/in
World at War Mafia
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Zona
40426 Posts
/in | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
(so that the game doesn't devolve into a silly tit for tat game where the town doesn't benefit) 1. On Day #1 - no one is to initiate a nuke with anyone else. The mafia are the primary beneficiaries of killing townies by fiat, so anyone initiating nukes when the town has little information is helping the mafia. 2. Day #2 and beyond - if you really feel someone is mafia and want to nuke them. Write a post detailing your case against them BEFORE you nuke, and give the rest of the town some time to consider your case to argue if it is valid. If no one overturns your case, go ahead a nuke. 3. If anyone initiates an unjustified nuke, someone with a real nuke launch a revenge strike against this initiator. If the initiator was mafia - good riddance. If the initiator was town, that person was still acting irresponsibly by initiating a nuke without a good case, and good riddance. P.S. RoL is probably vanilla town or miller, since he was added as the extra player after roles had already gone out. It'd be termendously unbalancing to add another mafia member. And I doubt Ace would invent another third party role just for an extra player, although that probably would be the most balanced way of handling things. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 21 2010 09:52 Ace wrote: [*]Play to win. Don't do anything that would be considered playing against your win condition or ruining the game for your team. So don't nuke indiscriminately! As to the role of anti-nukes against initiated nukes - at the moment I think it should be at the owner's discretion. If we had a policy to anti-nuke every nuke that was launched, mafia members could launch fake nukes to make the town spend all their anti-nukes, then we're left with no anti-nukes for real mafia nukes later on. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
There's no clues in this game - everyone post some ideas and opinions! Don't be inactive and let the mafia hide among you! | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 23 2010 13:32 d3_crescentia wrote: Problem: isn't it only that the person being nuked has the chance of firing a retaliatory shot? If so the only way to really enforce this is to lynch the person launching the nuke on the day afterwards. Any player can launch one nuke per day (real or fake, if they don't have real ones). It's when a player is the target of a nuke they can launch an ADDITIONAL nuke against the person who targetted them. Plan part 4: If a "revenge strike" against the initiator was a fake, lynch/nuke BOTH the faker and the initiator, because if we don't, mafia can initiate a nuke, have a teammate fake-revenge according to the proposed plan, and BOTH live. Plan part 5: Unless you as a town member have a very good reason, do not launch fake nukes for any reason at all. You simply muddy the picture for the town (by changing the focus of the game to your nuke) without actually targetting a suspected mafia. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. No chain nuking. There might be a third party who wins by annihilating the world by radiation, so everyone launching revenge strikes might lead to them winning. One or two revenge nukes at most. I do think a no-nukes idea is good for the most part, but later in the game the town can use them as daytime vigilante hits if we really fall behind by mislynching, so I wouldn't rule it out completely. On March 23 2010 13:39 L wrote: Now for day 1 lynch: Kill abenson. Kid's terribad and not worth keeping alive. Stop bringing past games into this. Your grudge against BM last game hit town and didn't meaningfully advance that game towards town victory (the overwhelming setup advantage did, though). If you think someone is terrible, convince the entire group of players to ignore him, rather than waste a lynch, especially a day 1 lynch which should provide information otherwise. The biggest reason is that if everyone piled on some target you proposed, we will have no differentiating votes to examine later on. And then we go to day 2 without that much more information than day 1. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 23 2010 13:47 johnnyspazz wrote: you guys totally forgot that some people have anti-nuke missiles there's no reason to add extra radiation when a country can anti-nuke and we lynch the retard next day I dealt with that here: On March 23 2010 13:18 Zona wrote: As to the role of anti-nukes against initiated nukes - at the moment I think it should be at the owner's discretion. If we had a policy to anti-nuke every nuke that was launched, mafia members could launch fake nukes to make the town spend all their anti-nukes, then we're left with no anti-nukes for real mafia nukes later on. To expand on what I said, if mafia late game still have nukes, they're extremely powerful as extra daytime hits. Early game the mafia, if careful, will hold back with their nukes because if they launch they could be easily discovered, especially if we follow the plan I proposed. But late game if they're on the cusp of victory it doesn't matter to them if they're discovered or not, as at that point they should have calculated that whatever payback the town can throw at them will not be enough to take their victory away from them. If possible, we need to hold some anti-nukes to defend against late-game mafia nukes, at the point where they would otherwise not fear being discovered. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Revised plan: 1. No one is to initiate nukes against anyone else. 2. If anyone initiates a nuke, TWO players with real nukes make revenge strikes. (This makes it far more risky for a mafia member to launch a fake nuke at the initiator to save him or her.) 3. Only if the town suspects they are close to losing, will the town COLLECTIVELY DECIDE to start using nukes as daytime vigilante hits. 4. If you have anti-nukes, save at least SOME for the endgame, to diminish the chance of mafia winning late game by simply nuking the remaining town members. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 23 2010 15:15 L wrote: If you set up a deterrent as concrete as possible its less likely that all actors attempt to move in a manner which will result in them losing. As it stands, your assumption that only a few people fire back essentially allows people to nuke tactically if they have anti-nuke capabilities or if they're part of mafia and know that their gambit will pay off for their team. Well if they use their anti-nuke, we throw more nukes their way. Given the setup I would expect that there be a third party that wins when radiation gets too high, which is why I'm against everyone retaliating. That third party could initiate a nuke to attempt precisely to induce everyone else to nuke back. But at least so far the consensus plan is for all town members to NOT NUKE. And if anyone does start nuking, some sort of town revenge nuking will take place. Fair enough on the point of having to propose someone for the day 1 lynch. But we better not end up with a situation where every person votes for the same lynch target. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 00:55 Caller wrote: Well guys, in case nobody noticed, before we can lynch anybody, a nuke has to be launched, or day won’t end. Seeing as how nobody else has been an obvious target, I propose that we "nuke" L this turn around. As town, we need more information, and the best way of getting information is by killing a few people. For instance, we don’t have any idea what possible roles there are, aside from our own. More importantly, he won’t be able to contribute to town for a good 40 or so hours. By which, of course, the day would have ended, timewise, unless we nuke somebody to postpone it another 24 hours. And if necessary, we can always delay the day by nuking someone that’s already being nuked, or somebody without any nukes can launch a “nuke” to prolong the day. In fact, the best way to go about this is for somebody without any actual nukes to nuke L. This will postpone the day and give us a lynch without raising ToD or killing L in the event he is town. Since a nuke has to go off to progress the day at all, a fake nuke at this point would be the best. We should save our real nukes for when we need them. WTF? NO! The day won't end if nukes have ALREADY been launched and 24 hours has not yet passed since the last nuke launch. We don't need to launch a nuke to end the day. There is already a day deadline for the lynch. A nuke launch can only push that deadline BACK. However - majority votes are required for lynches, and lynches could occur early if majority is reached early. But I have a feeling from past TL mafia activity that getting such majority votes will be difficult and a lot of no lynches will occur. I hope things will be different, though. For such blatant misreading of the rules, let me throw down the first vote. ##Vote: Caller | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Players without nukes should never launch, if they're town-aligned. Launching a fake nuke does not act as a daytime vigilante hit, but muddies the picture for the town, AND allows the person you target to launch an extra nuke, which will add to radiation and might get you killed. Until you are some awesome player (and not only in your own mind), please don't mess with gambits. Of the games I've been in and read on TL, I haven't really seen any gambits of this style pay off for the team the player was on. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 01:19 Amber[LighT] wrote: Oh and lynching someone because they didn't read the rules, take that as you want but that's more BS than lynching a guaranteed inactive. First of all, one vote isn't a lynch. Secondly, reading the rules and interpreting them correctly is key to town success. If you aren't sure, ask. Ace has offered to answer any question. 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. | ||
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? | ||
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. | ||
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
| ||
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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 | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote: 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: 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: 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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 13:10 Qatol wrote: 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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
