|
On March 16 2010 10:16 Versatile wrote:
zona- do the math. if BC (plus town) doesn't find a mafia member by day 4, worse case scenario, where the medics don't prevent any hits and we lynch a town member every day, we're 11 v 5. that's 6 successful mafia hits in 3 nights, and 3 towny lynches. now imagine BC is mafia. a DT who hasn't found a red for 3 days, that's not completely impossible, right? that's 11 vs 7 votes, and since when has the town ever voted to together as one?
Just because we hold off on BC for now doesn't mean we can't search for other mafia. If we as a town can't identify any mafia other than possibly BC, we're screwed anyways. Also, 3 DT checks have a 43% chance of failing to find even one red if town lynches wrong and medics don't prevent any hits, and BC should be doing better than just random checks.
Actually, I might as well post my thoughts on possibly revealing information even if our claimed mayor DT only finds greens and blues. The power of a private town circle is to discuss with each other their thoughts without being worried about mafia interference, as well as reduce the pool of players they need to consider when looking for mafia, increasing their likelihood of being correct. They can also vote together, which helps reduce the risk of isolated town votes being overwhelmed by mafia ones.
The risk of revealing the circle is to have it broken and its advantages lost. The mafia will kill two town members every night (lucky medics and bus drivers notwithstanding), but would rather kill confirmed town members rather than nonconfirmed because confirmed town members help the town narrow down suspects and drive the discussion. So this is the argument against revealing the town circle.
However, if BC supposedly is able to assemble a town circle while not being able to find mafia, the town should definitely become supremely suspicious (when he can't find mafia). Then perhaps the advantages of the BC-centric town circle revealing itself partially or completely (NOT THEIR ROLES, just the fact that BC has checked and confirmed them) may outweigh the disadvantages. The loss of the town circle advantages are significant, but it's even more significant to deal with the suspicion around the mayor, especially if he turns out to be a mafia, and thus could never bring himself to sacrifice one of their own to boost his credibility.
Note that I'm not entirely convinced that the above plan is the way to go, but I do want to throw it out there.
I do want to note that if BC really was an authentic DT mayor - the mafia would definitely want to try to get him lynched. It's incredibly difficult for them to kill him at night and will take some time before they can kill him through that route.
|
On March 16 2010 10:51 Bill Murray wrote:
Why wouldn't they be? I am a confirmed townie.
WTF is this? By what means are you confirmed? It looks like you're just making this statement and fishing. I've been overlooking your erratic play all game because you act strangely in other games and all over TL, but this is too much.
|
On March 16 2010 11:00 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Sadly for you, my check is going elsewhere. Maybe tommorrow. Tell us - are you looking for mafia or are you looking to build a town circle?
You haven't responded at all to my proposed plan, with reasoning, for you. At the very least BC, as mayor you should be discussing what people propose. I am very displeased at how little you are interacting with the town's opinions in public.
|
On March 16 2010 11:02 Bill Murray wrote:
I feel like you've been acting a lot scummier than I have, zona.
Actually I'll be happy for you to accuse me. What exactly am I doing that is scummy?
|
On March 16 2010 11:04 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Most of the towns opinion is reiterating the same arguments. Some I have dealt with once, and see no point repeating. Well for one thing, you haven't said anything about my proposed plan, one way or another, which was specifically meant for you.
On March 16 2010 11:04 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
As for Who i am checking. I have had another player RC a role I have already found. As the chances of two of them are insanely low, it means potentially one is lying. Once that is done, findings will be released. Good to have you on the record on how you plan to use your powers. I will follow up on this the next day.
|
On March 16 2010 11:08 L wrote:
To elaborate on what BC just said:
2 DTs seem to have checked the same target, which was bussed to a second target. Whether or not this is a fluke or someone's lying intensely is yet to be found.
To once again avoid misinterpreting your genius. Does this mean you and BC are cooperating?
|
On March 16 2010 11:13 Bill Murray wrote:
I'm getting off here... too much smoke and too many mirrors.
