolecheck the player below them on the player list. If town, that would give them someone to talk to. However, I'm not convinced that using the rolecheck early is the way to go (it might be).
I don't mind being nerfed if it means a bit of working together...
|
On January 23 2010 05:12 Faronel wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2010 13:06 meeple wrote:On January 22 2010 13:03 Faronel wrote:I'm kind of the inactive player. I'll post about like 1 post a day... mostly voting for who or what not. My activity is constant by small. But yea I voted for t_co cause I liked the banner , and "mafia experience" platform. Just a warning... there is going to be a certain degree of "would would mafia do in this situation?" reasoning. But in the end, the chances of actually hitting a mafia like this is really small, and each time you do lynch on a wifom decision it thins out the town's #'s, more so in the beginning due to more density of townies per mafia. So, I'm kind of advocating a wait for better than "that's exactly what mafia would do" proof, or like a MustLynch situation to lynch. Also, isn't there logic in lynch the mayor due to the massive # of votes he gets. Mafia has better use for that power than town because town already has a majority # of votes. Especially in days where the lynch vote is split b/w 3 people, the mayor essentially has the decision in his hands. The power gained by mafia is the mayor were mafia is so much greater than the power gained by the town if the mayor is indeed town. Unless the mayor abstains from voting most of the days? What did you edit... just because you're not really allowed to edit by the rules of the game I added in the 2nd paragraph about how lynching the mayor is awesome.
lmao, fair enough
|
Yeah, incarciration might be better saved as perhaps a saving measure... since the person who's incarcirated can't be killed
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