##vote: Abenson | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 20:32 Nikon wrote: 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.@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? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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! | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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 | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 06:24 Elemenope wrote: 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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
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. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 07:06 ~OpZ~ wrote: Yes. Me and Abenson are masons. I know his role/country, he knows mine. It's the same role, just different country. Masonic order. I can talk privately with him. Please somehow get Abenson to confirm this in the thread. You might want to figure out how to breadcrumb his country as well (and vice versa) but it might be tough now that we're looking for it. If Abenson can't even return to confirm Opz's claim...pathetic. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 06:51 Elemenope wrote: If Abenson and OpZ are on the same side as you imply, why not lynch one and we get the validity of the other? This is a TERRIBLE idea from the POV of the town. If you lynch one just to test their claim and it turns out they were indeed masons, you just removed their beneficial power, as the remaining mason is effectively just a normal town member afterwards. Or if there were more than 2, removing one from their circle removes a tremendous amount of benefit that they could have derived from an extra person in the discussion. And if you retort that having 3 people in a circle is almost the same as 2, all I can do is shake my head. The mason advantage is often dismissed too easily, but it's really the same advantage that mafia typically have, on a smaller scale (other than the nightkill). The big mafia advantage is information (they know their team) and coordination, contrasting directly with the town disadvantage of LACK of information, and lack of coordination. A mason group grants a small group of town members this advantage, which can be powerful if used correctly. Also, this is DAY 1. It's not too late to wait to test things, and it's far too early to lynch claimed roles. I don't like how you've totally developed tunnel vision on the two and won't consider anything else, especially on day 1. If you want to talk about anti-town or scummy behavior, there's some right here. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 07:17 haster27 wrote: Usually that would be the case, but KP of Mafia in this game is 1. This means we have some breathing room as long as no one becomes crazy and start launching nukes. It seems somewhat obvious that OpZ and Abenson, although having failed massively, are likely innocent. Why decrease number in our side and decrease our probability of winning? Whether or not we have "breathing room", no lynches are horrible, they allow mafia to control who dies, and what information is revealed. If we no lynch we have ZERO chance of hitting mafia, but if we lynch, at least there is a probability that we reduce their numbers by one. As well, after a successful lynch, the town can later review how players voted when new information surfaces to learn more about each player who participated in the vote. As for Mafia KP being one, I think it's highly likely there's a third party who also probably has a KP of 1 as well. If there's no other regular kill, this game has the potential to drag on forever with so many players. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
How about this - if you are online, reading, and willing to change your vote, post! Quote this post and reply if you must. We need to consider if we have enough town members to change who the majority will be, or else we have to settle for Abenson or L. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
ATTENTION TOWN MEMBERS! IF YOU ARE ABLE TO READ THIS POST AND WILL CONSIDER CHANGING YOUR VOTE, QUOTE THIS POST AND REPLY! | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Sigh... | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
At this rate I'm actually afraid we won't even be able to lynch one of L or Abenson. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
MY MESSAGE TO ANY TOWN MEMBERS WHO ARRIVE IN THE THREAD: There are less than 5 and a half hours remaining until the lynch deadline is up. We need to reach 12 votes on someone by then or we lose our chance to lynch, and lynching is tremendously important for the town to gain information. So you need to place a vote towards someone who could conceivably reach a majority of votes. As of now, L, Abenson, or RebirthofLegend seem like players who could possibly reach majority in votes. I personally would prefer to lynch RebirthofLegend, but at the very least vote for one of the leading candidates. If you arrive in the thread very close to the deadline at 12AM EST...vote for the player with the most votes! We need to reach majority! | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
I think we as a town have two options. One: anti-nuke, and lynch RoL. Alternatively: let the nuke fall on Caller as some have suggested, and lynch RoL if Caller is not mafia. Option one is what we've been discussing all game, and the reasoning for taking this path is well established. Why does the alternative option have some merit to make it worth considering? Well it centers on the fact that Caller hasn't really contributed, despite being a veteran mod and player. Now that the nuke is already in the air, if you subscribe to my earlier idea that we should be stingy with anti-nukes to have some going to the late-game, we need to think twice before using them. Caller does claim to plan to participate more later, but it's a claim we cannot prove or disprove during the time to make the decision to anti-nuke. If the nuke lands and by some tiny chance Caller is mafia, then RoL is actually okay. He somehow got rid of a mafia for us, even if it was against everything the town has established together in its ground rules. If Caller is revealed as town-aligned OR EVEN THIRD PARTY, then RoL is lynched. Lynch RoL even if Caller is third party because mafia could have easily targeted their nuke at anyone not on their team and just happened to hit third party. But in any case, this is not something we can vote on, since anti-nukes are used privately. We can't hold anti-nuke users accountable in public, so basically all our discussion takes place so those who actually have anti-nukes can read it and make their decision. So those WITH anti-nukes, consider what has been said in the thread and make your decision. What I suggest is that we as a town place 10 or 11 votes on RoL. Then the moment the nuke is resolved, we can finish the lynch by placing the last 1 or 2 votes, or shift the votes away, in the slim chance that the nuke lands and Caller is mafia. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Comes into the game without reading and understanding the rules. Without reading the posts. With wrong assumptions left and right. And goes against the plan that everyone other player, so far, has adhered to. And worse - you seem to stop caring about winning (helping your side win) the moment your "life" is in danger by making boneheaded moves. Do you even understand the game? The game is about helping your side win, not surviving. If you somehow live long in the game and your side loses, you still lose. On March 25 2010 08:57 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I decided I don't feel like wasting 2-3 hours reading around 15 pages just to die especially since I think you can get some more information via nuke. What a piss poor attitude. You signed up to play, and now you don't feel like reading? What did you sign up to do, anyways? To get your username into the "list of players" then ridiculed for not participating? Do you realize that your posts just before you die are the most important posts you make in a game, since when you die, your alignment is revealed and players can re-examine what you've said knowing who you were? On March 25 2010 09:13 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I also wasn't posting as much because I didn't fully read the rules yet LOL! So you didn't POST because you didn't fully read the rules...but you decided to NUKE instead? Is your logic a bit backwards? Worried about screwing up your posts (somehow?) by not understanding the game rather than screwing up the GAME by nuking before comprehending? And your obnoxious "LOL"'s in place of any hint of shame or regret. Do you think being cute will make up for the fuckup you've caused? Good riddance. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 11:58 Elemenope wrote: Just glanced through as I'm about to play more D2 right now, but if the nuke lands, it goes to night with a no lynch if we don't have majority. If this is true, we need to place a majority vote on RoL before the nuke lands. I will ask Ace. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 12:11 Zona wrote: If this is true, we need to place a majority vote on RoL before the nuke lands. I will ask Ace. I have confirmation. LMNOP is correct, the vote counts as the nuke falls is final. Town members - vote for RoL. He has launched a nuke - an anti-town action, and the response must be death. We've gone over the reasoning very thoroughly, please read earlier posts to see how we have decided on this. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 12:26 Ace wrote: If you anti-nuke it, the day goes back to "normal". Hence if we already passed the original 48 hours, and you anti-nuked the nuke then once its done, we go to night. We need to get a majority vote on RoL as soon as possible, in case an anti-nuke is launched! If an anti-nuke is launched the day may end earlier than the 24 hour extension we expect to get, and if we don't have a majority vote, we will end up no lynching! | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 12:34 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Just to point this out, even if Caller flips red I am still not proven innocent. You really aren't helping things. It's true that there is a mathematical possibility that if Caller flips red that you are mafia as well, but in that case you are the worst mafia player in the world. If that were the case, you are about to kill, or at least put a lot of heat on one of your fellow mafia members who had very little suspicion at that point, to maybe have a chance of saving yourself. If you were really mafia and did this - I would want you to stay alive. And keep screwing up and revealing all the other mafia, before we finally got rid of you as well. Now if you were a really, really sophisticated player, which you have proved beyond doubt you are NOT (by not reading rules, not reading posts, etc. etc.), you could have launched the nuke hoping that it would be anti-nuked. So you divert attention away from yourself and simultaneously bus your mafia teammate, Caller (supposing he was your teammate). But even this wouldn't save yourself because we would have lynched you all the same. But all of this is hypothetical discussion that can all be ignored. We've clarified the rules, and since we do not have any time between getting information from the nuke and finalizing the lynch vote, the lynch must decided on you before the nuke lands. