| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On January 25 2010 22:28 citi.zen wrote: One more comment: there is a mention after the last lynching of the second amendment, which is the right to bear guns. Are there clues in the lynchings?? | ||
|
Qatol
United States3165 Posts
No there aren't. Clues are only in the Day posts. | ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
| ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
| ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
| ||
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
On January 25 2010 22:20 citi.zen wrote: A couple of random observations, which will not help anyone at this point: the mafia killed the first three people if you list naes alphabetically, ignoring punctuation marks; we complain about clues, but in the end we did not really use the strongest ones for lynching either night. Hobbes and freewheel are still with us, and t_co and kane turned out to be green. flamewheel  I agree though: until we get the next set of clues, it would be prudent for us to look based on players' actions and interactions. Seeing as how I cannot actually dissuade people from logic since clues are there, I invite persons who have suspicions about me to interrogate me further. | ||
|
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
On January 25 2010 23:53 citi.zen wrote: BloodyC0bbler's mafia game ain't going any better for the town. I'd say theirs is worse. Lynching an inactive detective night one, then losing a bodyguard following the night, then the two vigilantes... yeah. 'Snot looking good for them. | ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
On January 26 2010 00:00 flamewheel91 wrote: flamewheel I agree though: until we get the next set of clues, it would be prudent for us to look based on players' actions and interactions. Seeing as how I cannot actually dissuade people from logic since clues are there, I invite persons who have suspicions about me to interrogate me further. I don't see how we are saying the same thing: you are suggesting looking at people's actions instead of clues, I am stating that we tried tha with t_co and kane, and it has not worked out very well. | ||
|
789
United States959 Posts
| ||
|
789
United States959 Posts
On January 26 2010 00:04 citi.zen wrote: I don't see how we are saying the same thing: you are suggesting looking at people's actions instead of clues, I am stating that we tried tha with t_co and kane, and it has not worked out very well. This is a good point though. | ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
| ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 26 2010 00:08 citi.zen wrote: Just keep in mind that t_co was lynched solely on suspicious behavior. I am not saying it is always the wrong approach, just that it can easily backfire. Aggressive behaviour shouldnt be considered suspicious most of the time. Thats the stance we should take collectively. Inactivity is whats suspicious. And in the end, it isnt right now so crucial as who we lynch right now since lets face it - it far more likely to hit a townie at this point. What matters is getting discussion with substance, to pile clues for later. | ||
|
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
On January 26 2010 00:04 citi.zen wrote: I don't see how we are saying the same thing: you are suggesting looking at people's actions instead of clues, I am stating that we tried tha with t_co and kane, and it has not worked out very well. Oops, quoted wrong person. My apologies. My thoughts still stand. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On January 26 2010 00:28 JohannesH wrote: Aggressive behaviour shouldnt be considered suspicious most of the time. Thats the stance we should take collectively. Inactivity is whats suspicious. And in the end, it isnt right now so crucial as who we lynch right now since lets face it - it far more likely to hit a townie at this point. What matters is getting discussion with substance, to pile clues for later. I would mostly agree with this. Some people would argue that we lynched kane]deth[ off clues, but I think it was mainly because he didn't protest at all. Regardless, what are people's ideas concerning the double lynches? Should we only use it if we're absolutely sure of two mafia? | ||
|
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
| ||
|
789
United States959 Posts
On January 26 2010 01:26 meeple wrote: I would mostly agree with this. Some people would argue that we lynched kane]deth[ off clues, but I think it was mainly because he didn't protest at all. Regardless, what are people's ideas concerning the double lynches? Should we only use it if we're absolutely sure of two mafia? I'd have to agree with your kane]deth[ point. I ended up voting for him in the end not because I thought the clues on him were the strongest - but because I thought he was the lowest risk to lose. He was hardly participating in the game at all, and I considered him to be a small loss if he flipped green like he did. Probably not the best of reasons - but it was my reason. The double lynch is a double edged sword. It can help us get back into the game by clearing out 2 mafia in one day. But it can hurt us badly - if we use 2 lynches and end up with 0 mafia, we're basically doing their job for them. I don't know if we have to be absolutely sure of 2 - but at least a solid conviction. If we double lynch we NEED to get at least 1 mafia with it. | ||
|
789
United States959 Posts
| ||
|
Phrujbaz
Netherlands512 Posts
First you have to remember that our double lynches are limited. That alone means we should only use one if we really think we can lynch two Mafia. Furthermore, there is always the risk of lynching two innocents. If we cannot reduce kill power right away it doesn't make sense to use double lynch already. We don't lose anything by waiting a day in that case. And we gain more information, leading to better informed lynches. We NEVER gain anything by using double lynch on a day where even killing two Mafia wouldn't reduce kill power. What does complicate things is that we cannot vote double lynch into place for today's lynch. It's always for the day after. So we have to think ahead a little. If we have a 100% confirmed Mafia, then we know that tomorrow there will be one less Mafia. That means we might want to use double lynch tomorrow, which means we have to vote for it today. When would we have such a situation? I think we need three Mafia suspects, at least one of which is very solid. We lynch the solid Mafia today, vote for double lynch, and have the potential to kill two more Mafia the next day (we'd even have more clues than we do today). I don't think we should use double lynch yet. I don't know how you guys are feeling but I'm not very confident in anyone being Mafia. AT ALL | ||
|
Ng5
702 Posts
On January 26 2010 02:22 Phrujbaz wrote: I remember somebody arguing (ng5?) that it doesn't matter if we could reduce kill power with double lynch or not. If we need to kill three Mafia, it doesn't matter if we first kill two and then one or if we kill one first and then two. I think that logic is wrong. First you have to remember that our double lynches are limited. That alone means we should only use one if we really think we can lynch two Mafia. Furthermore, there is always the risk of lynching two innocents. If we cannot reduce kill power right away it doesn't make sense to use double lynch already. We don't lose anything by waiting a day in that case. And we gain more information, leading to better informed lynches. We NEVER gain anything by using double lynch on a day where even killing two Mafia wouldn't reduce kill power. What does complicate things is that we cannot vote double lynch into place for today's lynch. It's always for the day after. So we have to think ahead a little. If we have a 100% confirmed Mafia, then we know that tomorrow there will be one less Mafia. That means we might want to use double lynch tomorrow, which means we have to vote for it today. When would we have such a situation? I think we need three Mafia suspects, at least one of which is very solid. We lynch the solid Mafia today, vote for double lynch, and have the potential to kill two more Mafia the next day (we'd even have more clues than we do today). I don't think we should use double lynch yet. I don't know how you guys are feeling but I'm not very confident in anyone being Mafia. AT ALL I also said that if maths and logic doesn't rub off on you I won't explain again, nor in more detail. | ||
|
789
United States959 Posts
On January 26 2010 02:59 Ng5 wrote: I also said that if maths and logic doesn't rub off on you I won't explain again, nor in more detail. I agree with you in the fact that it doesn't matter which order we take the mafia down, if we have 2 suspects to take down we do it - even if it doesn't reduce their KP. It seems that you, now correct me if I'm wrong, are ignoring the possibility that we won't have 2 mafia to lynch. You are one of the biggest supporters of using the double lynches asap, but you even abstained from voting in this last lynch. It seems that you don't think there are mafia we have figured out to lynch either, but still push for the double lynch. So, who would be the 2 people you would have suggested double lynching tomorrow (I know we don't have day 3 clues yet). You should have at least 1 in mind if you're going to push for it so hard. | ||
| ||
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
StarCraft2.fi
OlimoLeague
StarCraft2.fi
StarCraft2.fi
The PondCast
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|
EPT
