EPTIncognito's TL Mafia XVI
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
| ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 22 2010 11:14 DoctorHelvetica wrote: He was lynched because he was playing overly aggressive. He was pointing fingers and making accusations with zero evidence, which hurts the town whether he's mafia or not. I dont agree with this... It can be good to have more accusations going on since that gives us more intel about peoples opinions on each other. And when someone turns out to be mafiaman you can intepret that info. Everyone being totally quiet is worse than baseless accusations made to see reactions. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
| ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 24 2010 09:38 meeple wrote: We have plenty of suspects... by the time we get to use our double lynch there will be 8 clues at our disposal, almost certainly enough for two lynches. If we don;t start taking action now, we're going to be sunk later on. I dont consider clues strong enough evidence to warrant double lynches pretty much ever. That should be saved for times we have the criminals more clearly figured out by more accurate means, with some social evidence. Otherwise we just end up killing townies faster than we want to... | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 24 2010 15:31 Ser Aspi wrote: We absolutely cannot go with clues. A much safer thing would be to see who we are accusing on clues and declare them innocent. That's how little clues mean right now. Mafia often seem to try to hide in da shadows while the town goes crazy with clues and accuses the people who are in the open the most like t_co. unfortunately they almost always kill innocents while doing so. We should be targeting the people on the fringes above all else. I think that instead of going crazy on clues we should force the people who are not really contributing to step up or die. Zona had the right idea before but he drowned out by the clue posts. I'll start. Hyperbola Cynanmachae JohannesH Ghote i don't trust any of you. All of you are sitting aside quietly not helping at all. Better start contributing or your red blood will fly. Everyone help contribute so we can get good information. <3 But gotta agree that clues mostly distract us at this point, we might get lucky and hit a gangsta but thats pretty unlikely to me - and even if we get them that way, we cant really connect them to other mafiamen with that method. I would take under suspicion anyone who votes for a double lynch, either they are mafia trying to cut the townie count faster & save themselves from it at later date, or just really stupid which isnt desirable either. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 24 2010 16:00 flamewheel91 wrote: Focus being on the word trying. Why lynch more when we have less info, when we can wait and do it at a time where we have more info.So stupid = trying to get rid of an extra mafia member? However unlikely at this point, it's not considered "stupid," especially since you don't know how the detectives are working at this point. Prime thing to look at i think would be to see what happened with Bill - people who were in touch with him are suspects to me, but not necessarily mafia ofc (well goes for everyone...) If the vote is centered around clue 1 vs clue 2, mafia choosing based on that pretty much zero info about their voting patterns for the future. And if theres just 1 real candidate for lynch in the end they can go with it, was that guy mafia or not. Gonna do some more reading & analysing at some point later... Shit is not easy :/ | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
| ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
| ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
But as I said before clue-based lynches dont get us anywhere, neither does double lynch without real social clues. If I had voted it wouldve been Kane or DrHelvetica most probably - if we can force people to choose between options like that, they have to reveal something. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 25 2010 12:09 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Why I voted the way I did: I voted for kane]deth[ initially because of the evidence meeple posted. However, keits clues from Day 1 and his finger pointing behavior/inactivity convinced me he is more likely mafia than kane. Aggressive finger pointing isnt something a mafia would do too much I think. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
| ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 25 2010 13:37 ghote wrote: your right we should just not look at clues and blindly hang anyone who pisses us of nice idea Not blindly you moron. But who pisses who off, how people react to different accusations, force choices of voting on people, thats how this game is played. Just playing a riddle solving game out of the clues would be retarded. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 25 2010 15:33 ghote wrote: clues are our best bet on finding the mafia, looking at behavior is fine, but not if it gets in the way of putting the clues together, you cannot lynch somebody just based on their behavior, the clues are the only concrete link we have to people of the mafia, anything else is purely speculation No. Its just the other way around. Usually this game is played without any clues whatsoever. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 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. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
And if you incarcerate someone when mafia is 1 person away from losing kill power, you get 100% sure indication if hes a part of mafia. That might be equally useful for confirming/revealing an active townie like meeple, or just making sure of a suspicious person. If detectives have succesfully rolechecked a mafia, or clarified a lynching candidate to be green, I suggest you pm that to citi.zen. Well mafia might do that too but it could backfire so easily on them. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 26 2010 07:35 789 wrote: Ok, so what I just did was compare postcounts vs post on the site in the last week in general. The high post count on the site in general gets rid of the "don't have time" issue. Mystlord JohannesH skronch These are the three names that stood out on that cross check. Skronch especially ... with almost 100 posts in the last week and only 1 here. I feel like that lately Ive been relatively active, only in the start of the game I didnt post. I read everything now and post when I have something to say. But I say no for double lynch tomorrow. Since lets say we get our lynch right today and hit a mafia. Then if we get, however likely or unlikely it is i dont know, 2 mafia figured out tomorrow too, we can lynch one of them and incarcerate the other to both reduce kill power and get total confirmation of his identity. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 26 2010 14:18 Jugan wrote: There is no reason NOT to protect meeples. He needs to be protected by the sheriff. You could say that about anyone no? And we have medics too, in any case. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
And then we might get the chance to incarcerate meeple next turn, if we lynch a 2 mafia in 2 days we can be 100% sure whether hes one of them. Which we dont need to do with citi.zen as far as i see, unless hes the goddamnfather. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On January 26 2010 14:45 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Where does it say medics can't protect the same person twice in a row? Is that a rule? Apparently not now that I read the medic description again, just a rule I was used to on offline games I've played. Oops. | ||
| ||