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 12:36 Fishball wrote: Are you saying you're in a position to be able to make use of the extra 24 hours? I don't believe that I in particular have anything I can do to make use of the extra 24 hours. I was operating under the assumption that the town might not already have a majority vote on RoL, so hitting the lynch deadline (as a nuke was cancelled) would be bad, but a rough (so it's not solid!) re-reading of the thread shows that we have 14 votes on him, if we include non-bolded votes and other misformatted votes. So we should be okay either way. Someone else count the votes as well in case I've screwed up. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 11:17 Caller wrote: Well, RoL, I came back and was pleased to find that someone had fired the first nuke of the game. I was slightly less pleased that I was the target, but nonetheless bravo for having the balls to do something like this. Please tell us if being "pleased to find someone had fired the first nuke of the game" is sarcasm or not. Just so that we can be sure. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 08:57 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I am just saying when I die look at his hypocrisy from saying I am most likely innocent to preserve balance which logically makes sense, to I am inactive scum. Since I'm going through everything again I might as well respond to this as well. A player is allowed to change their mind when a good reason is given. And the reason was given here: On March 24 2010 00:08 Versatile wrote: uh, just to address this. ace is fcukin crazy. no one's alignment, even though RoL was added in at the last minute, is for certain. don't make this mistake. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 12:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I think saying that nuking is anti-town is fucking dumb. The mafia and the town have to avoid nuking because alternate conditions can end the game, and neither side would win. Okay. "The mafia and the town have to avoid nuking because..." and "saying that nuking is anti-town is fucking dumb." Am I the only one to see the contradiction here, in two sentences right next to each other? The town has to avoid nuking, but saying nuking is bad is dumb? In any case the town has gone through the reasoning very thoroughly already, and has come to the conclusion that nuking first is not a good idea for town members. On March 25 2010 12:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: What I think is actually about to happen is Caller isn't going to die, at least by my nuke. I think he is mafia and was feigning a weak country (as seen in earlier posts) and the mafia is going to protect him for the night since you can't see who is actually going to do it. I'm glad you're finally posting content. If you end up town, we should probably consider this statement, among the things you have posted. But of course while a town member's views are not tainted by a mafia's intentional lies, they aren't necessarily correct in of themselves. Here's an interesting one: On March 25 2010 12:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: just mobbing me for having only 3 fucking posts rofl. So you're saying lynching someone for being inactive is bad. (Actually for the day 1 lynch I would say it's often the best we can do. But let's go with your premise for the moment.) I think Caller would be grandstanding at this point trying to get power and give some good ideas since hes in a precarious position without any PMing. And your case against Caller is that he's...being inactive. Because you expect him otherwise to be really involved by "grandstanding" and so on. And you think so strongly about your case that you think you should nuke him. To summarize: Caller's worth nuking because he was inactive, but you're NOT worth lynching because you were inactive. Sigh. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
I don't want to be presumptuous and somehow insinuate that I should have the last word on the matter. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
When I started proposing plans and posting, I had hoped that there would be other players who would participate as much as or even more than I have. But for better or worse, I have by far the most posts in the thread. Allow me to flatter myself and claim that at least some of my posts have been useful and beneficial to the town, such as being the first to lay out the importance of not initiating nukes. Usually I look down upon those who publicly ask for medic protection, as I think the ego of such players cause them to overestimate their contributions and importance to the town, but in this game I do think I stand out as a target for the mafia to kill at night, if only to significantly reduce the amount of discussion that takes place in the game. Please consider me as a protection target if you have not already done so. But of course, the final decision is in your hands. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
~OpZ~: 36 Elemenope: 35 haster27: 28 XeliN: 26 Versatile: 24 RebirthOfLeGenD: 22 johnnyspazz: 18 JeeJee: 17 Fishball: 16 Amber[LighT]: 14 iNfuNdiBuLuM: 14 Iaaan: 13 Caller: 10 Nikon: 9 meeple: 9 d3_crescentia: 9 Abenson: 7 nemY: 6 tree.hugger: 4 Phrujbaz: 2 L: 2 One final post tally before I leave. If you hadn't nuked someone RoL, there surely would be better lynch targets now. But you did. @RoL. I changed my mind because originally I thought about game setups from my own point of view, and my definition of balance, which in my mind is the definitive way to balance (I calculate the probabilities for each team if they acted randomly, the number of lynches required and mislynches allowed, and more, for goodness's sake). But Versatile reminded me that I should be thinking from Ace's point of view and not my own. And Ace definitely has a different view of balance than I do, so I should not bring my assumptions about how I would balance a game (which I had been considering the definitive way) into a game where Ace is hosting. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 13:53 Bill Murray wrote: + Show Spoiler + On March 25 2010 13:48 Zona wrote: Hey, if you're a medic, please read this: When I started proposing plans and posting, I had hoped that there would be other players who would participate as much as or even more than I have. But for better or worse, I have by far the most posts in the thread. Allow me to flatter myself and claim that at least some of my posts have been useful and beneficial to the town, such as being the first to lay out the importance of not initiating nukes. Usually I look down upon those who publicly ask for medic protection, as I think the ego of such players cause them to overestimate their contributions and importance to the town, but in this game I do think I stand out as a target for the mafia to kill at night, if only to significantly reduce the amount of discussion that takes place in the game. Please consider me as a protection target if you have not already done so. But of course, the final decision is in your hands. 'Please Vote me MVP' I'm sorry that you're interpreting it this way. There's no way a real MVP can be decided this early in the game, there's still a lot to be played out. Maybe later in the game someone will somehow read the entire mafia team and get them all lynched one by one (like what citi.zen did in incognito's mafia 16). Now that would be legitimate MVP material. I would just like to point out to any potential medics out there that it's possible I would be considered a higher value target to the mafia when compared to another player randomly chosen from the player list. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 14:04 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Regardless of how the game is thought of, the fact is the least influential role in a game of mafia is a townie, Sigh. This is the kind of viewpoint that leads to weak towns. Mechanically, it's true that the townie has the fewest abilities. But that means all the more that townies should often be at the forefront of discussion, as if they are targetted, the town won't collectively lose a special power. Would the team rather lose a blue? Townies are the core of the town team. If townies are discouraged by the role they receive and play passively because of it, then the town's chances of victory are greatly diminished. In any case, you seem to have nukes. So you aren't a plain townie. Unless you plan to now claim that the nuke is fake. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 14:22 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Holy shit, are you that dense Zona? You just completely ignored what I said, or at the very least misinterpreted it entirely. I understand that an active green/townie population plays a strong role in the town, its why regardless of my role I never shut the fuck up. I was saying from a BALANCE PERSPECTIVE which is WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. A townie has the least impact on balance in the game as opposed to say adding me in as lets say in normal game terms a Vigi which increases town KP, another Mafia, another godfather which rape the town (I am purposely going to extremes here) or lets say adding an entire third role on the spur of the moment giving me an entire different agenda without having thought it through entirely which would either make my objective impossible or too easy which would essentially ruin the game. Or a townie, who kind of just adds one to the town and overall looking at the ROLE itself not the people playing it is much LESS influential on the outcome of the game. This has nothing to do at all with "Me thinking greens are worthless" but to say they are of equal importance to a medic would be foolish. You've already shown you're not a plain townie by launching a nuke and implying it was real. Unless you plan now to reverse your stance and say it is fake. So your argument that balance implies you are a plain townie is null and void. And yes I did go off on a tangent there, because I wanted to make the point to the rest of our readers that townies shouldn't stay inactive, and you provided an opportunity for me to do so. And it's interesting you call me dense, when you are the superstar who read the rules and didn't comprehend their implications. Read the thread and somehow missed the entire discussion on how nuking first was anti-town. Read the thread and also missed all but 6 of my posts the first time around. Ugh. I can't believe I'm still arguing with you. