|
On March 24 2010 09:38 Iaaan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 08:48 Versatile wrote:
so what makes abenson a better target, iaaan? for the most part, everyone is just as dumb as everyone else. the only thing that makes L different is he got himself banned.
what's the issue? what big grand plan did he come up with to implement before he got himself banned?
listen. i don't care who it is, the dude got himself banned. period. he won't be active for two days. i'm usually for not lynching anyone on the first day because there is so little to go on, but since we've got someone sitting right there who will not benefit the town for two days, why not lynch them?
honestly, if it was some other player, there would probably not be so much protesting to keep L alive. hop off his dick for a second and look for reason, loser. I have the same opinion of L as I do of you, you both just love pissing people off. But at least the two of you actually do shit. I am not set on Abenson, lynching L would be silly for the reasons that have been posted, and Abenson is a reasonable alternative. I will listen to arguments against other people. What makes Abenson a better target than L is that, L posts; if he is mafia we can catch him, while players like Abenson do not post, and since he has hopped on a ridiculous bandwagon, that is scummy. His actions point to him, L's do not. We will have lots of chances to analyze L's posting, we will not have many to analyze against players like Abenson. Lynching someone for a completely useless reason, that they wont be around for a day and a night of the game is just scum trying to get the town to waste a lynch.
On March 24 2010 09:45 Iaaan wrote:
Oh, I forgot, Versatile helped get the bandwagon on L started, of course it hurts his e-peen to back down from his brilliant lynching plan >.>
haha. nice. an actual response, and then a jab. thank god everyone isn't a crybaby. seeing as how ace is the mod, everyone needs to check their emotions @ the door.
i don't believe i got the bandwagon going, as there were votes for L before i said a word regarding voting for him. i just don't think he's a bad lynch candidate.
in any case, i don't especially care who gets lynched first. the likelihood of it being mafia is just so ridiculously low. to me, it makes sense to lynch L and unless someone better comes along, i'll keep my vote there.
ps: my e-peen's a monster yo, be very afraid. i might smack you in the forehead with it. owwwww!
|
On March 24 2010 09:12 nemY wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 06:48 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
Regarding lynching nukers, we should always lynch the aggressor. If the person being nuked retaliates with nukes, then not lynching is dangerous because there may be anti-nukes in the air directed at either party. A way to sidestep this is to evenly vote for each player (11 on each) such that if one player gets protected, he is lynched anyway because the other target is invalid. However, this does have the potential to result in a wasted lynch if no anti-nukes are fired. In addition, it requires full town participation which seems unlikely to me. However, it does sound better than the alternative of waiting for the nukes to fall and then voting, because the time frame will be very small and thus more subject to vote swings from the mafia, since they are organized.
if anyone has a better solution than that, speak up (there must be a better one, i just can't think of it right now). but we need to avoid entangling nukes.
Regarding lynching L: it is stupid. We wouldn't be voting for him if he wasn't temp banned. We should be voting for people that we think are mafia. People that stick out to me are anyone voting for L. And Nemy for feigning ignorance.
On the same token, not lynching anyone the first night is just as stupid. Anyone who suggests this is either dumb, mafia, or both. -Not trying to start shit with you infundi, but every game i've ever played with you, you've feigned ignorance.
I have? Really?
(lol see what i did there?)
the main reason i thought you were being weird about it is that you made a post saying you would the thread and post your thoughts, and then later your next post was asking someone else to summarize the game. everyone here knows you're capable of read + understand + post.
-I don't think we should vote for L, because he is L. Say I'm riding his dick all you want Versatile, but L contributes a shit ton more to these games than both you and me combined, and given how the day/night cycle is, he'll be back somewhere inbetween Night 1 and Day 2, PLENTY OF TIME FOR HIM TO JUMP ON BOARD AND START RAPING MOTHERFUCKERS.