Sorry, that's not the way I expect someone to respond when they call me scummy and I ask them to back up their accusation. Do you have any reasons at all? It would be good for the town to hear them.
|
On March 16 2010 11:13 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 11:10 Zona wrote:On March 16 2010 11:08 L wrote:
To elaborate on what BC just said:
2 DTs seem to have checked the same target, which was bussed to a second target. Whether or not this is a fluke or someone's lying intensely is yet to be found. To once again avoid misinterpreting your genius. Does this mean you and BC are cooperating? Obviously, that's why they're both advocating lynching the same people. -_-
L has been saying that some of us have been misinterpreting him. I want to make sure that everything he has to say is entirely clear for the town to judge.
|
Also, I want everyone to keep this in mind when analyzing how people interacted with Malongo.
Since he was inactive, he was an ideal person for the mafia to sacrifice to burnish their own townie credentials.
|
On March 16 2010 09:23 Zona wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2010 07:37 Incognito wrote:
Reasons why I think BC is town: He says that he claimed to three people. Claiming DT to three people is a pretty bad idea if you're mafia. You'd preferably keep it to one so you can kill off that member if you decide you are being found out. Now we don't have proof about the other two people he told, but I don't know if he'd make that bad of a lie.
I like this part. However like you said we don't have proof that he actually claimed to three people. I want BC to reveal which three people he claimed to, and those people to confirm that he claimed AFTER BC has named his list. Revealing this information (as far as I can see) has no particular benefits to the mafia as BC is not revealing any blue roles, nor is he revealing if he has any information about these three people. He, and the three, are just simply confirming that the talked to each other, proving that his statement was true.
Here's one more I want you to respond to, BC. I want the statements you have made proved, one way or another.
Also, since the plan you proposed does not mention if you're prioritizing aiming for mafia, blues, greens, or town members in general after checking the elected officials. I want you to prioritize potential mafia members for checks.
It's true that mafia members want a DT mayor dead. But the rest of the town has no evidence that you're really a true DT. If you were a mafia mayor, then the town needs to get rid of you. As I've stated before, I think you should have until day 4 to prove yourself, so don't go accusing me of wanting to get rid of you. 3 nights are plenty for you to use your power enough to prove yourself. But you need to keep in mind that you need to get the rest of the town's trust - because we HAVE to be wary that you are in fact a mafia mayor and not a DT, as if you really were mafia, we'd be in deep danger.
Since you are a protected claimed mayor, though forming a town circle is nice, which seems to be the crux of your plan (dealing with perhaps a non-mayor DT), finding a mafia to lynch so that the rest of the town can trust you more is more important than that.
BC's plan post is spoilered here in case some readers don't want to scroll to find it:
+ Show Spoiler +On March 11 2010 05:12 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
As for mayoral elections.
I, BloodyC0bbler, am running for office.
With the setup of this game, and the fact elected positions can be RC'd, the elected positions are far more likely to end up in townie hands. This is a good thing, and I believe it is in our best interests to make sure town can get in.
I believe that I would be a good candidate because I have many games worth of experience, a few as an elected official, and others where I have have helped in the pinning of reds. I believe that from this experience I will be able to help the town quickly and hopefully bring about a swift end to the mafia.
The Plan:
The plan is simple. Whoever is elected (in this case I would love it to be me), but regardless, whoever is elected. The dt or dt's will both check the elected officials. I would say if your a dt and numbered 1-12 on the list, check the mayor, 13-25 check the pardoner. Instantly we have information. If they are a blue role you write it down. If they are red, speak up to someone (possibly wait a day to find a green person in a check). Reveal the findings, person dies.
If they are green, keep them on a seperate list.
Soon as you get two greens, RC them, and tell them who you checked and start a circle.
If you get blues. Keep that info to yourself until you need it proved. If you find a dt, make them check someone (most likely one you've checked to confirm), medic prot someone, vig hit someone, etc...
Anyone who flips red dies.
For all those who are not a dt. Constantly update your posts in the archive thread, and carefully analyze peoples posting behaviours. If you think something is a tell, or feel they are scummy, rather than just point a finger, really sit down and prove it. But be aware that if you cause the death of an important player and they flip town, you will prob quickly follow.
