|
Another thing I want the town to think about is the pardoner power.
I think the pardoner MECHANISM as a whole brings NOTHING good to the town. When players die, the rest of the town gains CONCRETE INFORMATION. However, with mafia nightkills, the mafia decides what information to reveal, so the information from a lynch is much more valuable, because it is not totally driven by the mafia. As well, vote history is very valuable when combined with lynch results. So when the pardoner ever pardons, the town is deprived of information is needs to get.
Okay, so the pardoner shouldn't pardon. But therein lies the problem. When we reach lategame, the pardoner power becomes EVEN MORE DANGEROUS to the town, when in the hands of a mafia member. By that point in the game, the pardon can simply be used to cancel a town's lynch, and allow the mafia to continue whittling down the town with their nightkill. So we as a town want to reach lategame without the pardoner having his or her power. But if the pardoner ever uses his or her power...it's a bad thing.
I have no easy answer to this dilemma. However, if we force the pardoner to use up pardons earlier in the game to remove the risk of mafia pardoning late game, the town falls behind and loses two lynches. If we kill the pardoner with a lynch, we fall behind in ONE lynch, but we also lose one town member.
The only alternative is we somehow have to prove the pardoner is definitely town, so we can avoid using pardons and also go into the lategame without worrying about mafia pardoning.
|
On March 17 2010 04:02 Versatile wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 03:55 Zona wrote:
Another thing I want the town to think about is the pardoner power.
I think the pardoner MECHANISM as a whole brings NOTHING good to the town. When players die, the rest of the town gains CONCRETE INFORMATION. However, with mafia nightkills, the mafia decides what information to reveal, so the information from a lynch is much more valuable, because it is not totally driven by the mafia. As well, vote history is very valuable when combined with lynch results. So when the pardoner ever pardons, the town is deprived of information is needs to get.
Okay, so the pardoner shouldn't pardon. But therein lies the problem. When we reach lategame, the pardoner power becomes EVEN MORE DANGEROUS to the town, when in the hands of a mafia member. By that point in the game, the pardon can simply be used to cancel a town's lynch, and allow the mafia to continue whittling down the town with their nightkill. So we as a town want to reach lategame without the pardoner having his or her power. But if the pardoner ever uses his or her power...it's a bad thing.
I have no easy answer to this dilemma. However, if we force the pardoner to use up pardons earlier in the game to remove the risk of mafia pardoning late game, the town falls behind and loses two lynches. If we kill the pardoner with a lynch, we fall behind in ONE lynch, but we also lose one town member.
The only alternative is we somehow have to prove the pardoner is definitely town, so we can avoid using pardons and also go into the lategame without worrying about mafia pardoning. i think there is only one way to deal with this. the two tells the pardoner (incog in this game) that we do not want any lynches. and if he goes against the town's wishes so blantantly, that's cause for immediate lynching. of course, this should have been done in the beginning of the game, but we can just keep it in mind for future games as well. obviously there some problems with this, for example, it counts on the pardoner keeping their word so it is not full proof.
The thing is, the pardoner obeying the town in using up pardons in the first two days does nothing to prove how town-aligned they are. The mafia would be happy to have a monopoly on kills for two days. They then control what information the town has.
Actually the first town lynch vote is probably one of the most important in the game, because it provides the first voting record for the town to examine. I'd definitely be against pardoning that one...
That's why the mechanic of having the mayor decide the first lynch actually sets the town back, because there's no voting history to examine day 2.
|
On March 17 2010 07:30 Bill Murray wrote:
MY team = green players, and I have no idea who they are. I'm in no circles. I can't trust anyone.
I thought a bunch of people role claimed to you, which you implied when you said "keep the roleclaims coming"? Wouldn't that make you the center of some circle?
|
Fcusk. I die before day 3 again.
From my dying spirit I toss to you the torch, town...good luck!
|
On March 19 2010 12:57 Incognito wrote:
Regardless I still stand by the idea that you just don't announce your DT checks even if you're elected.
WTF is this? Earlier in the game you post a DT list, which is pretty much declaring DT checks - and now you "stand by the idea" that you DON'T announce your DT checks? The game's over...but I still have to point this out.
And don't get me wrong. I have nothing personal against you. In fact I think it's great that you host games and play in them. It's also my hope that you don't have any particular grudge against me for losing all interest in your second hosted game. However, it's just that your ideas were so all over the board (and poor) all game, and I need to point them out.
|
Also - no need for everyone to get all riled up by each other now that the game's over...
wow at the emotions running through the thread.
|
On March 21 2010 08:37 madnessman wrote:
i gotta say bm was actually pretty spot on for the majority of his guesses.
Totally disagree. He made so many guesses that some of them were bound to be correct. He made so many "person x is probably green" and "person x is probably red" style posts, if anyone bothered to count them up we'd see that his success rate was unspectacular.
|
On March 21 2010 10:37 citi.zen wrote:
As I said before, I now think L's "playing style" is perfectly OK. It does come more naturally to some people than others, but in the end the "good" players in repeated games often make bad arguments or behave inconsistently. All that means is that "catching" him next time he is red will not be easy: playing like crap and lynching greens would be "consistent".
I disagree. I stated this before, but I think that if a player who is town in a game makes bad arguments or is not being helpful in general to aid his or her chances as a mafia member in future games is not a show of skill, but instead shows a lack of skill, because this player is not confident in his or her ability to be helpful and appear town-like in a game as mafia.
The player is essentially hurting the town (and his/her) chances to win when playing as a member of the town only to help his/her chances to win when playing as a member of the mafia.
|
On March 21 2010 11:34 L wrote:
An extra medic and another mafia kp would have balanced the game quite nicely, imo.
Do you really think so?
I do agree the extra mafia KP would have helped a lot, because it greatly reduces the number of days available to the town before losing, and thus the number of mislynches the town can afford (the number in this game is ridiculously high), but 2 DTs in a game where the protected elected officials can be checked is incredibly powerful. No only can 2 DTs check a significant portion of the game's players between them, but they can confirm each other and the protected mouthpiece they can then use.
|
On March 21 2010 12:22 L wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 11:48 Zona wrote:On March 21 2010 11:34 L wrote:
An extra medic and another mafia kp would have balanced the game quite nicely, imo. Do you really think so? I do agree the extra mafia KP would have helped a lot, because it greatly reduces the number of days available to the town before losing, and thus the number of mislynches the town can afford (the number in this game is ridiculously high), but 2 DTs in a game where the protected elected officials can be checked is incredibly powerful. No only can 2 DTs check a significant portion of the game's players between them, but they can confirm each other and the protected mouthpiece they can then use. Extra kp is massive and lets you double up on DTs to get kills. Playing smart would involve someone fake claiming something, then when the town finds out ask for a mafia bus claim to the person who's going to be killed. Then use a pseudo confirmed setup to give him orders; An IRC channel where no one admits their name except the bus, for instance. At this point the moment you discover blues, you can bus them to randoms and siphon hits in which makes the medics useless unless counter counter bussed. tbh, mafia might even be heavily favored in that format depending on how early bus contacts.
Well remember Fishball's amazing switch to get rid of the bodyguards removed something that could have been a huge factor this game.
With checkable elected roles, the DT doesn't need to reveal to the public who he/she is, or if elected, the DT is protected by two layers of protection. Plus with only only 2 shots for the bus driver, it can only nullify medics twice.
Interesting plan you have there to trade a mafia member for the bus driver. I think it's a good idea, but with this game it might not have worked so well with so many townies fake claiming that role to others in PM...ugh.
If DT checks could be bussed without the DT knowing, then the mafia bus driver could be killer without coordinating. But that wasn't the case in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
