EPTBanned for a rather funny, but inappropriate sexist joke.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Mafia - Page 18
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
Banned for a rather funny, but inappropriate sexist joke. | ||
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
pm me if interested | ||
|
lakrismamma
Sweden543 Posts
I would think though that since the deaths was posted on different occasions it was a third party or a vigilantly that killed one of them. What we need to focus on is likely candidates for a lynch. Im not very good at having reads on peoples posts but I will give it a go later today. As said earlier its very important that the inactive people start posting. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
We need these inactives to step up and post. If you think you are safe because you have spells you should get the idea out of your head that you're special and you do not need to post. This game is going to require activity from everybody. Now with that said I'm pretty sure that the auror was not protecting me, but to be sure we can run through the hypothetical.... 1. He didn't live so the 50% part is out. 2. Either myself or he would have been killed (25%), this is possible. 3. Both of us would have died... Couldn't happen since I'm still alive 4. He was targeted on his own, most likely Conditions 2 and 4 are the only possible scenarios. I think it's more likely that he was targeted on his own since there was such a slim chance that the 2nd condition was met AND then after a roll between myself and the auror resulted in the auror being killed. That doesn't mean it didn't happen though. Thegilaboy was a dayvig... so was he able to cast AK during the day? He didn't really leave much of a paper trail other than the fact that he voted for Radfield. The only correlation I made with him and radfield and one other player was the odd push for votes. To be honest I'm more interested in this YellowInk vote party that went on. In the last 6 or so hours of the day there was a bandwagon of voters that almost took the Pardoner (AND MOM) position. Here is yesterdays vote list. You should pick people who are on the SAME LIST. (Note this includes people who voted after the deadline) Amber[LighT] Amber[LighT] JohnnySpazz AcrossFiveJulys Lakrismamma Zeks Jayme Radfield Abenson JeeJee JeeJee Radfield Roffles Hesmyrr YellowInk YellowInk ~OpZ~ Subversion (didnt count) Stormtemplar (didnt count) Jugan Elyas People who did not vote: LuDwig- Roffles | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
If you didn't do that, you're not helping... and you should step forward immediately if you were a town-aligned player who killed someone. I'm also assuming no one did any checks and found a DE? We will also come up with another list of names to be checked. | ||
|
ElyAs
France205 Posts
I think I'm gonna do this for AcrossFiveJulys and zeks, they were in Mafia XXVI with me so I can do some analysis using the two games. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
Be careful with your analysis and PLEASE cite specific posts if you're going to draw conclusions. And let's not flame each other. The analysis placed on players should be objective, so the players getting analyzed should not get their ego's taken down a notch because someone's cross analyzing play. If you guys don't mind it might be best for me to take the players that did not vote at all (Roffles and Ludwig-). I have to work (like actual work, not the "work" where I sit on TL all day and post lol). Expect something tonight by me. Other players should begin posting in my absence... I'll be watching the thread and responding if I need to ^_^ | ||
|
lakrismamma
Sweden543 Posts
On June 24 2010 21:16 Amber[LighT] wrote: Here is yesterdays vote list. You should pick people who are on the SAME LIST. (Note this includes people who voted after the deadline) Amber[LighT] Amber[LighT] JohnnySpazz AcrossFiveJulys Lakrismamma Zeks Jayme Radfield Abenson JeeJee JeeJee Radfield Roffles Hesmyrr YellowInk YellowInk ~OpZ~ Subversion (didnt count) Stormtemplar (didnt count) Jugan Elyas People who did not vote: LuDwig- Roffles Wouldn't it make more sense to investigate people on the other lists then the one you are on. This to prevent mafia from investigating eachother if they now had one candidate they wanted elected? Or am I missing something? | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 24 2010 23:00 lakrismamma wrote: Wouldn't it make more sense to investigate people on the other lists then the one you are on. This to prevent mafia from investigating eachother if they now had one candidate they wanted elected? Or am I missing something? I mean when you pick two people to investigate.. make sure that they are BOTH on the same list. You should not be picking people that are on the SAME list as you... and there can be overlap in analysis... that's encouraged actually. sorry for the confusion. | ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On June 24 2010 17:12 Bill Murray wrote: looking for a replacement for Subversion pm me if interested | ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
On June 24 2010 21:41 ElyAs wrote: For now I'm gonna do what AcrossFiveJulys and amber suggested. I was trying to see the differences between playstyles in mafia XXVII and here for OpZ, but since we are in the same list, I suggest that someone else does this (If I posted something in the lines of "He was mafia in the XXVII and he was less active/aggressive", I don't think it would have any meaning) I think I'm gonna do this for AcrossFiveJulys and zeks, they were in Mafia XXVI with me so I can do some analysis using the two games. Lol...No you figured out how I play as mafia?! Did I miss these lists or something? -er- anyway, I don't mind you trying to analyze me. Or anyone. Not hiding nothing this game. Ludwig needs to post. I'm for lynching YellowInk solely based on finding out if any of the random voters at the end (I'm part of that list) are mafia. I voted for him because I was uncertain of Radfield and didn't want Radfield to be pardoner. But YellowInk made a scummy post...In my eyes atleast. But he was going to lynch DC for me... Lol...At any rate, I'm going to take a look around now. Let's see what I find. On June 24 2010 