I agree with this. As long as the motherfuckers are the Axis of Evil.
|
On March 24 2010 09:12 nemY wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 06:48 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
Regarding lynching nukers, we should always lynch the aggressor. If the person being nuked retaliates with nukes, then not lynching is dangerous because there may be anti-nukes in the air directed at either party. A way to sidestep this is to evenly vote for each player (11 on each) such that if one player gets protected, he is lynched anyway because the other target is invalid. However, this does have the potential to result in a wasted lynch if no anti-nukes are fired. In addition, it requires full town participation which seems unlikely to me. However, it does sound better than the alternative of waiting for the nukes to fall and then voting, because the time frame will be very small and thus more subject to vote swings from the mafia, since they are organized.
if anyone has a better solution than that, speak up (there must be a better one, i just can't think of it right now). but we need to avoid entangling nukes.
Regarding lynching L: it is stupid. We wouldn't be voting for him if he wasn't temp banned. We should be voting for people that we think are mafia. People that stick out to me are anyone voting for L. And Nemy for feigning ignorance.
On the same token, not lynching anyone the first night is just as stupid. Anyone who suggests this is either dumb, mafia, or both. -Not trying to start shit with you infundi, but every game i've ever played with you, you've feigned ignorance. -I don't think we should vote for L, because he is L. Say I'm riding his dick all you want Versatile, but L contributes a shit ton more to these games than both you and me combined, and given how the day/night cycle is, he'll be back somewhere inbetween Night 1 and Day 2, PLENTY OF TIME FOR HIM TO JUMP ON BOARD AND START RAPING MOTHERFUCKERS. -~OpZ~ calling you and idiot was being somewhat blunt/rude and i apologize for that. Your posting has been very spammish of late though and it's hard to read through everything you post given that not all of us have an unlimited amount of time to devote to this game. Yes you got accused as mafia, even a few votes were thrown your way, but that doesn't mean you have to go Bill Murray on us, there's plenty of time to deter the voters away from you.
If the votes didn't operate different this round I wouldn't care. I wouldn't support lynching one of the only people I know that is confirmed town, and since the votes are an instant majority thing it gets a little more scary than usual. Especially if you feel you were bandwagoned after a reasonable statement of things to be aware of this game.
|
On March 24 2010 08:37 ~OpZ~ wrote:
True...Abenson, Johnny, Don't just bandwagon. Give us a legitimate reason.
And someone, Xelin or Elemenope(?) said not to take L's past game's actions into account? But we are still supposed to use past games to assess their character? Hmm...is this logical to not use past game actions then? Shit, L could possibly have Nukes...it would be better to lynch him while he's gone then wait for him to be here then Nuke right before he dies in order to take peoples with him.
Just pointing that out...
I'm at class right now on break and reading this from a friend's laptop, but I'd like to point out that I said that L's past actions shouldn't have a bearing on this game, and I never said that we are to use past games to assess character. If you interpretted that, you misinterpretted. Provide quote and I'll explain more if needed, but my stance is that only current game actions/activity should have bearing on this game. Use that information to discredit people rather than attack players based on past games or "revenge" crap like L did with BM last game and with Abenson current game. Larger post will come with more of my thoughts when I get home.
|
Postcounts since the game started (Ace's day 1 post):
Zona: 19
~OpZ~: 15
Versatile: 13
Amber[LighT]: 12
XeliN: 12
haster27: 10
Fishball: 8
Elemenope: 8
meeple: 8
Caller: 8
JeeJee: 7
iNfuNdiBuLuM: 5
Iaaan: 4
nemY: 4
d3_crescentia: 4
johnnyspazz: 3
tree.hugger: 3
Nikon: 2
RebirthOfLeGenD: 2
L: 2
Abenson: 1
Phrujbaz: 0
Some people need to step up and post their ideas and opinions. I hate having to say this every game - but if you're inactive, don't let mafia hide among you!
##Vote: Phrujbz
|
##Vote: Phrujbaz
Gah, that name is hard to type. I should be copy-pasting like how I've been advising my players in the other game. Sigh.
|
Won't he just be modkilled if he doesn't post?
|
Probably. But the vote's there just to indicate to the people with few posts to shape up. It'll be changed if their behavior changes.
|
On March 24 2010 10:34 ~OpZ~ wrote:
If the votes didn't operate different this round I wouldn't care. I wouldn't support lynching one of the only people I know that is confirmed town, and since the votes are an instant majority thing it gets a little more scary than usual. Especially if you feel you were bandwagoned after a reasonable statement of things to be aware of this game.
