EPTThree Kingdoms Mafia (三国演义) - Page 22
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Hesmyrr
Canada5776 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:19 Bill Murray wrote: tricode: pretty much cleared yourself off the lynch list right there. good job. You realized he made a big post to say "I've been inactive, but I'm also going to be inactive in the future" and you're taking that as a sign that he's active? ... ok. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:18 L wrote: Brownbear, by contrast reacted a bit too emotionally to being called out as the YT leader so it probably isn't him. He might be a grunt if they start with grunts. Given that it makes sense Could you finish that sentence please? I'm not about to attack you, I'm just actually curious what you were gonna say. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:21 Fishball wrote: I don't feel like pulling the reading comprehension card again from Mini Mafia-1... Read again, I never said "I don't want". I didn't understand your wording, which is why I asked On May 20 2010 05:22 Tricode wrote: I some how doubt that, but I don't care really. I'm just gonna go along with the ride until the game solidifies more and contribute as best as I can to me winning or w/e faction I'm in by force. No, dude, you're good. You weren't even being discussed, really, and then you came out with a good post that you didn't even need to do to survive. If someone picked you to lynch it would be a party foul now. The fact that you're being actively lurking combined with a willingness to post when called out turns you from looking like a mafia member to looking like (and no offense here) a noob town player who is trying to soak in how to play properly. If you're wanting to play properly in the style you seem to be taking on for yourself, watch how L plays. You yourself admitted you didn't want to do much in this day 1. Another good person to see is foolishness when he's mafia. He might not post at all on day 1 really. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:24 L wrote: You realized he made a big post to say "I've been inactive, but I'm also going to be inactive in the future" and you're taking that as a sign that he's active? ... ok. his opinion of inactiveness i took to mean actively lurking | ||
|
Fishball
Canada4788 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:18 L wrote: Fishball's pretty much spamming while saying he doesn't want to play. Given he and I have had altercations in the past I'm wondering if that's intentionally done to make it look like he doesn't have a power role, or whether or not he is indeed a leader. My posting period on weekdays is pretty much the same everyday, usually during my lunch hour in the office. I don't know what our past has to do with this, unless you are a leader and think I wouldn't want to be under you so I want to quit? Also, I'm pretty confident that everyone in this game has some sort of power from their roles. If I were a leader, I wouldn't need to go emo. Then again, you can argue this could be an act, and here we go in circles again. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:24 BrownBear wrote: Could you finish that sentence please? I'm not about to attack you, I'm just actually curious what you were gonna say. Well, i actually saw that too after I re-read the post, but its kinda complete as it is. "given that, it makes sense." To elaborate, it would make sense that someone would laugh that they've been caught as being, say, the godfather, if they're actually just a grunt. Since the pin IS false and they can see the absurdities behind the argumentation, they're more likely to rage or laugh it off like most people do. Generally speaking, when accused people laugh the issue off if they're innocent, but we've had a rash of townies being really dumb and getting really angry instead of trying to clear themselves off what they obviously know is shitty logic. Given that mafia are put into a position of introspection and self-censoring, they're kinda a bit slower to jump to either option because of how thread mechanics work. In short, its much harder for an accurately pinned person to fake an emotional defense because instead of being an emotional reaction, it becomes a calculated play. But yeah, if the YT do have a leader format, so far I'd say you aren't him. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:28 Fishball wrote: My posting period on weekdays is pretty much the same everyday, usually during my lunch hour in the office. I don't know what our past has to do with this, unless you are a leader and think I wouldn't want to be under you so I want to quit? Also, I'm pretty confident that everyone in this game has some sort of power from their roles. If I were a leader, I wouldn't need to go emo. Then again, you can argue this could be an act, and here we go in circles again. Nah, its more that I know you're prone to rage, hence why It kinda makes sense that you'd rage a bit. Your logic on the past page, however, hasn't been as unrefined as it normally is when you rage. So its mostly a question of whether or not you're bluffing. This post basically states that you've got some kind of role, too, so I dunno. | ||
|
Fishball
Canada4788 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:26 Bill Murray wrote: I didn't understand your wording, which is why I asked Ok, so I didn't quote your entire line, so just reply exactly to what I quoted, great. You already made a conclusion in your head by saying you were disappointed at me. Your question afterwards isn't exactly a question. If you were to word your statement as a question, you should have said, "Don't you want a victory for the neutrals? If not, I would be disappointed in you." Not the other way around. | ||
|
Fishball
Canada4788 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:30 L wrote: Nah, its more that I know you're prone to rage, hence why It kinda makes sense that you'd rage a bit. Your logic on the past page, however, hasn't been as unrefined as it normally is when you rage. So its mostly a question of whether or not you're bluffing. This post basically states that you've got some kind of role, too, so I dunno. Yes I do have a role. I'm pretty sure everyone does. That was my point. I'm replying with this small window opened in the office, so my replies are a bit hasty. Lunch hour has passed afterall. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:33 Fishball wrote: Ok, so I didn't quote your entire line, so just reply exactly to what I quoted, great. You already made a conclusion in your head by saying you were disappointed at me. Your question afterwards isn't exactly a question. If you were to word your statement as a question, you should have said, "Don't you want a victory for the neutrals? If not, I would be disappointed in you." Not the other way around. MY saying "IM DISSAPOINTED IN YOU" is because in the past 2 pages you've been a crybaby asking for a modkill. My disappointment is not from the fact that you're not seeking an unlikely win condition. Sorry that you inferred incorrectly. That's why I ask questions. | ||
|
Tricode