23:00 lakrismamma wrote: Wouldn't it make more sense to investigate people on the other lists then the one you are on. This to prevent mafia from investigating eachother if they now had one candidate they wanted elected? Or am I missing something? OMG...Thank you for quoting Hes's post. I was wondering what the plan was. It seems the plan was to investigate...the people who all bandwagoned certain players? Examining different lists is fine. I feel like taking it a step forward though. Do not investigate those that investigate you. If they've already been investigated, fuck it, do your own investigation. Anyway, Hes how didn't you notice the flaw Lakrismamma just pointed out. Kinda obvious one.... On June 24 2010 23:27 Amber[LighT] wrote: I mean when you pick two people to investigate.. make sure that they are BOTH on the same list. You should not be picking people that are on the SAME list as you... and there can be overlap in analysis... that's encouraged actually. sorry for the confusion. Do what? What are you saying? Investigate the same list or a different list? | ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
On June 15 2010 06:16 YellowInk wrote: Another flaw with any attempt to moderate whether you can explicitly name claim is that it can be unfair to deny a claim that you are a given name. For instance, can I say, "I am NOT Ron Weasly?" This gets to be a really slippery slope. If I can only deny claims made against me, I could just ask everyone to throw claims at me until they hit me, etc, an obvious breach of the spirit of the rules. Even if it weren't so blatant, it's clearly going in a direction that you do not intend. If we can't say, "I am NOT Ron Weasly," then suppose a player says I am either Ron Weasly or mafia (perhaps based on my list of abilities). It gets very messy as to how I can go about defending myself without saying whether or not I am Ron Weasly while still trying to show myself to be non-mafia. tl;dr it's really hard to moderate this kind of thing when accusations start getting thrown around. *Yawn* YellowInk's first posts in the thread are about game balance and things like that. These can not be used to judge him at all and do not fall for the "I was trying to help." Why yes, yes you were, but this was before you got your role PM that possibly coulda been Death Eater. Now it gets interesting First post of substance by yellowink http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=131008¤tpage=10#186 + Show Spoiler + On June 22 2010 13:42 YellowInk wrote: MOD request: Please edit the rules to reflect actual gameplay. Upon reviewing the thread I have noticed scattered rule changes that do not appear reflected in the original post. As the thread gets larger, I will of course do my best to follow all of the rules you have set out, but we will all be using the original post as our core reference. Re my inactivity: I thought we were on a Monday start due to requests to avoid Father's day, so I did not check in here. No worries, I will be plenty active in this game, but now I have a tarnished opening record. =\ Re my nomination for MoM: I am fine with running for minister here. I don't think that I have any special qualifications beyond the other two candidates posed except, well, that I know I am town. But supposedly so do they, so yeah. If people feel that I would be a valuable choice in the election, I would gladly take the role to at least keep it out of death eater or even independant hands. My spellset would mesh reasonably well with an elected role, but regardless of election will need to remain concealed to keep its optimal efficiency. Re roleclaiming: Bill Murray has stated that we cannot mass roleclaim. We may not name claim. + Show Spoiler + On June 15 2010 05:09 Bill Murray wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 15 2010 04:11 YellowInk wrote: My mafia experience is limited, but every game with a complete specific character list I have seen played (I've played in two) was a devastating victory for town. At some point in the game there is mass role claiming. Assuming all townies are truthful and mafia lying, that immediately brings the number of suspicious people down to #mafia x2. I'm not saying it's impossible to have a game like this balanced, but it takes a lot away from the game when, for instance here, there's only 10 people worth scouring for mafia and you effectively have 15 confirmed townies. To offset this, when there are characters in a given game, one common solution is to give the mafia a 'safe list' of what they can role claim without worry of being contested. There's still the problem here where say a player claims Ron Weasly and goes uncontested, they are nearly a confirmed townie because that role was almost certainly included in the game design. A crafty mod could leave one or two of these out just for the mafia's benefit though. To follow through on this with what you've already posted as well as preserve some integrity of mafia role claims, you could just list 25 town aligned roles and have 5 that just don't get assigned to town (and given to mafia as their safe list). I'm sure there are other ways to balance this as well. I just see complete uncontested character lists given at the start of game as a huge town advantage. Just my thoughts on the matter. I will not be accepting name claims to occur in this game unless I am sure it will be balanced or your role PM specifically states otherwise. You may spell claim, or claim whatever nonsense you want, but try not to break the game. "Not Slytherin,eh?" said the small voice. "Are you sure? You could be great, you know, it's all here in your head, and Slytherin will help you on the way to greatness, no doubt about that--- no? Re oddities in electoral positions: Note that the Minster of Magic does not have 3 votes. They get a weak form of bodyguard protection and choose the day 1 lynch. Note that the Governor does not get bodyguard protection and an indeterminate number of chances to pardon. This role seems nearly useless for town and incredibly powerful in death eater hands. I would wonder if it has some usefulness to 3rd parties. Policy decision: I think it may be a good policy to straight up say right now that if the Governor ever uses their power, we must hang the Governor the next