EPTL
Amber
Caller
Zona
Amount of Nukes Fired: 0
Radiation levels - very low
World at War Mafia - Page 11
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
L Amber Caller Zona Amount of Nukes Fired: 0 Radiation levels - very low | ||
|
Versatile
United States396 Posts
also, there's all this discussion about how to punish someone for nuking without town consensus, but no discussion on how we decide who does nuke. and how to figure out who has nuking capabilities. i think some altered form of 789/ace's plan in the caller game might be useful here. | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
He's also contributed a plan, even though I vehemently don't agree with certain aspects of it. Those of you calling for him to be lynched...why? He's not going to be inactive for long. Do you have any good reasons beyond that? | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
haster27
Taiwan809 Posts
On March 24 2010 01:25 Amber[LighT] wrote: Thats why the inactive route is the better choice. Maybe we should wait a bit and get a better look at who's going to be useless in this game and spare L. I guarantee 2-3 idiots are going to stroll in here in about 6 hours saying "oh hey just saw the game started" or "oh I was so busy with schoolwork I had no time. I guess I'll check up on the thread now." What I am worried about is that Mafia will not adopt lurker policy due to Ace's harsh mod-kill policy. Because of mandatory 1 post per day and one has to vote within the thread, it will be really hard for anyone to try to be inactive without drawing town attention onto themselves. I do recommend waiting for everyone to make their first post, but lynching due to inactivity should only apply when there are absolutely no suspect present. | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 01:49 Amber[LighT] wrote: Figuring out who can nuke isn't really the issue since I don't believe it matters whether or not you can nuke or not. It doesn't guarantee anyone is town or mafia aligned. I agree with this. But I see the use of nukes (as a daytime vigilante kill) as a last-resort, desperation measure for the town when they feel they are close to losing. Let's not factor using nukes into the town plan until we're really fucked. | ||
|
haster27
Taiwan809 Posts
On March 24 2010 01:43 Versatile wrote: as far as someone nuking without town consensus, how about they get nuked by the person above/below them in the list? this would help in beginning to determine who may have what "powers". also, there's all this discussion about how to punish someone for nuking without town consensus, but no discussion on how we decide who does nuke. and how to figure out who has nuking capabilities. i think some altered form of 789/ace's plan in the caller game might be useful here. If we are correct about wanting to use nukes as pro-town powers, then trying to create list of who can nuke is basically tantamount to providing vigilante list Mafia can just NK. | ||
|
XeliN
United Kingdom1755 Posts
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough) To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~ His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. | ||
|
Versatile
United States396 Posts
so when the town decides person A needs to be nuked, how do we stop persons B-J from all firing a nuke @ him and ending the game? we have to think about this if we're trying to avoid chaos. | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:14 Versatile wrote: so when the town decides person A needs to be nuked, how do we stop persons B-J from all firing a nuke @ him and ending the game? We haven't even agreed on how many nukes we're going to lob at a person who initiated an unjustified nuke. In any case, to prevent excess nuking (should we decide that everyone nuking the same target is not beneficial), just have people who ARE about to nuke REFRESH THE THREAD and read to see if others have already nuked. Actually I now have another argument against mass counter-nuking someone who started it. If there's a mafia member with a sizable number of real nukes, then if this mafia is suspected or for another reason doesn't care to live and starts something with a real nuke, then for every nuke another player (who wasn't the target of the first nuke) launches at this mafia, the mafia can launch ANOTHER one back at this person. So if the town mass-retaliates, the initiator can get another nuke launched at the town (as long as the initiator still has more real nukes remaining). Following L's plan could allow a mafia with, say, 5 nukes, to kill 5 townies at the cost of the mafia's own life, if the town mass-revenge-nukes him. | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
|
Caller
Poland8075 Posts
Majority votes = death. Once a majority of the players in the game vote on a person that player will be killed as soon as I notice the lynching vote. However, since no one can be lynched until any nukes have landed you will have a chance to change votes before it strikes. You vote for a player in the thread by typing ##vote: player in bold. If you wish to not vote, you can but you must be posting. Remember that not voting can have consequences also.Any other format will not be counted. You can vote for yourself if you're crazy enough to do so. Needless to say, if no nukes are in the air and a player reaches majority vote they are instantly lynched. If a majority of votes isn't reached the day ends in a no lynch. my bad, disregard whatever I said. I thought that this statement implied that a nuke has to land before a lynch can start. | ||
|
Versatile
United States396 Posts
there needs to be an established game plan, asap. if there isn't, as soon as the first nuke is launched, there's going to be mass-hysteria and confusion. mafia will take advtange of this. there must be a plan of action that can be carried out right away if/when this happens, and people need to know the consequences for their actions. otherwise, this is what's going to happen: person A: ##nuke your mafia ass, person B. person B: oh hell nah, ##nuke your ass back, person A. mafia 1: wth, person A and person B, what y'all doing? ##nuke both your hoe asses. this needs to be decided and set in stone RIGHT AWAY. if a nuke is launched before it is, give up all hope of town order as far as nuking goes. @ this point, i haven't see a single reason why someone wouldn't nuke. someone could do it, and say oopsie daisy, kill me if you want. and then you have to convince 12 people to lynch this lone wolf. and who knows how many mafia are even in this game who can screw with that count? i applaud the efforts of zona and whoever else so far, but we need faster action. