|
On March 08 2010 14:22 d3_crescentia wrote:
The more I think about this game the more I feel that it's a glorified probability problem.
Generalized scenario: There are only town and mafia. If we just run through the players on the list by having them try to shoot each other while the mafia try to whittle us down 2 at a time, we'll have basically checked everyone by Day 6. Assuming that the town continuously hits other townies, we'll have 16 dead (10 by mafia, 6 by us) which leaves the 6 who shot AND THEN, presumably 4 mafia. This is the worst-case scenario, but it also gives us the most information possible.
Obviously it gets slightly more complicated with CIA in the way, for in the above scenario the town HAS to be ready to execute faster than the CIA can.
I don't even think we really NEED to consider DTs/medics too much because the execute-by-list system gives us WAY more information than a vote/lynch system. One DT gives us another day of wiggle room; two DTs gives us another day. I actually think medics protecting during early game can be actually a bit detrimental then, because we don't get any confirmed information.
Triggerhappy is a different case, in which case they should roleclaim.
Of course, the problem remains that the mafia can choose to kill LESS townies to keep us confused... but in which case we still continue to pair people off and have them shoot each other. At this point, argument isn't really necessary, because we're all just fodder.
The real problem is going to be in hunting down the CIA agent(s) in the end-game - but DTs won't really be important in that scenario; only behavioral analysis and (maybe) medics.
So, my proposal:
Two people (who have not previously executed people) will attempt to execute each other as fast as possible, giving us confirmed information about the killer, who is either green or CIA, and the killed, who is green/blue/red. DTs can go ahead and check an arbitrary 3rd person that hasn't been checked/killed before.
If we have a pair of people that are incapable of killing each other, we split them up and have them killed by a different set of townies. It honestly doesn't matter if we even HAVE a list, let alone having it be public/private; we just have to be careful not to reuse anyone. For that reason I now think shooting Malongo/BM is now a bad idea (though shooting BM may still have some merit as he could fuck things up later).
The two problems I see are that either we have MORE mafia than 4 - in which case I believe we'll end up killing them rather quickly, so no biggie - or if we have LESS than 4, in which case the remaining 4 will simply have to shoot each other.
So, tl;dr: it doesn't matter if we have a list or a plan just so long as we continuously rotate in new shooters and shootees.
i think this is actually a good idea, lets have the two most scummy people in a stand off.
|
aw man that 0 should be a 10.
Hope I dont mess up like that when I pull out my pistols.
|
lurking by itself is a pretty good case imo, do you agree?
|
On March 08 2010 14:54 johnnyspazz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2010 14:22 d3_crescentia wrote:
The more I think about this game the more I feel that it's a glorified probability problem.
Generalized scenario: There are only town and mafia. If we just run through the players on the list by having them try to shoot each other while the mafia try to whittle us down 2 at a time, we'll have basically checked everyone by Day 6. Assuming that the town continuously hits other townies, we'll have 16 dead (10 by mafia, 6 by us) which leaves the 6 who shot AND THEN, presumably 4 mafia. This is the worst-case scenario, but it also gives us the most information possible.
Obviously it gets slightly more complicated with CIA in the way, for in the above scenario the town HAS to be ready to execute faster than the CIA can.
I don't even think we really NEED to consider DTs/medics too much because the execute-by-list system gives us WAY more information than a vote/lynch system. One DT gives us another day of wiggle room; two DTs gives us another day. I actually think medics protecting during early game can be actually a bit detrimental then, because we don't get any confirmed information.
Triggerhappy is a different case, in which case they should roleclaim.
Of course, the problem remains that the mafia can choose to kill LESS townies to keep us confused... but in which case we still continue to pair people off and have them shoot each other. At this point, argument isn't really necessary, because we're all just fodder.
The real problem is going to be in hunting down the CIA agent(s) in the end-game - but DTs won't really be important in that scenario; only behavioral analysis and (maybe) medics.
So, my proposal:
Two people (who have not previously executed people) will attempt to execute each other as fast as possible, giving us confirmed information about the killer, who is either green or CIA, and the killed, who is green/blue/red. DTs can go ahead and check an arbitrary 3rd person that hasn't been checked/killed before.
If we have a pair of people that are incapable of killing each other, we split them up and have them killed by a different set of townies. It honestly doesn't matter if we even HAVE a list, let alone having it be public/private; we just have to be careful not to reuse anyone. For that reason I now think shooting Malongo/BM is now a bad idea (though shooting BM may still have some merit as he could fuck things up later).
The two problems I see are that either we have MORE mafia than 4 - in which case I believe we'll end up killing them rather quickly, so no biggie - or if we have LESS than 4, in which case the remaining 4 will simply have to shoot each other.