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 14:19 Ace wrote: He can't. I addressed it in the thread.. Can't he at least share the ideas they discussed? If he doesn't copy-paste the wording from the PM? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 14:33 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I also never said whether or not my nuke was real or fake, You didn't say whether it was real or fake? On March 25 2010 13:59 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: At this point letting caller die is the only way to do this. What's this? You say he'll die from your nuke? I wonder what sort of nuke would be able to kill, real or fake? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 14:04 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Regardless of how the game is thought of, the fact is the least influential role in a game of mafia is a townie, hence if you had to add another role that would effect the game in the smallest way possible it would be a townie. Which is the reason why I pointed out that with your nuke, and the claim of death that it would bring, means that you are not claiming to be vanilla town, which is what you have implied by adopting the 'balance purposes' argument, and which is now shown to be false. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 15:12 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Seriously? Who the fuck ever expects even 55% of the town to agree on nuking a single person? You do realize if we never reach >50% consensus on lynching, we'll never get to lynch? So the policy on nuking is identical to the mechanics of lynching. The policy is there to use nukes as extra lynches when the town is desperate and feels it might be on the verge of defeat. Using nukes otherwise brings us towards the situation where no one wins (except for my guess on a third party which wins when radiation is too high). On March 25 2010 14:59 meeple wrote: I've said before that I don't agree usually with lynching most inactive, I mean it tells us nothing about the person or possible ties. I don't know why Zona was so pushy for it, since there are obviously some better targets when we consider that we have two basically confirmed townies and a better choice would be to sift through the votes for Abenson(yes I know I'm on that list...) and see who tried to push the bandwagon. For a day 1 lynch I thought he was the best target, as once we had the mason claim from Opz on behalf of himself and Abenson, he was the least active poster other than those two and the banned L, and his few posts were garbage. Only after he had many votes on him he began to contribute...and launch that nuke. If YOU think there are obviously some better targets for the day 1 lynch target you should have been here to promote it. You're actually here AFTER the original day 1 lynch deadline, which was extended because of the nuke. Actually, I see no good reason for you to delay naming your "better targets" so perhaps you could kindly name them now? It will give the town the benefit of your analysis and show how I was mistaken to focus on inactives. Please give the town the benefit of your insight. It definitely would not do for my voice to be the only one out there, as I have my blind spots. I would like for you to contribute what criteria you think was better than just inactives for the day 1 lynch and which players are lynch candidates based or these criteria. My words may seem forceful but I am not against changing my mind when other players give me reasoning superior to what I have proposed. One example of that is amending my original "revenge-nuke" proposal to a "lynch the first nuker, and revenge-nuke only later nukers" which incorporated other players' superior ideas. Also let's look at this: On March 25 2010 14:59 meeple wrote: Having said that I'm rather glad that RoL launched the nuke ... However, I'm not totally against him being lynched, seeing as he did violate the "Nuking without town consent" policy. You seem to agree with the "nuking without town consent" policy, so I will assume you have considered the REASONS why this policy was put in place, since I expect that you make decisions based on reasoning. (A very-cutdown-summary: launching new nukes doesn't help the town, and could lead towards defeat. I don't want to repost our entire discussion on this.) Then why are you glad that RoL launched the nuke? The extra time is not worth it when weighed against all the arguments against launching nukes in the first place. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 14:59 meeple wrote: I've said before that I don't agree usually with lynching most inactive, I mean it tells us nothing about the person or possible ties. I don't know why Zona was so pushy for it, since there are obviously some better targets when we consider that we have two basically confirmed townies and a better choice would be to sift through the votes for Abenson(yes I know I'm on that list...) and see who tried to push the bandwagon. I see no good reason for you to delay naming your "obviously better targets" based on criteria other than being inactive, so perhaps you could kindly name them now? The biggest strike against tree.hugger seems to be that he hasn't posted much, along with the vote for L without a post to back it up. It will give the town the benefit of your analysis and show how I was mistaken to focus on inactives. Please do recall that I pointed out RoL when he only had 3 posts, all of them content-free. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 25 2010 15:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Lynching is not the same as nuking and the dynamic is different as YOU just ADMITTED in your followup where you changed your mind from retaliation nukes to lynching the nuker. The damage caused by the nukes makes it harder to get a consensus compared a lynch where the only risk is killing an innocent as opposed to raising radiation and killing a innocent as POTENTIAL risks. Meaning I don't see how you expect to get EVEN 55% of the town to agree on something more controversial than a lynch. Wait, the consequences of nuking are GREATER than lynching, so we should LOWER THE BAR on how easily they can be used? It's precisely because the consequences of nuking at greater than lynching we also demand that the town agrees before they are used. On March 25 2010 15:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: The suggestion for nuking seemed like a large majority not just 55% to be okay with it, meaning you want ideally like 75% good with the lynch. Now you're just putting words in my mouth. In no post at all have I mentioned 75%, three quarters, or anything along those lines. On March 25 2010 15:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Anyway if you also act stingy with nukes you allow the Mafia to be more liberal with them later on, since there is no radiation threat yet. Part of the policy is to reserve anti-nukes precisely to deal with the threat of late game mafia nukes. But just because some other team can bring us to the radiation threshold doesn't mean we ourselves should approach it first. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
If you claim I implied something, you should find my words where you derive that implication. Otherwise anyone can attribute any point of view to someone else by saying "it was implied". In my posts where I claim you have implied something, I have included a quote where the implication can be drawn from. On March 25 2010 15:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Whoever reaches the threshold first has successfully increased their overall KP. Whats the problem here? KP is only useful to the town if the town has some insight on how to use it. Look at the very recent Caller's game where every town player had a kill. They used their kills in an undisciplined manner and the game was won by scum, with many of the townie deaths coming from town's use of kills. And if the mafia uses their nukes to increase their KP, they're revealing a ton of information that we can use. Especially if town members agree to refrain from nuking, as most of us have. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
We definitely want to go to the late-game with some anti-nukes, so I think we shouldn't force anti-nukers to come forward. It's true mafia might have anti-nukes, but that doesn't mean we should risk outing a town anti-nuker. Keep in mind, if we ignore the presence of anti-nukes for the moment, nukes are stronger in the hands of mafia than town, because mafia already know who is not on their side. Town nukes may or may not hit mafia, and if fired off at random, are more likely to hit town-aligned than not. I am not in favor of a stance where nukes are used more freely. If town members start regularly using nukes, then the mafia can blend in and get a few extra guaranteed town kills by launching nukes of their own, while the town in return gets a few marginal chances to hit mafia. (And of course if there is a third party that wins by high radiation, all of this advances this player's interests.) Since mafia nukes are much more likely to hit their enemies than town nukes, keeping town anti-nukers alive is a bigger concern than getting rid of mafia anti-nukers. Anyways, it's only when town keeps their nukes in check that mafia cannot nuke freely, as people who nuke in this situation are suspect. I'm repeating myself from earlier on for the next point, but once we reach lategame, if there are only a few more town members than mafia left, it's possible the mafia could use nukes to reduce the number of town members so that mafia have a majority and win. So anti-nukes need to be reserved for this situation. As for the role of anti-nukes in a game where nukes are used freely. If the anti-nukers aren't sure which nukes are launched by town and which are by mafia, then it's just a random crapshoot whether or not the mafia nukes are nullified. I highly doubt there's as many anti-nukes as nukes. So the existence of anti-nukes is not enough to make it beneficial to follow a policy where nukes are used more freely. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