Wait what? Who are you talking about that's confirmed town? Just to be clear.
|
On March 23 2010 16:13 ~OpZ~ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2010 13:39 L wrote:
Hey; Better idea.
Don't fucking nuke anyone at all because we might lose to radiation. First person to nuke gets chain nuked by everyone else. I call this strategy M.A.D. for Mutually Assured Destruction.
Sound awesome? I know it does.
Now for day 1 lynch: Kill abenson. Kid's terribad and not worth keeping alive. Aye....I will make certain to fire many nukes in the interest of assuring mutual destruction if things do not go properly. First step of these talks shall be a statement of bargaining. L, if you bus someone for something for a previous game, I can assure you destruction. Abenson has done nothing improper yet in this game and hasn't even had the opportunity to post. I feel he at least deserves the opportunity to prove he can be a better player. We should first discuss a plan of action. Ace was pretty smart by not telling us what countries were included in this game, otherwise we could of simply called out our countries (not including our arsenals), and seen if the country we had mattered. I'll assume countries with anti-nukes are like day time paramedics. I'm curious if their are ones that protect against night actions. While Zona has a decent plan to deter nuking, it involves a lot of secondary nuking. (One nuke = Two more nukes being fired as retaliation). Then his suggestion of a third party scares me into believing he himself is a third party. Seriously, one retaliatory nuke should be enough. We have no idea how many nukes can actually be fired before we wind up fucked from radiation. Until we hear from every person I don't think we should decide on a lynch candidate. We have 2 days to find a target, let's use them. Everyone post an overall strategy, don't just cosign someone elses. I support L's M.A.D. only because I will not let someone bully me, or force a band wagon when half a day hasn't even went by yet. Be wary of following L too hard. I don't support holding grudges like that. Also, Abenson, remember this: I'm only defending for now because you haven't posted. If you continue with your habitual one liners, I may be forced to side with L and support some corrective actions. Don't take this lightly. L is rather amazing at creating band wagons, but I see people have become atleast mildly fed up with his strong grudge holding. We also have no need to day lynch, remember this. We can start shit and throw suspicion as much as possible. Ace said we need a majority of players, and once he notices, the days over. No changing your vote after that. Day cycle ends. This can hurt us severely. Everyone must be active or else we will be thoroughly fucked. Keep yourselves read up on the thread at the least, don't miss anything. If you see a bandwagon, hesitate. Don't just jump on it because you might just wind up ending the day and regret it later. Good Luck. Let's try and play nice.
Going back a few pages...
Sup, North Korea, I hope you aren't still hoping to throw all those nukes around, or maybe you will be the one to lynch day 1.
I like your posts, but make sure you are clear. I can see why people are voting for you, need to be less ambiguous.
|
On March 24 2010 10:05 Versatile wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 09:38 Iaaan wrote:On March 24 2010 08:48 Versatile wrote:
so what makes abenson a better target, iaaan? for the most part, everyone is just as dumb as everyone else. the only thing that makes L different is he got himself banned.
what's the issue? what big grand plan did he come up with to implement before he got himself banned?
listen. i don't care who it is, the dude got himself banned. period. he won't be active for two days. i'm usually for not lynching anyone on the first day because there is so little to go on, but since we've got someone sitting right there who will not benefit the town for two days, why not lynch them?
honestly, if it was some other player, there would probably not be so much protesting to keep L alive. hop off his dick for a second and look for reason, loser. I have the same opinion of L as I do of you, you both just love pissing people off. But at least the two of you actually do shit. I am not set on Abenson, lynching L would be silly for the reasons that have been posted, and Abenson is a reasonable alternative. I will listen to arguments against other people. What makes Abenson a better target than L is that, L posts; if he is mafia we can catch him, while players like Abenson do not post, and since he has hopped on a ridiculous bandwagon, that is scummy. His actions point to him, L's do not. We will have lots of chances to analyze L's posting, we will not have many to analyze against players like Abenson. Lynching someone for a completely useless reason, that they wont be around for a day and a night of the game is just scum trying to get the town to waste a lynch. Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 09:45 Iaaan wrote:
Oh, I forgot, Versatile helped get the bandwagon on L started, of course it hurts his e-peen to back down from his brilliant lynching plan >.> haha. nice. an actual response, and then a jab. thank god everyone isn't a crybaby.
