EPTOn 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.
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 +
There was some discussion after this, but ended without a clear result.
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.
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 + ^ YellowInk
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?
+ 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.
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.
@ 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.
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.
Is night over? Want to start analyzing soon.
and depending on how Lakris flips I assure you I WILL be looking very closely at anyone who defended him or moved the conversation elsewhere. 