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:39 Versatile wrote: well then, it's time to decide how many nukes are going to be lobbed then, aye? there needs to be an established game plan, asap. if there isn't, as soon as the first nuke is launched, there's going to be mass-hysteria and confusion. mafia will take advtange of this. there must be a plan of action that can be carried out right away if/when this happens, and people need to know the consequences for their actions. otherwise, this is what's going to happen: person A: ##nuke your mafia ass, person B. person B: oh hell nah, ##nuke your ass back, person A. mafia 1: wth, person A and person B, what y'all doing? ##nuke both your hoe asses. this needs to be decided and set in stone RIGHT AWAY. if a nuke is launched before it is, give up all hope of town order as far as nuking goes. @ this point, i haven't see a single reason why someone wouldn't nuke. someone could do it, and say oopsie daisy, kill me if you want. and then you have to convince 12 people to lynch this lone wolf. and who knows how many mafia are even in this game who can screw with that count? i applaud the efforts of zona and whoever else so far, but we need faster action. I have to disagree.... if someone nukes without any good reason, the town can just anti-nuke it, no harm done, other than wasting the protection. The person who did it will get bitched out for a while and perhaps lynched/nuked. I do feel we need to progress the game though, so I'm calling out Opz from my guts about his post earlier. Convince me otherwise, but for now ##vote Opz | ||
|
XeliN
United Kingdom1755 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote: As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them Explain why this wouldn't work before you guys jump to a plan of nuking vigilante's. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On March 24 2010 01:53 haster27 wrote: What I am worried about is that Mafia will not adopt lurker policy due to Ace's harsh mod-kill policy. Because of mandatory 1 post per day and one has to vote within the thread, it will be really hard for anyone to try to be inactive without drawing town attention onto themselves. I do recommend waiting for everyone to make their first post, but lynching due to inactivity should only apply when there are absolutely no suspect present. I'm completely fine with that. I mean only two of us voted so far so it's not like Ace is rushing for the Night post. It would be wise to note who hasn't posted as of yet and to get on their ass to come up with a plan. If people think that being quiet is going to make them an asset later they better wake the fuck up and start posting. Ask questions. Suggest targets. Suspect people. CMON GUYS THIS IS MAFIA! | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:14 Versatile wrote: all i'm saying is, we're trying to create town order. so when the town decides person A needs to be nuked, how do we stop persons B-J from all firing a nuke @ him and ending the game? we have to think about this if we're trying to avoid chaos. Simple. We need to establish that though townies and mafia both have nuking capabilities, that neither side should use them or else we're all fucked. Nukes are our bittersweet friend, and mafia shouldn't be using them unless they're all retarded, and I don't think Chezinu signed up so we're okay! What we should do is discourage the use of nukes for at least two days. From there we can determine how to eliminate players by using nukes, if necessary. If we keep the count down by the end of the game we will be fine. For all we know the mafia could launch a nuke when the towns ahead just to call it a draw, and vice-versa. If you have a special role then keep it to yourself and when the time comes, put it to good use. I'm not sure how these roles are going to work so we're really going to have to play this game as an old-fashioned lynch, night, kill, clues, day, lynch etc. game. Don't focus on nuking. If someone threatens to use a nuke we have to be on top of counter/anti-nuking. | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:45 meeple wrote: I have to disagree.... if someone nukes without any good reason, the town can just anti-nuke it, no harm done, other than wasting the protection. The person who did it will get bitched out for a while and perhaps lynched/nuked. I said in an earlier post that at least a portion of anti-nukes needs to be saved for the late game in case mafia decides that the numbers are in their favor and tries to nuking to finish off most of the remaining town members. If we had a policy of always spending anti-nukes on every nuke that is launched, we could go into the late game having used most or all of them up. Perhaps mafia could even launch fake nukes early on to consume anti-nukes just for this purpose. @Ver, I do think my plan is superior and would definitely be happy if my plan was "set in stone" but I'm not going to be like incognito and just declare it to be so. Other town members are welcome to consider it and point out flaws in it, as L did with the first version. @XeliN. If we decided only to lynch nuke-initiators, what if two people initiate with nukes over the course of one day? Plus lynching is a lot less reliable, and needs a lot more coordination to pull off than revenge-nuking. If you can get the entire town on board with the idea to lynch the first nuke initiator and then revenge-nuke any subsequent ones, then that would be an improvement to the plan. But I suspect with a closed setup game like this there's probably some roles with extra hidden votes or some other way to mess with lynch votes. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:55 Zona wrote: I said in an earlier post that at least a portion of anti-nukes needs to be saved for the late game in case mafia decides that the numbers are in their favor and tries to nuking to finish off most of the remaining town members. If we had a policy of always spending anti-nukes on every nuke that is launched, we could go into the late game having used most or all of them up. Perhaps mafia could even launch fake nukes early on to consume anti-nukes just for this purpose. @Ver, I do think my plan is superior and would definitely be happy if my plan was "set in stone" but I'm not going to be like incognito and just declare it to be so. Other town members are welcome to consider it and point out flaws in it, as L did with the first version. @XeliN. If we decided only to lynch nuke-initiators, what if two people initiate with nukes over the course of one day? Plus lynching is a lot less reliable, and needs a lot more coordination to pull off than revenge-nuking. If you can get the entire town on board with the idea to lynch the first nuke initiator and then revenge-nuke any subsequent ones, then that would be an improvement to the plan. But I suspect with a closed setup game like this there's probably some roles with extra hidden votes or some other way to mess with lynch votes. I wouldn't say we do it for all of them, but just ones where its agreed upon that the targeted person should live. I agree that the mafia can abuse this, but if they launch an unwarranted nuke they're putting themselves in huge danger and likely will be lynched/nuked back... Shouldn't there be a protective system in place instead of just retaliatory? We're given anti-nukes for a reason and should use them. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
##vote L | ||
| ||