and Thanks, I learned from watching L (:
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On March 24 2010 11:38 d3_crescentia wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 10:34 ~OpZ~ wrote:
If the votes didn't operate different this round I wouldn't care. I wouldn't support lynching one of the only people I know that is confirmed town, and since the votes are an instant majority thing it gets a little more scary than usual. Especially if you feel you were bandwagoned after a reasonable statement of things to be aware of this game. Wait what? Who are you talking about that's confirmed town? Just to be clear.
Bill Murray, of course.
I have a feeling lynches might be quite hard to come by this game. Nukes may end up going out sooner then we think if we can't even lynch a banned person.
|
It's only a temp banned and he will be back. We gain NO behavior information from lynching L; we might as well pick a name out of a hat and hope it is mafia. Everyone has been saying this for the last couple pages and you still want to lynch him?
|
Good point Zona...
##Vote: Phrujbaz
L has a reason....The rest of you all need to up your posting game. With some content.
Okay...I'm going to say this again. We don't need an exact definite decision against nukes. I think our biggest worry will be people about to be lynched firing off their nukes anyway. That's the kind of stunt I would pull. I think that retaliation for nukes should be done on a situational basis. Two nukes is kind of much given that we don't know how much it will increase the ToD. That's my only problem with it. A combination of lynch/nuke is my thought, with some respect for the individual situation. I'm sure random nuking will be enough to piss off a majority of the town.
Also, we need to focus on a good lynch target. Be aware that we aren't near a lynch. Even though a few of us have been posting we need the whole towns participation. Not talking is bad for the town. Stuff like that will get you lynched and it's bad for use to not post. One liners don't help. Now please, start posting some content people.
Lots of people seem to be wanting to vote L. If he was some random person he would be a good candidate. But he is easily one of our best planners. Even if no lynch occurs today we will have some information gained from it because he will likely be a mafia target tonight, or even if someone else is, we should pay attention for those who push for L's lynch. Johnnyspazz hasn't posted much and voted for L originally. Abenson hasn't either and he voted for L. Nikon hasn't really posted either.
I propose Phrujbaz along with Zona. (Should he actually be modkilled right now? Has he confirmed to ace, or in the thread? Game's been up for 24 hours right?)
|
On March 24 2010 11:57 ~OpZ~ wrote:
Good point Zona...
##Vote: Phrujbaz
L has a reason....The rest of you all need to up your posting game. With some content.
Okay...I'm going to say this again. We don't need an exact definite decision against nukes. I think our biggest worry will be people about to be lynched firing off their nukes anyway. That's the kind of stunt I would pull. I think that retaliation for nukes should be done on a situational basis. Two nukes is kind of much given that we don't know how much it will increase the ToD. That's my only problem with it. A combination of lynch/nuke is my thought, with some respect for the individual situation. I'm sure random nuking will be enough to piss off a majority of the town.
Also, we need to focus on a good lynch target. Be aware that we aren't near a lynch. Even though a few of us have been posting we need the whole towns participation. Not talking is bad for the town. Stuff like that will get you lynched and it's bad for use to not post. One liners don't help. Now please, start posting some content people.
Lots of people seem to be wanting to vote L. If he was some random person he would be a good candidate. But he is easily one of our best planners. Even if no lynch occurs today we will have some information gained from it because he will likely be a mafia target tonight, or even if someone else is, we should pay attention for those who push for L's lynch. Johnnyspazz hasn't posted much and voted for L originally. Abenson hasn't either and he voted for L. Nikon hasn't really posted either.
I propose Phrujbaz along with Zona. (Should he actually be modkilled right now? Has he confirmed to ace, or in the thread? Game's been up for 24 hours right?)