I doubt that's the case though. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 26 2010 10:12 L wrote: No, I'm not. If the anti-nuker is town, he will probably step forward unless he has another ability, which is unlikely. If he's mafia and doesn't step forward, then RoL should nail Caller 100% and we can be happy that mafia just wasted an anti-nuke. Are you still operating under the assumption the anti-nuker only has spent his or her only anti-nuke and is now vanilla? Because I don't think it's a good assumption, and if this player is town and still has at least one anti-nuke, I would not want this player to step forward and become a mafia target at night. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 26 2010 10:16 L wrote: Err, no. I didn't talk about Japan at all until you brought up the nation. Nor did I say that he had to be anti-mafia. I said the person should come forward because he COULD be mafia. Why would you think Japan has a certain set of abilities unless you know someone who has japan? Um...did you read this? On March 26 2010 09:06 Ace wrote: General! The nuke from Rebirthoflegend heading towards Caller has been shot down! We do not know who did it, but we know that the shot came from Japan! | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 26 2010 10:18 L wrote: Even if the guy has a single extra anti-nuke, it would be far better for him to reveal himself so that RoL has information regarding his retaliatory strike. Granted its probably you or Caller, you're probably against someone coming out because he might end up offing you. I disagree here, and very much so. First of all, your assumption that this anti-nuker has no further anti-nukes is based on thin air. But beyond that, my biggest objection to your reasoning is that each extra anti-nuke in late game can potentially stop a full mafia kill. As an illustration, here's an extremely contrived example. Let's say we've come to a situation where there's 5 town members and 3 mafia left, and the mafia have 2 nukes. The mafia obviously know who the town members are, and they could launch their 2 nukes, kill two town members, and grab their win, as they now have equal numbers as the town members and can prevent lynches. Each anti-nuke the town has can prevent a whole kill from the mafia in this kind of late game situation. On the other hand, you are suggesting that we ask this person, who might have 1 or more anti-nukes remaining, to step forward and identify themselves, and risk being nightkilled by the mafia, in return for a small amount of information which doesn't even guarantee the alignment of any other player. I want to emphasize something. In many mafia games the mafia only wins when their number is equal or more than the town. But in this game, if the mafia have more nukes remaining than the town has anti-nukes, for each nuke they have extra, they can have one fewer member than the town and still win. Of course the mafia isn't sure about how many anti-nukes the town has remaining, but that doesn't mean we should risk our anti-nukers needlessly. To reiterate: The power of a mafia nuke is not the same as the power of a town nuke, when anti-nukes are gone. The mafia nuke is guaranteed to reduce the number of town members. The town nuke may or may not reduce the number of mafia members. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
If there were no town anti-nukes, each mafia nuke is essential a guaranteed additional kill, made in public. The disincentive for the mafia to use these nukes early games is because they might out themselves and be killed in return. In the late game, if there are only a few more town members than mafia and inadequate amount of anti-nukes remaining, they can simply use their nukes as kills and win, as by that point in time outing themselves is not a problem, as the town no longer has enough "extra" members to absorb the kills and still be able to take revenge to win. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 26 2010 12:24 tree.hugger wrote: Here's what I have to say: - If L is not mafia, he might be saved. - If L is mafia, he will definitely be saved. - There is no way this nuke will be as successful as I wish it could be. But at least it might make L a little more friendly and constructive. Why did you launch the nuke if you figured it likely wouldn't be successful? You've just put a lot of heat on yourself for the slim chance of getting rid of L. I highly doubt L will change how he plays because of it. He's consistently like this over multiple games, he'll either die or continue to be himself. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 26 2010 16:39 Bill Murray wrote: WHAT I PROPOSE: Lynch Abenson solely to give the town someone to build a circle around with ~OpZ~. I find it highly unlikely that masons would be on different sides given the format that we are using. I would like to disagree with this. Since this game has no PMs allowed, confirming OpZ does not allow us to "build a circle" because no one else can talk with OpZ privately, detectives cannot use OpZ as a mouthpiece, and none of the regular benefits of a "town circle" can be realized. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
"Well for all we know Ace could have..." created a role which absorbs radiation once 13 nukes have been launched to become a radioactive superhero with the powers of medic, detective, vigilante, roleblocker, veteran, and more combined. Let's launch a bunch of nukes to power up this player, in case the role exists! Hmmm... Well, unless you are somehow in contact with this hypothetical detective that can PM others? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
TL players aren't exactly a bastion of self-discipline. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 27 2010 01:24 L wrote: That would probably be why someone would want to stop it, right? I think he means anchor in terms of something holding back a ship. Rather than the other interpretation of anchor, being a solid foundation to build something on. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
But this is a minor benefit when weighed against the rest of the factors - saving antinukes, nullifying out-of-nowhere-nukes, etc, which have been discussed over and over again (and without agreement). | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
NO MORE FUCKING NUKES! Town members have been launching nukes without consensus based on their feelings that "player x must be mafia" on day 1 - this is HORRIBLE play. Why? Because any individual's players feelings on who might be mafia, no matter how SURE they are, are probably wrong on day 1. On day 1 the town has the LEAST amount of information - any town-directed kill is much more likely to hit town than mafia (as town comprise the majority of the game's players). Anyone's personal feelings, no matter how strong, will often be wrong. The town should be slow to kill early in the game, and only later in the game consider (but not necessarily commit to) killing faster, as more information surfaces. The town's reads on other players, and the information it has gets better later in the game, so LATER town-directed kills are much more likely to be successful. In most cases, waiting on some consensus is best before using a town-directed kill. Town consensus does have the downside of potential mafia influence, but like vote counts, this can be examined later on. And the UPSIDE is that the opinions of multiple town members can help overcome your blind spots and biases. And so far all the known town-directed nukes HAVE been wrong. Because of this - even if you're about to be lynched, if you're town, you SHOULD NOT nuke, at least not until the late game. (part 2) Regarding anti-nukes - more evidence has surfaced supporting the idea that they are scarce: Notice out of the 4 dead townies that have flipped, only one had anti-nukes, and that person only had ONE anti-nuke in total. Don't squander our anti-nukes. (part 3) I honestly do think we should all wait for night before deciding what to do. Some people have asked "why do you want night so early...to take your night actions earlier?" - but that's an inaccurate and loaded question: Earlier or later nights doesn't make a difference in how effective your night actions are - the game mechanics are exactly the same. The town still gets one lynch in the day for every night that passes. It's not like the town LOSES powers or the mafia GAINS powers if we don't extend the day. Extending the day in a mafia game could benefit town members IF THE EXTRA DISCUSSION IS USEFUL. But in this game the extended day has just devolved into more nukes and no particular solid leads on mafia. So there's no point in extending the day further. (part 4) I really think Versatile really stepped out of line, and tree.hugger/Xelin to a lesser extent, but with recent developments I really don't think we should immediately lynch or revenge-nuke them, simply because of the reality I described in the earlier parts. What happened to my earlier stance on revenge-nuking? Revenge-nuking at this point in the game just opens more opportunities for the original nuker to launch more nukes, which we want to avoid. So at least for now, let's not revenge-nuke. How about lynching our nukers? Actually, I'm rather on board for a Versatile lynch since she's launched more nukes than our other nukers and shows no sign of stopping. But there are so many hours before we can make our the next lynch, we might as well see what develops before we make our decision. Maybe someone else will show even more significant signs of being a mafia member in the hours to come. Our next lynch IS a long time away (real-life time), so I'm not going to commit my vote just yet. (part 5) I don't suggest following L's plan even if he was town. As I stated earlier, the town has the least amount of information early game and the highest chance of picking the wrong suspects, so hold your fire. (Plus L was totally wrong in most of his calls that he made without relying on DT-check last game.) However I do support keeping an eye on the suspects he has indicated, as now that we know he's town, his list of suspects are free of mafia bias. (It doesn't necessarily make his suspect list ACCURATE, though.) Summary: As a town, we have the least amount of information early in the game, so we should be slow to kill. As we gain more information and our suspicions become more solid, then it could possibly (but not necessarily) be useful for the town to kill more quickly. As a town, our lynch for the day is already completed. The only thing we can do now is either: - Wait - Launch more nukes I am against launching more nukes - so let's wait and see what happens. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Notice BM flipped "Day Doc" while johnnyspazz flipped "vanilla townie" - so johnnyspazz probably didn't have anti-nukes. I don't know what to make of the "I get them day 2 - oh wait I read things wrong" part of his claims. L was a medic and still made himself such a focal point of the discussion? I guess he can't stop himself from being loud in any game of mafia. Caller's still silent. Very silent, for an experienced TL mafia player and host. Plus, the nuke at him was shot down, while it seems whoever holds anti-nukes have been much more reluctant to use them to shoot down other nukes. If Japan (who anti-nuked for Caller) still has anti-nukes, for some reason this person isn't using them to save other nuke-targets. If Japan had only one nuke, I doubt this person would have spent it that readily. I agree with others who are stating that it's a significant possibility that a mafia-aligned Japan saved Caller, because either Japan spent his or her one anti-nuke very readily on Caller and didn't even consider saving it for another situation, or Japan does have more anti-nukes but only chose to save Caller and not other targets. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
