|
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.
@Xelin. I don't think we should be making any assumptions about the game setup. As Versatile stated earlier in response to a declaration I made about RoL's alignment (which I now retract, due to her point), Ace could have done anything for this game. The setup is hidden for such a reason. I would guess there's plenty of roles to mess around with anything. The game host does often derive enjoyment by seeing how everything mucks up everything else, especially with such a format.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +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?
My sentiments precisely.
On March 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +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? 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.
I'm with you here on this well. Asking someone to summarize the thread for him is truly ridiculous. A player signs up knowing that they need to put in effort to play the game, whether as town or mafia. It's truly unfathomable. Plus, asking someone to summarize seems like you want to absolve yourself of some responsibility in the future. I'm keeping my eye on you.
On March 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +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?
Yeah. First of all, we probably have some room with the number of nukes allowed to go off before everyone dies. But to declare that you would fire a nuke just because you're close to being lynched isn't pro-town behavior. You're being selfish in firing a nuke just because you're about to be removed from the game, rather than playing to help the town win.
|
On March 24 2010 13:10 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 12:39 Ace wrote:
In danger of being modkilled/replaced - Phrujabz
When does this time expire? 24 hours after the game started? (which is like 2 minutes from now) 24 hours after the post warning him? Some other time?
Rules seem pretty clear to me:
On March 21 2010 09:52 Ace wrote:
[*]You must participate. If you do not post at least once every 24 hours, and/or miss 2 votes you will be replaced or if necessary mod-killed.
|
Actually since Phrujabz should be replaced/modkilled now, I'm moving my vote to the next most inactive as I stated earlier:
##vote: Abenson
|
It depends on what he has to say. Unfortunately, even if we set aside L's ban for now, there's 9 others in addition to that guy with 5 posts or less. If he posts something marginally more useful than Abenson's single useless post, I'll go with Abenson for now.
|
On March 24 2010 20:32 Nikon wrote:
@Zona and ~OpZ~ voting to lynch Phrujbaz when he was most likely going to get killed due to inactivity? What exactly was going through your guys' heads?
A vote doesn't necessarily mean I definitely want someone lynched. It can also be used as a wakeup call to whoever's being voted for, or a way of pointing out to others behavior I think is unhelpful. In any case, if you read thoroughly, I already stated multiple times why I voted and how I would change my vote if he was killed or replaced.
|
Btw, everyone, we have less than 16 hours to form a majority vote on someone.
Right now Opz and L have have the most votes, with 5 or 4 votes respectively. If you aren't going to be around again before the deadline, you need to put a vote down, preferably on someone who has some sort of reasoning behind a push for their votes (although day 1 lynches are likely to be as flimsy as always).
We as a town cannot afford to no lynch! Vote for someone in the 16 hours to come, and keep in mind we need a majority vote (of 12) to lynch successfully!
|
I'm not shifting my own vote yet as I'll be here later today, but those of you who only stop by once a day - make a decision!
|
BM: The town needs to reach a majority vote (12 votes) on someone in just over 7 hours, so don't without your vote too long. The lynching setup is different from other games on TL.
Abenson: You have a grand total of 2 posts. Among the least of all players. The same amount as someone who's been banned for most of the game. And the 2 posts contain nothing of value, unlike L's revision of my initial plan. Sure, you might be town or mafia, but you're deadweight to the town, and if you are in fact town, you are allowing mafia to hide among people like you. This is the day 1 lynch, a crapshoot, so you're a good choice. And getting rid of inactive town members, while not ideal, reduces the number of inactives that the inactive mafia can use to blend in and hide.
|
On March 25 2010 06:15 ~OpZ~ wrote:
Abenson should be confirmed soon enough. I'll RC, or he will in a minute. I figured I would die earlier, so I simple breadcrumbed his name into a post for him to reveal on my death.
...
I will not vote for a confirmed townie over someone unconfirmed.
...
Whether you all want to take this as confirming him, whatever. I gave him strict instructions to only post this on my death to save himself from a town lynch. He seems to be afk a lot, and I will not support his lynch.
Wait - did you just claim masons with Abenson? Because I presume you did read the rules and otherwise wouldn't be talking to him privately.
I'm willing to switch my vote to someone else if you clarify this claim, at least for day 1. The problem is I'm not sure if the town's momentum can be changed.
|
Alright, here's the deal. I'm not close to being impressed by what Abenson is contributing. But if he and you, OpZ, are claiming masons, I'm willing to try to lynch someone else for now.