Yes, we do need a definite decision. That decision is that the vast majority of the town needs to agree before a nuke is fired, and if one is fired against the will of the town, then that person is anti town, and must die instantly via nuke.
If people just nuke randomly people they get pissed off at, the town will suffer. I was mafia in Caller's red army mafiya game, and I was just giggling at how people were shooting eachother willy nilly. The mafia would be so happy to have everyone killing eachother off for them, while they stay out of the way. We need to enforce this to maintain order, and we can't just lynch idiots who fire nukes at their own discretion because:
1) It is a waste of lynches
2) Everyone will just forget about holding people accountable for their actions, and move to lynch other people
They need to be nuked so we do not sacrifice the town's KP, and so that they are not forgotten.
If people decide to launch nukes as they are getting lynched, again without the admission of the town, then they deserve to die. Do not let your emotions get in the way of winning, even if you are town and getting lynched, your team can still win once you are dead, without getting screwed over by a bad nuke.
|
If Phrujbaz is modkilled, I will switch my vote to Abenson. Unless someone does something that screams anti-town so loudly it can't be ignored.
I honestly think we should be MORE worried about not reaching majority to get a lynch, than being worried about a group of people suddenly out of nowhere reaching majority early. The latter, if it is a mafia bandwagon you're afraid of, is a terribly obvious play. And town members shouldn't cast votes when someone is close to majority casually.
HEADS UP FOR TOWN MEMBERS! Be EXTRA CAREFUL when you are casting votes when a player is 1-3 votes away from being lynched!
Let's try to puzzle out a bit of the game setup. While I'm sure there's a lot we won't be able to figure out yet, we should at least try to get a sense of how large the mafia team is. Now although you can say that Ace might have made some wild setup, with his declaration of "Play to win", the setup should give the mafia a reasonable chance of winning.
If we assume the town does lynch once a day, and the mafia kills once a night, then we lose 2 players (out of 22) per day/night cycle. Suppose there's, say, 5 mafia, then 17 town members. Then we need to lynch correctly 5 times to win, and 4 of those times, we will lose 1 town member at night as well. So we have 13 "buffer" town members. Which provides us up to 6 mislynch opportunities and yet still win. But that's actually a bit too much. So perhaps there might be 6 mafia.
But I really do think there will be a SK or some third party in this setup, so let's say they also get one kill per night collectively, then we'll lose 2 players a night, and 3 per day/night cycle. Then if we assume 5 mafia/third party with 17 town-aligned, 4 correct lynches are accompanied with 2 night deaths, so there's only 9 buffer town members. This provides us with a maximum of 3 mislynch opportunities. Actually needing to lynch 5 correctly with only 3 chances to go wrong seems pretty difficult for town to me.
If the third party is also antagonistic towards mafia...hmm. I still think it's pretty similar since any random kills by someone without full information (like an SK) will more likely hit town than anything.
I guess I'm thinking in circles for now. We'll know more after seeing how many die the first night. I just wanted to throw my thoughts out there though, as the town needs to at least CONSIDER how close to winning or losing we are when we progress in the game, as it affects what plans we employ. If we're winning, we should play more cautiously/slowly. If we're on the verge of losing, time to employ more desperate plans.
|
On March 23 2010 21:41 haster27 wrote:
It is my opinion that launching only one retaliatory nuke against the player who nukes without permission is terrible idea. If the player has nuke capabilities, it is highly likely that he will also have some anti-missile defense to protect themselves with.
I don’t see how you can say this. It’s highly unsupported unless you’re just basing it off of your capabilities, which is quite unwise.
As for the first lynch, waiting sounds good enough. It should force Mafia into activity, and active Mafia generally seemed to be easier target to find than lurking Mafia.
This only holds valid when the town is active as well. Which is why I stress it is important that everybody talk. Basing off current lynch votes, it seems L is going to be one of the first to die on the basis of inactivity. He really has no choice of activity but everybody else does – it’s imperative people are active.
On March 23 2010 23:08 Amber[LighT] wrote:
All this bio-chemical warfare. We should go for the ez kill then and go for L if he's going to be inactive anyway. Any other target would be foolish at this point, unless someone thinks there's any reason to suspect anyone else.