You don't simply say X or Y is the right choice in a vacuum, you compare all the possible steps the town can take to each other and choose what is best. Leaving them alive sucks - but what is the alternative? Nuke them so they can launch even more nukes? You could put them on a queue to lynch one after another - but we really shouldn't fix in place steps that we will take so far in the future. There's so much that could happen to change our view of the situation between now and then. If you think I'm scummy just for thinking through the situation thoroughly, I'm truly disappointed. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 28 2010 21:21 Zona wrote: we really shouldn't fix in place steps that we will take so far in the future. There's so much that could happen to change our view of the situation between now and then. Just so my post doesn't get misconstrued, let me elaborate on this part. Between now and then, we'll get more cardflips, more discussion, and perhaps some players will gain information during the night as well. We'll have much more to work with before we approach the next lynch, let alone one or two lynches beyond that. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
(I'm NOT saying they're town. I'm saying that their claims that they will not nuke again are not trustworthy.) | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 28 2010 22:41 ~OpZ~ wrote: No...more the fact you were one of the people willing to let someone I confirmed die by lynch... Wat. Who did you confirm that I voted to lynch? Plus interesting you rage at tree.hugger and Xelin but not Versatile - why this discrepancy? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
iNfuNdiBuLuM: 31 JeeJee: 30 Iaaan: 29 meeple: 28 Fishball: 26 Amber[LighT]: 26 Nikon: 18 d3_crescentia: 14 nemY: 13 Abenson: 12 Caller: 12 Phrujbaz: 2 A summary of posts from three of them...I'll go through more later: d3_crescentia - agrees with part 1/4 of plan, but not 2/3: has a problem with nuking those who nuke first, as they can nuke back, posts a guess at the math behind the game setup votes L - "don't feel too strongly for anyone" "rather vote L than Abenson because L could dick over the town way harder" votes RoL post-nuke surprised that Zona isn't posting more, Xelin claimed to be NKorea supports the idea that anti-nukes are more valuable in the endgame nemY - asks for a summary of what's gone on so far calls out infundi for "feigned ignorance", against votes for L voted for BM "for the same reason as caller" - caller's reason was that he doesn't trust BM with nukes calls out those voting for L voted RoL because "he broke the rules" why not nuke tree.hugger because of "personal vendetta against L" Nikon - agrees with lynch the nuker plan, disagrees with L's plan to retaliate with nukes votes OpZ after calling out Zona and OpZ for voting to lynch Phrujbaz when he was most likely to get modkilled for inactivity votes Abenson saying Abenson voted L "without having much of a reason" and OpZ unlikely to be lynched states that 3 masons makes sense in a 22-player game votes RoL after OpZ claims mason for Abenson points out the rules indicate something worse might happen beyond anti-nukes a one-sentence argument against L's idea that the anti-nuker (for caller) should claim acuses BM of being the third mason None of the three I've looked at so far have really brought any significant ideas to the table. Something for future reference. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
proposes fake nuking L retracts his statement as people point out he interpreted the rules incorrectly replies to a long chain of quotes saying something isn't WIFOM, but is a scumtell (as far as I can tell he's referring to Fishball's post, but it's ambiguious to me) votes OpZ "because his quotes are pissing me off" votes BM because he doesn't trust BM with nukes asks that someone anti-nuke the nuke headed towards him Caller has brought zero original ideas to the table, and of his dozen posts, half of them are fluff. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
but just to be complete, his stuff includes: votes L because he's temp-banned suspects xelin and haster27 for voting him unvotes L "since his ban is almost up" votes RoL post-nuke well, he does finally "confirm" that he's masons with opz and suggests lynching johnnyspazz | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 28 2010 23:01 Nikon wrote: I just love it how everyone points me out as a not very active poster. What do you want me to do on the first day? Post your plans, comments on plans, who you're suspicious of, what actions seem anti-town, etc. Plus posting isn't just to add to the discussion, but to allow the town to get a read on YOU. If you don't give us anything to work with, lurker scum can use you as someone to hide among. If you're town, that is. On March 28 2010 23:01 Nikon wrote: It's not like we had any info up to now, thanks to you high post count guys going apeshit insane and leveling a good portion of the population. Excuse me if I don't spam up the thread because I don't want to get nuked by you crazy sobs. One, we do have information we can work with, even though day 1 information isn't solid. We have 4 cardflips, we have one votelist, and we have a substantial amount of discussion, including plans and discussion about upcoming lynches (and some players have proposed revenge-nukes). And of course the launched nukes. Feel free to comment on it. Two, way to generalize about us and attribute nuking to the many of us who are posting a lot yet NOT nuking. And about not wanting to get nuked...play to help your team win, not necessarily to survive the longest. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 28 2010 22:41 ~OpZ~ wrote: And the stance as in putting Caller back at the top of suspects. Just so that no one actually considers this version of events as the correct interpretation - note that my posts have me stating that Versatile is my top candidate for the next lynch, if no new information surfaces. On March 28 2010 22:41 ~OpZ~ wrote: But look how many of our suspects supported letting Caller get merc'd by the nuke? Sure that coulda been a scum ploy to pretend it and then knock it out at the last minute, but I think the mafia woulda anti-nuked it a little later than that. Are you saying that just because the "suspects" (who we do not currently know the alignment of) were against anti-nuking the nuke towards Caller that he's town? Now note that I haven't declared that he surely is mafia - I've just pointed out his behavior is incredibly unusual - but two things to note: One, there's no reason to heavily consider the "suspects" actions in relation to Caller until we're sure about the alignment of the "suspects". If we do find out they're scum, or town, then we can use this information. Also, if the mafia did have anti-nukes and if Caller was mafia, fellow mafia could say anything to the town about not saving Caller and there would be no problem for them. Right now you probably have the most town credibility now since you went out of your way to claim masons to save Abenson. Since this move has very little benefit if you were really scum and lying (why associate yourself with Abenson), but has some benefit if you are telling the truth (prevent a townie from being lynched), I would say that it paints you in a more townie light. Try not to spread bad ideas with your position. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Sigh. Well that's not under my control. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 00:16 ~OpZ~ wrote: Abenson...You kept wanting to kill him after I posted we were masons. I mean, again, before you discredit my claim, I did breadcrumb the mans name so after my own death flipped me mason he can pop out and be like "oh hai guys, I'm townie" I feel thats kinda a strong claim... Ya know? I had a feeling you had misinterpreted everything...could you reread post 385 and 388 as well as all the posts surrounding them? I was the FIRST person to unvote Abenson in reaction to your mason claim. I read between the lines that you were claiming masons with Abenson before you fully claimed and unvoted then. When did I even try to discredit your claim? And after those posts I have nothing stating that I wanted to kill Abenson nor did I ever vote him again... | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
sigh. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 01:09 ~OpZ~ wrote: It was never really a big deal to me anyway. Just can't trust everyone with a big long post... Not a big deal to you? It's a big deal to me. You, the player with the best townie credentials so far in the game, accused me of the exact opposite of what I did. If you're trying to win, you need to make sure misinformation is minimized. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 01:16 XeliN wrote: Someone asked to expound on my believing LMNOP to be mafia, the whole OpZ Abenson thing was the most important in swaying, once OpZ came out as being I have to say I like this point. I'll have to re-read that portion of the game (yet again) to analyze it further. On March 29 2010 01:16 XeliN wrote: I have claimed North Korea, Already you know NK has the ability to launch nukes anonymously. Do you really think this ability would go to mafia? Either I am not NK (in which case the real one should come forward as it would out me as mafia essentially) or I am townie, in this case kim jong townie. This argument, I don't buy. I believe you are North Korea and I believe you launched that nuke. There's no advantage to anyone admitting this information (including you), it was just a bad move. The question isn't whether or not you're North Korea, but whether or not you're town. You could be North Korea and anti-town. And I wouldn't be half surprised if a serial killer, or mafia, had the ability to launch nukes anonymously. Actually, your flawed argument that "I'm either town or NOT North Korea" doesn't help me look at you in a positive light. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 01:27 meeple wrote: On the other hand... we really should be hunting red. I'm with you on this. I'm not saying that Versatile, tree.hugger, Xelin should be left alone. But we shouldn't focus all our attention there. That's why I started analyzing our lower-postcount players in addition to everything else we've been doing. In any case, to reiterate what I said in my big post that everyone doesn't seem to have any response to, right now in terms of tangible actions we can either nuke OR wait out the rest of the day and the night. And since nuking with the little information we have on day 1 is likely to hit town, we might as well wait and see more information before we decide who to lynch on day 2. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