As of last post:
Zona: 32
~OpZ~: 19
XeliN: 16
Versatile: 16
Amber[LighT]: 14
haster27: 14
Elemenope: 13
JeeJee: 12
Fishball: 9
iNfuNdiBuLuM: 9
meeple: 9
Caller: 9
johnnyspazz: 7
Iaaan: 7
d3_crescentia: 7
nemY: 6
Nikon: 4
Abenson: 4
tree.hugger: 4
RebirthOfLeGenD: 3
Phrujbaz: 2
L: 2
As of now, Rebirth of Legend has the lowest amount of posts (ignoring L), and not one of his three posts is useful. Even L's 2 posts has contributed to the shaping of the town's no-nuke-initiation plan. The other end is the odd argument that he was an extra player added, that probably is town or third party, but that was shot down as we shouldn't make any assumptions on how Ace is laying things out. So I will switch my vote to him.
##Vote: RebirthOfLegend
|
On March 25 2010 06:24 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2010 06:22 Zona wrote:
Wait - did you just claim masons with Abenson? Because I presume you did read the rules and otherwise wouldn't be talking to him privately.
I'm willing to switch my vote to someone else if you clarify this claim, at least for day 1. The problem is I'm not sure if the town's momentum can be changed.
Wait. Where did he even RC Mason? Don't be so assuming.
He has claimed that him and Abenson are "confirmed town". He also implies that he has spoken with Abenson, and speaking out of thread with other players is explicitly prohibited unless your role allows it. Now mafia can speak with each other as well but it'd be pretty dumb for them to reveal that. So the conclusion to be reached is a role with mason abilities.
|
For everyone reading who doesn't know what I'm referring to, check out here:
http://mafiawiki.four-horsemen.com/index.php/Masons
Or basically, in games where private out-of-thread discussion is not allowed for most non-mafia players, sometimes there are a few town members who are given the "mason" special role - which lets each of the players in the mason group know that the others are town members, AND allows them to speak to each other out of thread. It's like a mini-cell of town members who can work together privately to try to hunt scum and coordinate their public posts.
Too bad the roles in this game went to Abenson...and Opz.
If analysis-type players, or players who are good at reading behavior end up as masons, they get a tremendously beneficial boost as they can bounce ideas off other players who they know are town and thus get their ideas critiqued without having a chance of mafia taint. As well, the group of them can subtly work together to push their cases or vote, slightly countering the town's disadvantage of players not able to work together at first.
|
I didn't assume that his role was entirely just a Mason. I clarified with my subsequent post that his claim involved a role with mason abilities.
Of course anyone can lie. But I'm willing to put of lynching those who role claim right away as:
- the claims can be tested easily later
- there's still a fuckton of other inactive players that are as much deadweight as Abenson was.
I do agree Abenson needs to confirm that the spoke with each other. But it would be pretty silly for OpZ to throw himself out there for Abenson if they weren't on the same team.
I totally agree how his earlier post to use nukes if he was lynched was an anti-town declaration. Still, I think the claim, once confirmed by Abenson, is enough to put me off voting for them day 1. Of course we should keep a very close eye on them for the coming days.
|
As to elaborate on why I'm willing to overlook an anti-town statement. Players on TL are on average, pretty bad. Looking through past games, you see townies all over the place making horrible statements with very bad ideas. It's something you have to keep in mind, playing here. Otherwise most of the players in most games would be instant lynch targets.
|
If a town member was about to be lynched but thought that a role claim might get him or her a chance at life - then role claiming is the right thing to do, even day 1.
The name of the game is to lynch mafia, not people who behave poorly. However, if we have no idea who is mafia, THEN we lynch people who behave poorly because they might be mafia, and we also remove them from the game, so the next day's discussion may be better.
In any case, I think the core disagreement between you (Elemenope) and me is that you don't think the claim is worth considering (it might be a lie/it's a bad move), while I think it is (there's no good reason for Opz to do this if he's mafia/these two players haven't shown this kind of sophistication in the past). We probably won't be able to convince each other in this respect with further words.
We've laid out our reasons, it's up to the rest of the town to consider what we've posted, and hopefully ADD SOME THOUGHTS OF THEIR OWN, but if a large number of the town decides Abenson or Opz is to die tonight, I will of course move my vote to ensure that we can reach majority to get a successful lynch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