Sound reasoning. I’m only worried if something comes up shortly before the final vote is cast, but I suppose that’s something that can be dealt with the next day. And partially, I fear that a lot of this may be because people just don’t like L =\
On March 23 2010 23:17 JeeJee wrote:
ahhh... i love the smell of napalm in the morning
anyway, i think obviously if anyone launches a nuke without consensus, they should be dead. but i disagree with the counter-nuking plans proposed so far. we shouldn't be so triggerhappy. i would save our nukes for end-game if we need the extra daytime kp, plus i don't want to risk some bullshit ToD loss.
here's my plan. we adopt a strictly no nuking policy for now. anyone who nukes gets majority voted right away. as soon as their nuke lands, they pop, and we get 2 pieces of info (nuker and nukee's alignments).
I had forgotten this option at the start. Sounds reasonable. The only problem I can see with this is if someone uses it to save someone who is going to be lynched, kind of like a self-sacrificing pardoner. Or if multiple people launch nukes. I agree though that this can be used for the first few days until we have more information.
On March 24 2010 00:55 Caller wrote:
In fact, the best way to go about this is for somebody without any actual nukes to nuke L.
Disregarding the rule mistake which you’ve admitted, the problem with this is that we can’t confirm the validity of nukes until after they land. We have no way of proving who has nukes, who doesn’t have nukes; the same goes for counter-measures. I feel that nobody should state how many nukes they have nor counter-measure amount unless we can somehow verify the claim.
On March 24 2010 01:40 Zona wrote:Making the town misunderstand the game and thus the best way to play is beneficial to the mafia and must be called out. Actually I don't like your attitude that "they didn't read the rules" is some trivial issue. If you're going to play the game, at least take the damn effort to read the rules.
I agree that misunderstanding the rules is very harmful to the town. It is essential that each person knows what the rules are and what his or her role is along with its powers. Remember – we have no information about roles. We don’t know if there are conditionals to rules or not. It is very vital that you misinterpret your role and screw up. Again, as Zona said, PM ace if you don’t understand an aspect of your role. Although having admitted his mistake [I realize that this has happened after these posts], and the fact that it wasn’t at a time where everybody was on or anything, I’m thinking that he wasn’t doing it intentionally; though it is something to keep in mind in the future if he pulls something like this again.
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.
This is something I wish would get discussed a bit later when we may need to abandon the “lynch nuker” plan. Personally, I wasn’t here for the game in which this plan happened, so I can’t say so much about the plan itself and how it can be modified. I don’t really care for how many nukes people has as I feel until we get a verifying method, it isn’t something that should be discussed. But a non-biased and set plan for counter nukes is efficient in my mind.
On March 24 2010 01:56 Zona wrote:
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.
Nukes are shitty for ToD, but keep in mind that nukes as day vigs are basically our way of getting extra lynches in. If we are very sure about a particular suspect, we can lynch that person, yes. But if we are sure of two people, I feel that we should use a nuke as it’s basically a double lynch. I’m sure people are going to argue about this considering ToD, but as I said earlier, we don’t necessarily need to be afraid of using nukes but rather afraid of using them unwisely.
On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
The problem that it’s very put-offish at times. It may be the way he plays, but if it doesn’t rub well with people, obviously conflicts are going to come up even if people have different playing styles.
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.[/QUOTE]
On March 24 2010 03:14 Zona wrote:
Current version of proposed plan
1. No one is to initiate a nuke.
2. Anyone who initiates a nuke should be revenge-nuked by TWO players with real nukes. To ensure only TWO revenge-nuke, those with real nukes need to refresh the thread, and see if two have already been launched. If not, shoot one.
3. If any of the revenge-nukes turn out to be fake, the faker needs to be lynched or nuked as well.
4. Do not launch fake nukes. This only serves to muddy the picture for the town and gives an opportunity for the target to get another nuke in the air.
5. Anti-nukes should be used at their owner's discretion. However, save some for the late game, so that at that stage, the mafia can't simply nuke a large proportion of the remaining town members and win.