day. We have masons, but I think that if we have a mason Governor it would just look too suspicious for them to save a mason anyhow. I would rather keep a death eater off gaining more than one day from this power guaranteed than for a potential town mason Governor to use this (since the town mason Governor has no way to confirm that the target is a mason anyway by rules). I have skimmed the thread to pick up the important bits but definitely not carefully enough to pick up on behavior, so I'll have to spend some more time on this. Still, it's just day 1, reads aren't the best. Also, prospective MoMs, if you havn't already, please indicate your interest for day 1 lynch and thoughts on how to organize. Okay, YellowInk soft claims a useful role or useful spell set I guess, and talks more on simple issues that...well...we would do anyway. Duh lynch the pardoner who fought the majority. Duh the BG protection is weak. Duh the mafia gain a day with a pardoner. He also speaks about BM not allowing name claiming (which he does now allow...or doesn't again?) Basically...I don't like soft claiming...And then progressing with a "policy decision" An interesting post now... http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=131008¤tpage=12#229 + Show Spoiler + On June 23 2010 02:56 YellowInk wrote: @ day 1 lynching policy: Unless a good red argument is presented, I would go after whomever is least active that is not going to be modkilled. We need people to be active to root out the red, so I encourage everyone to post frequently. @ existance of bus driver: I am sure this is a game full of spells. Be wary of when and how you use them. The bus driver is devastating if they can predict your movements. @ existance of godfather: With 4 death eaters and one being godfather, investigation seems even less useful than ever. If your investigations are of a limited number, use them wisely. If they are extremely limited, I would probably wait until you have someone analyzed on behavior before trying to check them out. @ DT investigations of me: I'm going to try to avoid wasting any of our investigations by saying that I would not be a good target for this. Whether you believe that makes me pro town or pro mafia is up to you. However I will say that in a few days if I am under heavy suspicion and people come after me with a lynch I should have enough substance to be able to defend myself and show myself to be town. @ medics: Whether this claim makes me worth of protecting or not is up to you. I would recommend slightly against protecting me as I would hate to see multiple medics covering me. It's good to keep the death eaters guessing on their targets, though. My partial claim should serve this well. Because I have come forward to say these things, I think that this would make me an ideal Governor. If I am red and end up being forced to use my pardon early, you will lynch me and my partner the following day - town would be in an excellent position. Since I have stated that if I come under suspicion later in the game I will likely be able to defend myself, you could use that to see that I am not red and therefore not have to worry about getting ambushed by a pardon effect in the late game. I would be fine if chosen as Minister of Magic as well, but I think with what I have claimed that the death eaters would not target me in the unprotected role of Governor due to fear of being blocked by a medic. Okay, we've all been talking about that we need to be active. Some people aren't going to be. You changed your lynch policy pretty face when I agreed that I would vote for you if you ran to lynch DC...Your partial claim should serve what well? That you get medic protection? The mafia would like that if you were, but you tried to push it off right...Oh wait...Then you said you'd probably get it anyway...whole thing wild eh? And with regards to the bolded part... Why pardon? I mean...You don't have to even if it is a mafia member. We all know that. It'd be better to not pardon in many instances. And you keep emphasizing you would rather have the pardon. Just like Radfield...wild I say! On June 23 2010 06:31 YellowInk wrote: I'll bite. I don't have a read on DCLXVI either way. If I'm elected MoM (which I think is unlikely), I'll lynch DCLXVI unless there is some other compelling argument. DCLXVI, don't take this the wrong way, I don't think I'll be elected MoM anyhow.  You should vote for me to get me into Gov if you have faith in me over the other two candidates. I believe you do since you voted for Roffles.I have to agree with the sentiment of not liking the Amber[light] & Radfield together ticket. Lol...So nice...He still wants to be Governor.... Supporters of the YellowInk: ElyAs JohnnySpazz LaXerCannon (Townie/Killed) and Please begin On June 24 2010 02:07 Hesmyrr wrote: Is night over? Want to start analyzing soon. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
I don't mind name claiming if you are not a mason | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
then you can be like wtf no that's my name | ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
On June 25 2010 03:27 Bill Murray wrote: "He also speaks about BM not allowing name claiming (which he does now allow...or doesn't again?)" I don't mind name claiming if you are not a mason This makes being a mason a liability....what if I was a mason and everyones name claiming? Do I just make up a name or can I say my name and just leave out I'm a mason.... | ||
|
Abenson
Canada4122 Posts
| ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
On June 25 2010 03:53 Abenson wrote: *is desperately thinking of something helpful to write* This goes to everyone. Not just Abenson. Pick one or two people. Read some shit they've written. Summarize it. Post how you feel about it. Say whether you feel they are town/mafia. Whether they should be lynched, DT checked, protected. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On June 25 2010 03:37 ~OpZ~ wrote: This makes being a mason a liability....what if I was a mason and everyones name claiming? Do I just make up a name or can I say my name and just leave out I'm a mason.... you can claim it only if you have to. for example: you are near being lynched, or someone else is claiming your name. don't worry about the masons | ||
| ||
