|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On April 20 2010 04:47 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 04:46 Radfield wrote:On April 20 2010 04:36 CynanMachae wrote:
Oh I also forgot to point out that I'm hesitating putting my vote on RoL right now because 3 of those voting for him are among the players I find likely red (IntoTheWow, Rage and TheLardyLooser) Then jump on the jpak bandwagon! We got plenty of room! At least 20 seats! Seriously Pluses: He's almost as inactive as RoL; Already cast a vote so he's out of modkill danger (we won't waste our lynch) Minuses: I am completely against this style of play. They person may be an idiot, a noob, and a terrible player, but as far as i'm concerned it is scummy to lynch someone until we have proof that they're capable of being red playing the way they are. Furthermore, if jpak is red, do we have to worry about him? the person we need to be lynching is the godfather, honestly.
Fair enough. But if he's red he adds to the KP of the mafia. So far he's doing the bare minimum to stick around. One or two short posts in the forum, one vote for Jugan.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
Where did this Rage bandwagon come from!? Was his post really that suspicious?
We really need a change of attitude here imo.
I propose a town-wide ban (with lynching if not lived by) on accusations/analysis of previous posts until Day 2, and a lynch of the currently least active, most voted person RebirthOfLegend
Because let's face it, we're not going to be able to have enough of us agree on an already suspicious person to be able to lynch him on day 1, and we're only helping mafia decide which townies to snipe atm.
This would help us focus on getting a decent plan together for the rest of the game.
As far as I can tell, this post helps to focus the town down a road towards a lynch. Voting towards the "least active, most voted person" seems like a sound plan to get a lynch done. Perhaps you folks voting for Rage could elaborate a little more. I realize Caller's already posted a reason, but were that many people suddenly convinced? Caller's argument seemed a bit thin to me.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
Oh boy.....
I have no idea how to rerail this thread....
Also, if I pay 100$ can I get you to point out twice that you're playing like an ass?
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
we're still 5 votes short. If anyone thinks an inactive lynch > no lynch, and you're not voting jpak, now's the time to do it. Maybe it's not the absolute most solid move we could make, but we surely learn more than a no-lynch.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
we're at 19 with like 2 minutes to go....
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On April 20 2010 10:46 Incognito wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2010 06:23 Radfield wrote:Where did this Rage bandwagon come from!? Was his post really that suspicious?
We really need a change of attitude here imo.
I propose a town-wide ban (with lynching if not lived by) on accusations/analysis of previous posts until Day 2, and a lynch of the currently least active, most voted person RebirthOfLegend
Because let's face it, we're not going to be able to have enough of us agree on an already suspicious person to be able to lynch him on day 1, and we're only helping mafia decide which townies to snipe atm.
This would help us focus on getting a decent plan together for the rest of the game.
As far as I can tell, this post helps to focus the town down a road towards a lynch. Voting towards the "least active, most voted person" seems like a sound plan to get a lynch done. Perhaps you folks voting for Rage could elaborate a little more. I realize Caller's already posted a reason, but were that many people suddenly convinced? Caller's argument seemed a bit thin to me. Um actually yeah, if I read that correctly, I think it is pretty anti-town and warranting suspicion. Wanting to exclude all the pre-day 2 information is hugely ridiculous. If you don't think there's anything here to analyze, then something is wrong with you. This seems like an invitation to cover up information that the mafia doesn't want to be found. [/spoiler]
I don't think he was trying to exclude the day 1 info, just pospone making accusations based on it until day 2.
A problem for me right now, is that most of the accusations going around are based on " x played like this before, so I think he's suspicious because now he's playing like this". These arguments might be great, but for all the new players they're a bit worthless. Yes I could go read the other games(of which I have a bit) to try and analyze posting habits, but obviously that's a huge time investment.
I'm not 100% sure what I should be posting right now. We have a bunch of posts, some which seem fishy and some not, but I simply don't have enough of a background with either the players or the game to know who really stands out. I have a list of fishy seeming players, but I doubt my analysis is particularly bang on at this point. I'm sure this is true for most of the new players in the game. The fact is, If you're town and you're a veteren, you need to really be pitching in at this point(thanks incognito) because as far as I can tell, this is the most difficult time of the game to make decisions. Caller, instead of throwing up your hands in frustration, patiently explain why we gain little or no information from lynching jpak, and explain what the better move was. Ace you may be bored and wishing for a more insightful game, but it seems like you gave up less than halfway into day 1. If you were expecting award-winning posts from a game with a large percentage of newbies, you're gonna have to step up yourself. You're only making things worse by spamming and derailing.
I realize that there's no real substance in my post as far as analysis goes, so feel free to ignore my post, and instead respond with some award-winning analysis.