We definitely don't have as much information as we would have in a normal day 3. Honestly I think we're off to a pretty rocky start. I'm definitely not happy you've gone on and joined the nuke-initiating party. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 06:06 Fishball wrote: Don't feel like quoting all the posts that includes my name in the past few pages. All I have to say is, you guys are chasing ghosts. I've already mentioned this once. Have fun nuking each other. How many nukes have been launched in the "first day" already? There is nothing for me to say. This is no defense. It feels like you don't really care about surviving, or the game? Or you hope that it'll blow over and you'll be forgotten? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 10:00 ~OpZ~ wrote: Also, don't lump me in with them. I'm nuking someone who is highly suspicious... Each of those that you're trying to avoid being "lumped" with also thought like you did. They all nuked someone highly suspicious in their mind. Did you just ignore the entire argument where the earlier in the game, the less information all town players have, and the more likely they will screw up their unrestrained kills and hit fellow town members? Right now you've just declared that you're better than everyone else...and you're not. You say it's like day 3. It's not. We only have one concluded vote count. We don't have any flipped mafia, so we don't have any mafia statements we're sure of that we can examine for collusion with other probable members. You've just added to the crapshoot that has already gotten 3 town members killed (1 killed by lynch). Perhaps probability will dictate that you'll score this time, or perhaps not, but you're not playing to further the best interests of the town. This game is town vs mafia, not a bunch of lone rangers working alone vs mafia. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
If we lose, do you think you guys bear no fault of your own? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Second of all, as long as the town is restrained in nuking, I'm all for mafia nuking. They greatly risk revealing themselves when they shoot. Of course all this is no longer possible thanks to our trigger-happy town nukers. Thirdly, I DETEST the argument that getting towards the ToD strictly removes nukes as an option from the other side. Sure, you make it harder for the other side to win with nukes. But you also GRANT them the option of forcing a draw using nukes if they're close to losing. Why is everyone just looking at one side of things and not the other side with the consequences or alternatives? I feel like I'm just shouting into thin air. Obviously none of these egotistical nuke-initiators are listening. Why did the town bother going through the debate to put together a collective plan that offered a reasonable path to victory when you folks simply do your own thing? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
All the previous nukers probably thought their targets were highly suspicious. Look where it's gotten us. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
And consider that the mafia has 1 KP, for such a big game with so many players. Their advantage surely isn't in the number they can kill each night. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 10:34 Zona wrote: I've dug out really obscure things to talk about day 1 (and it is day 1) like lurkers and their points of view I mean I've gone as far as to dig out... As in, most of the useful topics for day 1 have been exhausted, and we've even moved onto very marginally useful topics such as those. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 10:42 Versatile wrote: zona, if you want to talk about something, no one has commented on my ideas for day 2 lynch. maybe we can get this squared away before then. My point of view is the same - we'll be in a much better position to talk once the night is over and we have a bit more information. I've been throwing out lots of things, from high value all the way down to low as the day dragged on and on, but we really have very little context and information to use with our suspicions. I'm just throwing stuff out so we can later refer back to it and examine it in a new light later. I'm glad you put together the list as we can reference it later, but what else can we do now? Re-examine the same posts that have already been looked at and continue to rage as new nukes are launched? Honestly I'm close to reaching to point where I don't care, as no matter how hard I try to help my side, the town, win, there's someone else who nominally is on my side, but goes out and wrecks things to hell and disproportionately hurts the town's chance of winning. What am I to do? Try to talk civilly to yet another person who has nuked town? Even you are part of that boat. Sigh. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 10:44 Versatile wrote: what are your thoughts on who to lynch, besides opz? your posts are going to be useful to the town if you don't get saved by an anti-nuke. If/when you flip town, your posts are something we should go over closely, so make the most of it. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 20:23 Nikon wrote: And then there's You're directly disagreeing with yourself. Based on this and how you've omitted various pieces of information in your nice big posts, I'd say that you're red. This is not a disagreement. First part, I want you (and other inactives) to post something useful. Now you're posting at least a tiny bit more, good. It would have been nice if you had posted more before you were called out. Second part, I'm responding to those who already saying "we should lynch player x next, we should nuke player y next" - I'm saying we don't need to fully need to commit to lynching a certain person right now when there's at least 72 hours more until the next lynch. In any case, unless a person posting a lot constantly repeats the same damn thing and doesn't take into account what everyone else is posting, it's likely you'll be able to find some change in opinion. Also - feel free to tell me what information I'm omitting, rather than make such a statement without providing any accompanying any evidence. And it's interesting you immediately call me red for such trivial reasons. When have any of my proposals not been in the interests of the town? When others have pointed out flaws in them, they have been modified. The real scummy plans are those that involve launching nukes early. Like I've said time and time again, these early nukes have such high chance of hitting town. And it's not just me saying this is likely theoretically. We know RoL is town. Who did his nuke hit? Johnnyspazz, town. The real problem is that even Opz, with the best townie claim so far in the game, is supporting plans that hurt the town. If I were mafia I'd be sitting back silently and cackling as the town kills other town members for me, not raging at the incompetence of my fellow town members. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 29 2010 23:22 ~OpZ~ wrote: AGAIN, you've argued to save anti-nukes for late game. So your argument makes no sense why wouldn't we want to increase the ToD. If it's the town launching the nukes at ONE player, then the MAFIA can't nuke anyway. You're making a unjustified leap in logic. Saving anti-nukes automatically lead to the conclusion that raising radiation is useful. Two separate issues. As an additional argument against increasing radiation, raised radiation also removes the option of nukes from town, later on. Have you been sleeping the entire time I've argued that town-directed kills get stronger LATER in the game? You're still itching to nuke more on day 1. And what if it's the town launching 3 to 6 nukes at this one player, who happens to have a bunch of nukes of his own, that he fires back? I really don't care anymore. Why do you guys bother discussing such things with the town when you clearly don't care what the rest of the town thinks and will nuke anyways? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 30 2010 00:52 Zona wrote: You're making a unjustified leap in logic. Saving anti-nukes automatically lead to the conclusion that raising radiation is useful. Yikes. Missed two words which totally changed the meaning. Saving anti-nukes does not automatically lead to the conclusion that raising radiation is useful. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 24 2010 01:07 Nikon wrote: Let's not nuke anyone just yet, shall we? On March 24 2010 04:43 Nikon wrote: Overall, I'd say that I agree with the "Lynch the nuker" plan. What's really interesting is: what if the mafia doesn't have nukes? Then what? On March 24 2010 20:32 Nikon wrote: No, we need an exact definite decision against nukes. Instantly lynching the person that launched them is a good one at this point of the game, since it doesn't leave room for him to retaliate to counter-nukes, should he have more than one. I know that you don't want to get lynched and there are votes for you, but flaunting your arsenal in the manner that you are, isn't going to help you. Even if you launch nuke(s) we can shoot them down, don't worry. On March 28 2010 23:01 Nikon wrote: I don't want to get nuked by you crazy sobs. On March 28 2010 23:19 Nikon wrote: Let's abide by the lynch a nuker plan then, starting with Xelin. Very consistent so far! I wonder what's coming next? On March 30 2010 01:49 Nikon wrote: Oh yeah, before I forget... ##Nuke: Zona | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