Medics, protect the bgs with your life. We will randomly pick one from the list of two, and then tell you to prot them.
Past protecting the bgs, no one talk to them in PM's, IM's, or IRC, period. They are not confirmable, do not associate with them. They can talk via thread, feel free to respond to them here, do not tell them anything.
Conclusion:
This game can be won very easily if we play it smart. I believe outside of my general plan to play, the reason I should be elected is I believe I will represent a threat to the mafia, which means they will have to actively try to remove me, which will give themselves away. If they don't I will continue to strengthen the town, and effectively force them to GG.
|
On March 16 2010 09:23 Zona wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2010 07:37 Incognito wrote:
Reasons why I think BC is town: He says that he claimed to three people. Claiming DT to three people is a pretty bad idea if you're mafia. You'd preferably keep it to one so you can kill off that member if you decide you are being found out. Now we don't have proof about the other two people he told, but I don't know if he'd make that bad of a lie.
I like this part. However like you said we don't have proof that he actually claimed to three people. I want BC to reveal which three people he claimed to, and those people to confirm that he claimed AFTER BC has named his list. Revealing this information (as far as I can see) has no particular benefits to the mafia as BC is not revealing any blue roles, nor is he revealing if he has any information about these three people. He, and the three, are just simply confirming that the talked to each other, proving that his statement was true.
You haven't responded to this part of my post that is just above yours.
On March 16 2010 11:53 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Catching reds is the overall game, but clearing innocents is just as important. Anycheck can do either or.
That's true, but you need to clear YOURSELF to the rest of the town. Finding red (rather than green/blue) is one of the easier ways to do so, at least partially. The only way we can have rock solid confirmation is for two DTs to check each other, but if you try to check people who are likely to be red (rather than trying to find blue, or some other plan), the earlier the rest of the town can trust you more.
There's also no reason to be condescending. Please focus on rational reasoning in your posts.
On March 16 2010 11:21 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Think with your head please
|
I voted the way I did because by the time I had absorbed enough of the thread and went to vote, there was only two possible outcomes: Malongo dies, or Malongo and Abenson dies. I am in favor of gaining more information rather than less, and Abenson's contribution to the game did not particularly convince me that he was an essential town member.
On March 16 2010 13:03 L wrote:
But then bill switches back to Abenson (9-9) and johnny throws the final vote off the malongo train onto bill on bill's insistence (9-8 Abenson). Once again, these last shifts happen LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES before the deadline. I'm glad you've pointed this out. Because his voting history is entirely opposite of what he states he believes. For example, among his various posts:
On March 16 2010 11:02 Bill Murray wrote:
I was very outspoken against Malongo.
If you were against Malongo, why did you vote for Abenson? Don't try to use the same explanation I'm using, as your situation is entirely different.
|
On March 16 2010 11:08 L wrote:
To elaborate on what BC just said:
2 DTs seem to have checked the same target, which was bussed to a second target. Whether or not this is a fluke or someone's lying intensely is yet to be found.
BC. You have no contradicted this statement in any way publicly, so I assume you agree with it. If not, you had better speak up now, and I would be shocked that you allowed this post to go by without commenting on it.
|
On March 17 2010 03:02 Bill Murray wrote:
omg dude, i've been on IRC once in the past 5 years, and it was when TeamLiquid was down for maintenance during the time that Mystlord was about to stream some pro scene. do NOT say I get on IRC. Don't ask me to speak to the mods about you making falce accusations about me using IRC. I DO NOT USE IRC.
On March 17 2010 03:16 Bill Murray wrote:
.... he did feel pretty comfortable when I talked to him and Ace on IRC about Malongo being red.
What's this?
|
On March 17 2010 03:15 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 03:05 Bill Murray wrote:
Excuse me for pushing votes... it's the only fucking ability I have. You also have the ability to spam posts, 7 in a row.
You're here. Post some real thoughts about the game, stop being inactive and letting mafia hide among inactives like you.
|
On March 16 2010 13:03 L wrote:
Bill Murray is 100% mafia after today.