Wow, the automated archive is amazing
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On April 21 2010 05:37 Falcynn wrote:
Wait...so Caller's argument against Rage is that Rage is way too calm in his defending of himself and as a result must be mafia? I realize I'm a total noob and am probably being premature with this but I'm giving a FoS (am I using this term right? just looked it up on that mafiascum wiki) to Caller, because it seems like he's purposely trying to sow discord with these "rules" he's using to spot mafia.
Then again, as stated, he is a way more experienced player than me, but I still don't see the logic in the way he makes some of his accusations.
Main reason I don't think Callers mafia is because of the jpak vote. As far as the mafia were concerned, jpak was pro-town, possibly a blue. They had every reason to jump on the bandwagon and take him out. We were down one vote, Caller was around, and certainly could have put us to the limit. Not only did he not, but he was adamantly against the vote, and seemingly disappointed that Jugan switched last minute to put it through. Also, he's stirring shit up, and as far as im concerned, that's good at this point.
So who did vote for jpak? Presumably the mafia would be more than happy to bandwagon on to jpak in an effort to lynch a townie. I would guess a fair percentage of the mafia are in this list.
BloodyC0bbler
Fishball
Radfield (*gasp* voter number three!)
KF91
CynanMachae
d3_crescentia
Osmoses
[NyC]HoBbes
Abenson
RebirthOfLeGend
meeple
Zona
incognito
scamp
madnessman
Foolishness
Infuldubulm
Dartheinan
Lardy Gooser
Jugan
The problem is that I feel there was also a good pro-town reason to vote out jpak. But at least this gives a list of more suspect people.
Additional Bandwagonners:
Dartheinian and Lardygooser both hopped on and off the RoL train
Meeple, Infuldubulm, and scamp all jumped on and off the Rage wagon
Also, special consideration has to go to Jadefist for voting Jpak after the deadline 
Very Inactive people:
nbtnbt5, Jadefist, Fulgrim, love1another, motbob
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On April 20 2010 10:25 ZBot wrote:AcrossFiveJulys+ Show Spoiler +On April 16 2010 15:24 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:
Sign me up yo On April 18 2010 08:06 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2010 07:58 madnessman wrote:On April 18 2010 07:42 d3_crescentia wrote:
2) BC, we can't establish DT circles in this game because there are no PMs allowed, so this strategy seems pretty invalid as well. I've already brought this up, and BC has replied. On April 18 2010 06:28 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On April 18 2010 06:12 madnessman wrote:On April 18 2010 05:47 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On April 18 2010 05:36 Zona wrote:
Hah, as I post you I see that you are still making arguments based on the idea DTs can PM. Confirmed townies are somewhat useful in a game without out of thread communications, but are a LOT LESS USEFUL THAN FINDING MAFIA. When a town member has to be publicly confirmed, the value is a lot less.
I would like you to elaborate on your "town circle" idea in this game where no town members have the ability to PM. If you truly believe you are right and I am wrong, you should have no problem explaining how it would work to benefit the town. If you are unable to figure out how a DT can create a town circle by clearing townies in this format I have no inclination to tell you. IT IS INSANELY EASY. Dropping mafia down to a list of x people is alot easier than sacrificing a DT for one red. As hey, I doubt we have 1 dt for every red. Remember, with millers around a checked red is never a confirmed red. Whereas a checked green or blue is more likely town as only 1 gf is alive to infiltrate. Assassins show up as what they are. I would have to agree with Zona and say that it seemed pretty clear cut to me that nobody besides mafia are granted the ability to PM. It'd be really complicated and confusing. If you're a special blue role (say DT), and you PM a green role, he/she would be unable to respond. If you PM a red role, is the mafia member allowed to PM you back? Mafia are given the ability to PM, but that's assuming it's for use within their own mafia circle to choose their hits. And then mafia would know you have a special blue role.. If you PM a fellow blue role, you may only start your town circle if he/she has also been granted special PMing abilities. So basically, you'd be PMing people based on a hunch that they are blue, and I suppose there's a decent chance that you end up PMing a fellow blue if you're good at behavioral analysis. But then he/she might not also have the special PM ability. And just by PMing somebody, you're giving away information that you have a special role. So yeah... flamewheel creating special PM abilities just seemed very unlikely and too complicated to moderate. Either way, I think Zona has cleared it up that forming town circles are impossible since town-aligned players don't have PM abilities. So I'm not exactly sure what you're arguing in the quote above o_O. You do not need PM's to form town circles. Seriously. Only the Dt's can form the circle effectively. I make reference to if they have the ability use it. If not you play without it, its pretty simple. In this game, with 38 players there will be anywhere between 2 and 4 dts most likely, lets for this argument say there are 3. Those 3 are able to form a circle easily. Hell, even greens can form a town circle with a bit of work, but it takes alot more work on their part than dts. I interpret this to mean that BC thinks a good plan of action would be for DT's to garner a list of confirmed townies/blue roles, and then post them publicly so as to create a 'town circle'. I've personally always thought that 'town circle' implied private communication, but I guess I'm mistaken... The thing about this plan is that it would require the DT to roleclaim later on in the game. Sure, by putting him/herself in the public sphere, medics will know who to protect. But with mafia role blocker and assassins, I don't know