So, tl;dr: it doesn't matter if we have a list or a plan just so long as we continuously rotate in new shooters and shootees. i think this is actually a good idea, lets have the two most scummy people in a stand off.
or....you can do it the safer way with the same results and make people role claim. Hi ^_^
Either way its time to get this killing party started. Malongo, Bill Murray - dont shoot anyone for a while ok? ok.
|
On March 08 2010 14:56 JeeJee wrote:
lurking by itself is a pretty good case imo, do you agree?
Yea. I fully support shooting all lurkers. Thats why I'm shooting Shockeyy. But shockeyy fucked up with tard logic so I've got extra incentive to shoot him.
You can shoot nemy next day though, ok?
|
On March 08 2010 13:45 Caller wrote:
night actions, ur shit, please
can i go to sleep in peace? no ETA on this right?
i kind of want to ninja f5 execute:nemy style
|
yeah allright ace
do you know shockey's history in other games? roleclaim makes no sense at all :S
or does threatening to kill people get them to roleclaim now?
bitch i'm gonna kill you if you don't claim. yes you. YOU. DONT TURN AROUND, no. YOU. THE ONE READING THIS POST. IM GONNA KILL YOU
so claim. now!
|
You know, I've got a really good feeling about something.
2medics/2cops/4 Mafia/1SK looks like great balance. 5 is a bit crazy, especially with the extra KP but workable.
lol wow town has like, an almost assured win situation with mass role claims. Especially if shockeyy does turn medic when I pop him.
That way the remaining medic claims town, and the goons have to as well. They can't kill from the townies pool without fucking themselves over ^_^
If no one can shoot - fuck it! Kill him. We win based on numbers. Then its down to good ole fashioned scum hunting to find the CIA agent. Sweet 
|
shockeyy actually brought up opz, which if i look through the posts, is kind of like abenson except less annoying. all his posts are basically equivalent to quoting someone else and going "QFT"/"I agree"
|
erm..I dont care about his history in other games lol.
First he keeps PMing me when I told him not to. I even said read the thread. I made it clear hes PMing me.
He feels threatened and role claims medic. 100% guaranteed to get hit tonight if he isn't lying. So it shows he's either scum or stupid.
I've got a gun. 2 people have killed on a whim. I've got the right to also.
^_^
|
On March 08 2010 15:04 JeeJee wrote:
shockeyy actually brought up opz, which if i look through the posts, is kind of like abenson except less annoying. all his posts are basically equivalent to quoting someone else and going "QFT"/"I agree"
posting ~opz~ name one time doesn't tell us anything. Even if opz flipped Mafia what did Shockeyy do that proves it? Then again I guess when I kill him, if he flipped cop (which would be dumb cuz he claimed medic lol) then I guess you kill opz the next day.
And then someone can kill nemy.
ok?
|
nah i'll stick with nemy
someone else can kill opz
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On March 08 2010 14:32 Ace wrote:
Incognito I already said I fully support randomized list via shooters and thats my position.
Shockeyy really thinks im going to believe his claim. I'm shooting him as soon as day hits if he isn't dead tonight. I wasn't hit last night, so really there is 0 reason for him to think I'd believe his claim. He wasn't under any pressure to claim, and he claimed medic. Any real medic who isn't an idiot would claim town. Whatever, I'm done trying to help the town out only to be ignored until the end of the game when you all go "shit, we should have listened to him :/" for the 100th time. Caller, bless his soul has given me the power to take the law into my own hands. I'd be a fool to once again let you guys do as you please just to lose. Fuck you all.
Incognito is not a confirmed townie. No one needs to privately roleclaim. You role claim in the thread. Only way Incog is confirmed is if a doc was fished and said they protted Incog and they both verified it. That said I really don't care what any of you do.
I can vouch for the medic that protected Incog. There's no reason not to roleclaim to Incog.
|
United States9292 Posts
I have a feeling I'm the blue role that kills when killed
|
United States9292 Posts
But if not, I'm just a commissar
|
All i can say is:
-Shooting people that already shot: stupid. Theres no reason to kill a guy that has biggest chance to be town than a non shooter.
-Shooting blueclaimers: stupid. We were suposedly asking people to claim when they couldnt hit.
If you want to take your gun and shot randomly at nemy, foolishness, l10f and all those lurkers out there do it: full support. Note that this applies to the stupid hit on L too, even hitting Abenson-Dokozo was better.
|
Foolishness no one is role claiming privately. Don't you understand this?
|
United States9292 Posts
Also, I like the "make 2 people kill each other plan", especially if we know they're both online.
It's going to be funny when players who are talking about killing people aren't capable of actually doing it.
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On March 08 2010 15:10 Ace wrote:
Foolishness no one is role claiming privately. Don't you understand this?
That's irrelevant. You seem to have a problem believing Incog is a confirmed innocent. I'm trying to set the record straight.
|
The "duel" format is essentially killing people at random, no?
I think Incognito's plan to rotate shooters and go down the list of suspects makes a lot more sense. Foolishness is a fine candidate for next day, better than any of the other names I've heard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