On March 14 2010 14:44 L wrote:
Citi.zen, if you feel so strongly about killing me, how's about we kill bill murray today and if I'm wrong, you kill me tomorrow.
Sounds like everyone wins.
Let's do this.
|
On March 17 2010 03:29 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 03:26 Zona wrote:On March 17 2010 03:15 Fishball wrote:On March 17 2010 03:05 Bill Murray wrote:
Excuse me for pushing votes... it's the only fucking ability I have. You also have the ability to spam posts, 7 in a row. You're here. Post some real thoughts about the game, stop being inactive and letting mafia hide among inactives like you. "Inactive" is a relevant thing. I've always been here.
Being here doesn't mean you're active. Being active means posting plans, opinions, accusations. You have nothing substantial among these categories. Step it up.
|
On March 17 2010 03:33 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 03:31 Zona wrote:On March 17 2010 03:29 Fishball wrote:On March 17 2010 03:26 Zona wrote:On March 17 2010 03:15 Fishball wrote:On March 17 2010 03:05 Bill Murray wrote:
Excuse me for pushing votes... it's the only fucking ability I have. You also have the ability to spam posts, 7 in a row. You're here. Post some real thoughts about the game, stop being inactive and letting mafia hide among inactives like you. "Inactive" is a relevant thing. I've always been here. Being here doesn't mean you're active. Being active means posting plans, opinions, accusations. You have nothing substantial among these categories. Step it up. Like I said, it is a relevant thing. Obviously we have totally different definitions of being "active".
Do you not wish to help the town? We're trying to find mafia. You help the town in two ways - posting ideas that may shed light on who mafia are. Posting ideas so that you yourself appear less suspicious and more like a town member.
Since you've posted no real ideas whatsoever - we have no way of reading you. And only those who are mafia benefit when we have no idea where someone's alignment lies. You need to contribute so that we do not suspect YOU as mafia.
|
On March 16 2010 15:40 Incognito wrote:
Other thoughts: I find it interesting how Versatile brings up an ultimatum on BC. Then proceeds to viciously attack the fact that BC isn't announcing people he's checked. Then, when BC responds, Versatile disappears. Something is not right here. The way they're going at each other, I'm guessing one of BC/Versatile are mafia. The question right now is, which one? Good question. Atm BC can be tested more than Versatile given BC's claim.
This is a very bad post. Town members more often then not get into bigger arguments than town and mafia, because town members lack information, and mafia want to stay below the radar.
Your conclusion here seems to be setting up a case on BC if Versatile dies and turns up townie (or vice versa), which I very much dislike.
|
I must state that I agree a lot with Versatile on BC's performance (yet disagree that BC needs to be lynched quickly). Being elected is a privilege and responsibility, not entitlement and right, and you're not living up to the responsibility of being mayor - by being more active, acknowledging and responding to the town, and accusing and driving discussion. Actually, in future games, because of your lack of performance in this game, I will probably not vote for you in elections.
I want the town to think very much about BC/L working together. So much so that L is elaborating on BC's statements, and BC does nothing to refute L's elaborations. If they can prove themselves as town, we're in amazing shape. I am curious how they came to trust each other though. A DT/mayor (if that's what BC actually is) definitely needs to be very sure before trusting someone, so I assume BC would have done his due diligence before trusting L. However, if BC went according to his plan, he would have checked the other elected official, incognito, first. I very very much want and hope that BC/L are both town and working together. However, another reason why they might be working together is if they're both mafia. Now there's little sign that both are mafia right now, but if we accept that they're both not mafia, I want to know how they came to trust each other. You may say I'm fishing for information, but I'm looking for explanations of your public actions. You two are working together, and we as a town should be wondering if there's any valid reason WHY. Because if there is no strong reason why they should trust each other, there's only one other explanation why they do so.
It should be BC's number one priority to get the trust of the town right now. Prove to us that you're a legit DT/mayor. Like Versatile has said, once BC has proved himself, he can become the center of a much larger town circle, everyone can role claim to him, and we can wrap up this game. If BC cannot prove himself to be DT, then the town needs to remember how powerful a mafia member can be with three votes and an excuse for not getting nightkilled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