6. If the town COLLECTIVELY (not by some individual thought) feels that they're probably close to losing, start using nukes as daytime vigilante hits.
The only thing I would change is that 6 shouldn’t be when we feel close to losing, but rather when we’re sure of a second scum in addition to the lynch. Though still, the town as a whole decides.
On March 24 2010 03:17 JeeJee wrote:
2i) lynch the second nuker on the day after. unfortunately if there's doubt about even performing one town lynch, i doubt this will work.
2ii) if possible have one of the nukee's counternuke the nuker, and we lynch the other one. that way they both flip on the same day (unfortunately this means more nukes in the air)
2iii) something with anti-nukes? like anti-nuke one, lynch other.
The main issue with 2i is that on the second day, the nuker may launch a second nuke. Yeah, we’re going to lynch him, but we still have a nuke to deal with.
2ii) possibility of scum to interfere with a single counternuke, and then we have the same situation with 2i, though now we may have two nukes out in the air.
2iii) this is probably the best option that I can see at the moment out of these 3.
On March 24 2010 03:19 Zona wrote:
There are two things to discuss though - if we approach a day deadline with no majority vote. Is it worth it to launch a fake nuke to extend the day?
And the amendment to my plan of LYNCHING the first nuke-initiator rather than revenge-nuking them.
I don’t see how we can do this. Are we to take the word of someone when he says that he has no nukes?
On March 24 2010 03:24 XeliN wrote:
There is a difference between making assumptions and considering likelihoods, it is reasonable to consider RoL might have a greater chance of being town based on the reasons you now retracted just as, in my view, it is reasonable to consider it unlikely that people will have an ability to manipulate the voting, or at least if anyone does have such an ability it would quickly be made obvious.
I don’t feel it’s fair to consider the likelihood of anybody having any role whatsoever. It may be obvious that someone has extra votes, but what does that matter? We have new information that we just have to take into consideration and execute our town plan(s) accordingly. Everybody is suspect considering we have no information whatsoever. Until we can get some verification methods, it’s to remain that way. Go by what’s being posted/activity/inactivity/actions. Not likelihood that something may or may not happen because it “doesn’t seem right”.
I’m not even going to say anything other than “lol” at the Xelin-Fishball misunderstanding.
I want this clarified
On March 24 2010 04:07 ~OpZ~ wrote:
You didn't respond to anything about my post. You just read my post and says he's trying to claim town. Now Xelin, I hate to tell you this, but your instinct is wrong. Also, your lynch idea as being the perfect retaliation to nuking? Wrong.
In response to
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 (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
You say On March 24 2010 04:36 ~OpZ~ wrote:
It's a WASTE of time. Do you think mafia will have all kinds of nukes to just launch? To throw themselves out there and pray we don't retaliate? I agree retaliation is necessary, but ending the day right there to give them another kill, when it was most likely an idiot townie? Go look at Caller's game, the CIA agent was the last person to execute someone, and ended the game with it. It's already been stated how big of a gambit it is to just throw yourself out into the open. I agree with retaliating, but directly saying launch 3 nukes is bad, and simply ending the day is bad. The situation should determine the means of countering.
when he was advocating that we only retaliate with nukes when a second player launches a nuke. Are you actually reading posts or are you trying to put words in people’s mouths?
And then in the same post, you say
That is what my problem with the plans. So far, I like the lynch plan best, because it doesn't increase the ToD.
Do you even know what you’re saying? I realize that you claim you are in favor of lynch as the countermeasure for an unsupported nuke, but do you realize that you’re refuting and agreeing with people in the same post?
On March 24 2010 05:55 Abenson wrote:
I will vote for L simply because he is temp-banned and not much help as of now.
##vote L
This is your one post, and you’re just going to leave it at that? Are you fucking serious?
On March 24 2010 06:30 nemY wrote:
Can someone summarize what's gone on so far? What I can make of it so far is: L's been banned. we're adopting a "no nuke" policy, if someone breaks the policy we nuke them 2x, don't use fake nukes (if you have them), and ~OpZ~ is being an idiot?
Are you fucking serious?