My question is: Why have you, Nikon, gone after me with your "analysis" and have not "analyzed" any other player in the game in the same way? Let's take a closer look. He has only provided one single reason to justify his actions, even when repeatedly questioned: On March 29 2010 20:23 Nikon wrote: And then there's You're directly disagreeing with yourself. Based on this and how you've omitted various pieces of information in your nice big posts, I'd say that you're red. This is the sole reason he has provided to justify his nuke on me. First, I've already explained why it is not a contradiction. But to quickly re-iterate: I suggest posting more plans and suspicions, but not solidly deciding on who to lynch until the next day. However, let's for some reason suppose you don't buy my explanation and consider it a real contradiction. Now comes the question. Is this single contradiction enough to declare that surely I'm "red"? Furthermore, this "contradiction" that I posted - does it promote actions that really harm the town in the long run? Finally, notice is that Nikon has not gone after anyone else in the thread in the same manner. Nikon has shown no interest in finding contradictions in anyone else's play. Nikon is exclusively going after me, for a single flimsy reason. What's going on? He's not pointing me out in a general attempt to help the town, but in an attempt to justify his nuke on me. I honestly don't think I was even that threatening to him, given that my post on him was among posts on many players, but his response is to first make his one flimsy argument on me then nuke. By now, so many nukes have been launched that perhaps mafia feel safe in joining the fray. After all, at this rate the town isn't even going to kill our nuke-launchers for awhile - so they don't fear being immediately killed if they nuke. Summary: Nikon tries to paint me as scummy by pointing at a single "contradiction". He repeats himself several times with no new evidence, then goes off and launches a nuke. He has shown no sign of examining anyone else in the same manner. The conclusion to be reached is that all he wanted to do is to nuke me, and his posts are there to try to justify the nuke. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 30 2010 06:10 Zona wrote: I have no nukes, and I do not have any anti-nukes. My question is: Why have you, Nikon, gone after me with your "analysis" and have not "analyzed" any other player in the game in the same way? Let's take a closer look. He has only provided one single reason to justify his actions, even when repeatedly questioned: This is the sole reason he has provided to justify his nuke on me. First, I've already explained why it is not a contradiction. But to quickly re-iterate: I suggest posting more plans and suspicions, but not solidly deciding on who to lynch until the next day. However, let's for some reason suppose you don't buy my explanation and consider it a real contradiction. Now comes the question. Is this single contradiction enough to declare that surely I'm "red"? Furthermore, this "contradiction" that I posted - does it promote actions that really harm the town in the long run? Finally, notice is that Nikon has not gone after anyone else in the thread in the same manner. Nikon has shown no interest in finding contradictions in anyone else's play. Nikon is exclusively going after me, for a single flimsy reason. What's going on? He's not pointing me out in a general attempt to help the town, but in an attempt to justify his nuke on me. I honestly don't think I was even that threatening to him, given that my post on him was among posts on many players, but his response is to first make his one flimsy argument on me then nuke. Summary: Nikon tries to paint me as scummy by pointing at a single "contradiction". He repeats himself several times with no new evidence, then goes off and launches a nuke. He has shown no sign of examining anyone else in the same manner. The conclusion to be reached is that all he wanted to do is to nuke me, and his posts are there to try to justify the nuke. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
If we assume he's town-aligned, then perhaps he's afraid that my mention of him as being inactive might get him lynched. But there are so many alternatives and he isn't even close to being high on the town's radar. He was definitely less in the spotlight than he is NOW. Alternatively, he truly believes that the one so-called contradiction he found in my numerous posts indicates that I'm surely scum. If that's what he truly believes, he's an idiot. As well, for whatever reason he hasn't bothered to analyze other posters for the same kind of "contradiction". If we assume he's mafia-aligned, then things start to make more sense. A lot of other players have launched nukes and have not suffered any consequences. After all, at this rate the town isn't even going to kill our nuke-launchers for awhile - so mafia might feel that they can join in and nuke without being afraid of immediately killed in response. I like to think that I'm driving discussion to some degree, so maybe the mafia wants to get rid of me. Perhaps in one of my posts I've made them nervous by calling some of them out (I wouldn't know which ones.) So this might be the true reason why he wanted to nuke me. He thinks it's better for his team for me to be dead, and he doesn't fear the town calling out nukers, since we haven't really dealt with the ones that have nuked so far. As well, look at how out of the ones who have nuked, he wants Xelin dealt with first. Conclusion: Nikon is an idiot, or scum. Since I like to believe the best of people and posters on TeamLiquid generally display some level of intelligence, let's assume Nikon isn't an idiot. Thus, he's scum. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 31 2010 10:04 XeliN wrote: Actually I think I can explain, in his mafia game he implemented a new rule as a result of what I wrote, I think his reaction to it is one that a mafia member would make and whilst certainly a townie could too (trust me it was lame, can't stress this enough) I think it more likely that he is mafia. The BOLD part was my reaction. Do keep in mind that while I want to win, I only want to do so within the confines of the game. In any case, I had no idea that you would actually remove your post in reaction to my rule change in a game that you had no involvement in. I certainly didn't expect that my game rules would somehow spill back into a game I was not hosting. (And I do need to defend myself here. Otherwise this statement made against me: On March 31 2010 09:59 XeliN wrote: just hangs out there which I cannot rebut, as he "won't explain further".)I can say that I consider Zona to be mafia as a result, but won't//can't explain further." @Iaaan: You might want to mention who you're agreeing with, because I'm not sure. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 31 2010 10:30 Fishball wrote: I wouldn't go as far as to say its awful. It's a long shot, but I understand where he is coming from. Okay. Since you understand where he is coming from, I assume you saw what he posted. Sequence of events: Xelin posts something which is supposed to establish that he is pro-town. I go and add a rule to the games I host (which have nothing to do with this game!), and do not react at all in this game. Xelin edits out his post after reading about my game, which ostensibly has its own rule set and doesn't mix with this game whatsoever. His edit admits his post is "dubious" and a later post admits it was a "lame attempt to circumvent [rules]". Xelin says that this sequence of events makes him view me as mafia. Here's the two ways I can see him drawing this conclusion. 1st possible way: The new rule "helps" mafia by taking an "option" away from the town. So Zona must be thinking about how to help mafia and is mafia in this game. But the "option" I take away, which you attempted in this game, doesn't just "help" town, it removes all purpose in playing the game altogether. I add the rule so we can continue to play the game of mafia, instead of having the game revolve around all town-aligned players doing what you just did. 2nd possible way: Zona knew somehow that his rule addition would cause Xelin to remove his post that was showing his pro-townness. Therefore Zona didn't want the town to see Xelin's post. So that means Zona is mafia. Like I said before, I had no idea you would react in that way. I had my own players in mind when I did that, not you. Both of these possible logical sequences are flawed. That's why I say that it is awful logic that my adding a rule in my game somehow is evidence of my being mafia in this game. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On March 31 2010 11:04 XeliN wrote: I didn't remove my post as a reaction to what you wrote, in fact I saw it after i'd decided to myself so don't assume things, and all I am saying is that I consider your reaction to be more consistent with if you were mafia than if you were town. Just to make things perfectly clear. By my "reaction" are you referring to my adding of the new rule to the games I am hosting? | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
We now have quite a few "idiot townie or devious scum" candidates. Each of them are players who have made blatantly anti-town moves along with few or no pro-town actions. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
- all the nukers/fake nukers/etc - inactives - the claims that have just come out. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Too many anti-town actions have been ignored under the "idiot townie/impulsive townie" umbrella. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Caller's claim is well-crafted, but coincidentally very convenient. First, take note of Foolishness's quote on Ace's general dislike of Bus Driver roles. So that's one point against the claim. But let's assume there is a bus driver, and the bus driver happens to work the way Caller claims. It's too convenient that the bus driver happened to switch Nikon (someone who everyone is suspicious of, and thus a reasonable player to check) and meeple (someone who died). It's convenient that Caller can now claim cop without providing any useful information at all (perhaps he has none). Remember that this is something Caller came up with to otherwise explain the very suspicious track that Fishball claims to have tracked Caller with. I would say it's highly likely that the balance to the fact that the mafia has such low KP is their power to nuke. As well, notice that someone claims to have their nukes stolen. It's very possible that these nukes are now in mafia hands. If we guess that the setup includes 3-5 mafia and 1 serial killer, then with 16-18 town members and 3 regular deaths per cycle: one lynch, one mafia kill, one sk kill, (we can afford 3 or 4 days of mislynching before we're boned, if we didn't nuke. However, since we've lost quite a few town members to impulsive nukes, the town might be in a losing situation as quickly as day or night 3. It probably will be a good idea to mass claim and consensus (not impulsive individually) nuke on day 3 if nothing improves between now and then. If I'm correct that one of the night kills is from the serial killer, eliminating this serial killer will give the town a substantial amount of breathing room it didn't have before. To the rest of you town members: Stop lying. Lying hurts the town because the town is trying to work together to figure things out, and lying leads us off track. If the people who are lying so much and diverting the town's attention are actually town, I'm aghast at how you play. Stop ignoring anti-town actions under the umbrella of "idiot/impulsive" townie. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
| ||
Zona
40426 Posts
With mafia winning even via simple majority, the SK's needed to play pro-town to start off if either of them wanted a chance to win. I don't think the way the mafia played would have worked anywhere else but here though. TL townies are really a unique brand of suck. TL pro-town vigilantes, even moreso. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
Forgot to say so earlier: Thanks to Ace for hosting the game, and flamewheel91 for wrapping up the end. | ||
| ||