United States538 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:37 Bill Murray wrote: MY saying "IM DISSAPOINTED IN YOU" is because in the past 2 pages you've been a crybaby asking for a modkill. My disappointment is not from the fact that you're not seeking an unlikely win condition. Sorry that you inferred incorrectly. That's why I ask questions. In Fishballs defense, he wasn't asking to be mod killed but seeking someone to replace him if possible. He did state he will play the game until the end if he can't be replaced. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Tricode
United States538 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:40 Bill Murray wrote: also, L, see how this guy isn't inactive? Just making sure, my apologies. (edited spelling fuck off) L just hates me, don't worry about convincing him otherwise lol. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:28 L wrote: Well, i actually saw that too after I re-read the post, but its kinda complete as it is. "given that, it makes sense." To elaborate, it would make sense that someone would laugh that they've been caught as being, say, the godfather, if they're actually just a grunt. Since the pin IS false and they can see the absurdities behind the argumentation, they're more likely to rage or laugh it off like most people do. Generally speaking, when accused people laugh the issue off if they're innocent, but we've had a rash of townies being really dumb and getting really angry instead of trying to clear themselves off what they obviously know is shitty logic. Given that mafia are put into a position of introspection and self-censoring, they're kinda a bit slower to jump to either option because of how thread mechanics work. In short, its much harder for an accurately pinned person to fake an emotional defense because instead of being an emotional reaction, it becomes a calculated play. But yeah, if the YT do have a leader format, so far I'd say you aren't him. Fair enough as far as your logic goes. I'm neutral (for now), and I'm still pretty convinced that the YTs operate pretty much the same as the other factions, albeit with some extra rules. I'm betting the YTs actually have a leader because if they did not, it would be a travesty. Assume that the YTs don't have a leader, and that there are three of them. Person A and B want to recruit someone, say, Bill Murray, and Person C wants to recruit Fishball. Normally, Person A and B would just send off one PM to Caller saying "Yo, the Yellow Turbans are recruiting BM tonight, kthxbye" and all would be good. Person C, however, is a dick, and doesn't want to accept that he lost the vote. So Person C decides to be a dick and just PM Caller before Person A or B does, saying "Yo Caller, we're recruiting Fishball tonight." I'm assuming Caller doesn't want his inbox cluttered up by all the Yellow Turbans voting, and doesn't want to have to tally up the votes, so he will probably just go by the first person who votes. Thus, if Person C beats out Person A and B, then the Yellow Turbans will recruit Fishball instead of Bill Murray, despite Bill Murray winning the majority vote within the YTs themselves. This, quite frankly, is a stupid way of setting up a faction. Note, however, that I have never played as a Mafia character in any other Mafia game, so I'm not sure how the voting works for that: I'm just going off the voting structure of a similar-style game played on another forum (with werewolves instead of mafia, but you get the idea), where the host took the first PM in at night to be the nightkill, so teams could get easily derailed by one person being a dick. For that game, it wasn't really a big issue, since one person hijacking the pick just meant that another random player got killed, and a KP wasn't wasted. In this format, however, there is actually a penalty (a very serious one at that) for picking the wrong person, so one idiot could actively mean the death of an entire team. It is for this reason that I think one of the two following scenarios is more likely: 1) YTs operate as a team, but they all send in nightvotes and Caller tallies them up. This is very unlikely for the following reasons: This would clutter the crap out of Caller's inbox, and he probably doesn't want to deal with that shit, and also, he has said in this thread that teams can choose whether they want to notify new recruits that they have been recruited or not. Obviously, YTs would most likely want to notify their new recruits, but in the case they choose not to, for whatever reason, that would leave one Yellow Turban completely out of the loop, so he wouldn't be able to vote. That would be silly. 2) Given the problems with the above scenario, this is the far more likely one: The Yellow Turbans have a leader, who acts as all other leaders, and has the final say in recruitment. So, from what I see, it looks like the Yellow Turbans should be the same as any other faction, just with the added danger of all getting murdered, and the ability to grow very strong very quickly. | ||
|
Hesmyrr
Canada5776 Posts
That means nothing. I specifically pointed out this four people to see what would happen; I believe faction leaders will be more interested in keeping himself alive rather than uninterested Townie. This is why I removed all those who voted in wrong format from my current suspicion list- faction leaders, while lurking, are more likely to pay attention to development of the game. Hell, if you are faction leader, and you are being targeted, would you pop up or just lurk? Also "waiting for something to happen" could be convenient excuse; he can keep actively lurking for quite a while, saying "lol I'm not recruited yet" when someone points this out. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:44 Hesmyrr wrote: @Bill Murray That means nothing. I specifically pointed out this four people to see what would happen; I believe faction leaders will be more interested in keeping himself alive rather than uninterested Townie. This is why I removed all those who voted in wrong format from my current suspicion list- faction leaders, while lurking, are more likely to pay attention to development of the game. Hell, if you are faction leader, and you are being targeted, would you pop up or just lurk? Also "waiting for something to happen" could be convenient excuse; he can keep actively lurking for quite a while, saying "lol I'm not recruited yet" when someone points this out. I would pop up just like L did. | ||
|
Tricode
United States538 Posts
On May 20 2010 05:44 Hesmyrr wrote: @Bill Murray That means nothing. I specifically pointed out this four people to see what would happen; I believe faction leaders will be more interested in keeping himself alive rather than uninterested Townie. This is why I removed all those who voted in wrong format from my current suspicion list- faction leaders, while lurking, are more likely to pay attention to development of the game. Hell, if you are faction leader, and you are being targeted, would you pop up or just lurk? Also "waiting for something to happen" could be convenient excuse; he can keep actively lurking for quite a while, saying "lol I'm not recruited yet" when someone points this out. Except for the fact that if I was a faction leader I would not want to draw attention either way since I wasn't the prime candidate in which people would like to lynch. So I would most likely still keep my mouth shut until I actually felt pressure. Especially since everyone seems to be gunning for a faction leader right now. | ||
| ||