On March 24 2010 07:15 ~OpZ~ wrote:And Elemenope, I don't see what we are arguing over? My post was stating I would use what I have as needed. And I didn't support lynching until everyone posted. We have over 24 hours, and as I've said, we should use them. Only using one nuke in retaliation preserves the ToD. We can always launch another if it's necessary. You act like we can't fire it the next day if necessary? Why must we retaliate within the same day?
Please explain what is wrong with that.
I’ll explain this right now on why it’s necessary that all unsupported nuke launching needs to be dealt with that same very day:
Because that person can launch another nuke the very next day. Then what do we do? Use up a lynch just because we were afraid of instant GG from ToD when due to our inaction, another person dies and we waste a lynch. That’s two days gone basically. When radiation is at none, are you seriously still proposing that if two people launch nukes, we only deal with one now and the other the next day when he could launch another nuke, thereby increasing ToD if it’s detonated? Aren’t you in favor of not raising ToD in any way?
*We can’t rely all the time on anti-nukes or other prevention methods as ways to prevent unsupported nukes from killing people.*
On March 24 2010 07:19 meeple wrote:
It's possible Nemy is feigning ignorance, but its also possible that he doesn't have the time to read the whole thread. On the other hand, he is suspect to me because of how he made a questionable statement that was ill-informed, that promotes the wrong type of ideas. (Saying that OpZ is being an idiot)
If he hasn’t had time to read the thread, then he shouldn’t make posts that says he’ll read the thread, then make another post asking people to summarize the thread for him. That’s just ridiculous.
On March 24 2010 09:43 tree.hugger wrote:
Don't let L's reputation for being frightening and wrong discourage you. His guesses haven't gotten better over time, and I doubt a two day break will help his logic sober up.
That man should never be let near a blinking red button, take him out.
Also the 'or worse' clearly means a kind of 'Dr. Strangelove' doomsday device. Purity of Essence, remember, PoE, PoE, Purity of Essence....
You have got to be kidding. On all parts.
On March 24 2010 10:34 ~OpZ~ wrote:
If the votes didn't operate different this round I wouldn't care. I wouldn't support lynching one of the only people I know that is confirmed town, and since the votes are an instant majority thing it gets a little more scary than usual. Especially if you feel you were bandwagoned after a reasonable statement of things to be aware of this game.
Um, what? How do you know anybody is confirmed town?
On March 24 2010 11:57 ~OpZ~ wrote:
Okay...I'm going to say this again. We don't need an exact definite decision against nukes. I think our biggest worry will be people about to be lynched firing off their nukes anyway. That's the kind of stunt I would pull.
Wait. So you claim so much that the ToD is like some fucking ceiling of death 1 foot over our heads, and how we should lynch people and try not to do any major counter nukings, random nukes, etc. Then you fucking say you would fucking fire off a random nuke if you’re about to be lynched? Are you even reading what you’re saying? If you’re truly town, you wouldn’t fire off a nuke, even if you’re about to be lynched. On top of that, since it’s a majority ends the vote or 48 hours, it’s not even guaranteed that you’d be lynched when you fire this nuke. Do you see the problem with this at all?
Going to play D2 some, will be back later maybe to read some of the few replies since I last refreshed.
|
With 22 alive, it is 12 to lynch.
L(5)
Amber
tree.hugger
Versatile
Abenson
Fishball
~Opz~(3)
meeple
Xelin
Caller
nemy(1)
johnnyspazz
Abenson(1)
Iaaan
Phrujbaz(2)
Zona
~OpZ~
Amount of Nukes Fired: 0
Radiation levels - very low
Answering a question about nukes here:
If someone has 2 nukes sent against them and they both turn out to be real nukes they both hit. Even if the player dies from the first nuke, the second one can still land and the ToD will go up.
In danger of being modkilled/replaced - Phrujabz
|
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.
Made an error in quoting. I did not say this, so don't misconstrue this part as what I have said.
|
FREEAGLELAND26782 Posts
On March 24 2010 10:05 Versatile wrote:
ps: my e-peen's a monster yo, be very afraid. i might smack you in the forehead with it. owwwww!
Draggggggggggggggggggggg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