whether the town and DT will necessarily be in a better off position because the DT can't have guaranteed protection. I agree with BC in that there are definitely pros to knowing who the DT has checked, so mad hatters/vigils don't hit the wrong people, and DT's don't waste hits checking people who have already been checked, etc etc. But I don't want to sacrifice a DT for the sake of knowing 2-3 confirmed townies. I guess the DT should see first what roles he is able to collect from role checks, and determine whether he thinks his information is worth the risk of RCing (eg. if he has found mafia, he might think it more important to publicly share his list with the town)... DTs should of course show discretion on when they RC in order to post their list, but they have to do it at some point, otherwise what good are they? One person's non-RC'd opinion probably won't be able to sway the town to lynch mafia/not lynch townies, especially when there are no clues. On April 18 2010 12:31 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2010 12:01 Bill Murray wrote:
The first half of the list is required to assassinate the 2nd half of the list. The list will be inverted the next day so everyone will get their turn to kill someone if they are an assassin. They won't want to be using their kills up every single night anyways, as they can use a Detective Check on the alternate night. I will be cutting the game list into a 1/2 order. 1s are killers, 2s are killees. It will switch the next night. If you are a killer or a killee, don't complain. In all likelihood you won't have to kill or be killed, as we are not sure how many assassins there are. If the mafia kill a killee in the night, we skip a lynch to balance it (hypothetically), but if they kill a killer then we will lynch the killee of the person that they killed the killer of. I hope this is making sense to you. If anyone has any questions about the Bill Murray plan of town success let me know. This plan will help the town as it will be putting mafia players in vulnerable "killee" positions in which they would potentially lynch the "killer". We use the assassins to win as a town. They COUNT as town people, so assassins will want the town to win. It will also be giving them chances to win the game for theirselves through killing other assassins and finding assassins that they can kill at any time during the night that we aren't asking them to kill for us. If they find an assassin, they can breadcrumb a message to us previously or something to let us know BEFORE they do the action that they will be killing an alternate person (this will guarantee that they stay town as we let them go towards their goal while we go towards our goal together). I don't want assassins to claim at first, but it will become obvious after the first 2 cycles on who they are anyways, so we can be a lot more organized after the first couple day/night cycles. I lost confidence in your plan and stopped reading it when I came across the bolded line. Here is the description of the role of the assasin: The Assassin is this game's third party candidate! Except for, there may be more than one? To complete his/her win objective, the Assassin is to find and kill all the other Assassins in the game. Assassins will be told in their role PMs how many Assassins there are in the game, but nobody beyond them will know. Assassins show up as Assassins to role checks. To clarify the Assassin's win objectives: The Assassin wins alone, and must complete his mission before the war between the town and the mafia ends. The Assassin counts toward the number of town-aligned people for counting town vs. mafia purposes.So, the assassin does not win if all the mafia die. I don't completely understand your plan, and it might still be good, but it seems you came up with it off of an incorrect assumption so I'm going to need an explanation for why you thought that and if you still think your plan is valid. On April 19 2010 17:21 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:
I still have my suspicions about BM, but I'm willing to change my vote to lynch an inactive due to good reasons brought up numerous times in the last few pages. On April 20 2010 10:19 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:
FFFFFUUUUU bad luck with krndandaman...
and... I guess it's neutral that an assassin was killed, since they have no incentive to kill mafia and might end up killing townies in finding assassins? I'm really not sure how that's going to affect things.
I've been reading through AcrossFiveJulys posting history, and to me it seems a bit suspect. It's nothing specific in particular, but does anyone else get the same vibe?
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
I've been looking through some more of the posting archive and another player has jumped out at me. iNfuNdiBuLuM. He's moderately active, but with a fairly high amount of low content posts. His larger posts are full of content, but I don't know, something jumps out as fishy to me. A combo of the play-by-play/recap content, the posting style, and the overly helpful attitude (sad that at this point I'm actually suspicious of someone being helpful...). However, I'm not familiar with his posting style, so it could simply be that. I'd love for someone who is a bit more familiar with him to look it over as well.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
Also, he's supposed to be one of the pro-stars, but despite being around hasn't contributed much lately.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
Apologies for post #3 in a row but...
medics! protect incognito at all costs. As far as I can tell, he's our best shot at really outing some mafia.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
shucks, well good job to Foolishness at any rate. I was just gettin in to it....
gl all
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
The archives are great. I would have used them a ton had I stuck around longer, but even early on they were really useful. Thanks so much to both Zona and Flamewheel, it was great. Definitely fun to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
