Welcome peasants, to a brand new offshoot of Mafia called Kingmaker! This game is similar to Mafia with a few new twists! Read the rules, join up, and prepare for carnage!
Game Setup
Unlike in Mafia, there is no voting in this game. But there is evil as always! So how do you get rid of the Scummy Assassins? You have a King do it for you.
Every day a King may execute a player by typing execute: player in the thread. This stops all discussion and the executed player is immediately lynched. The game ends when the Assassins outnumber the Village.
However, the King is not elected democratically. There is one player on the side of the town called the Kingmaker. It's this person's responsibility to choose a new King every day. The Kingmaker may not choose the same person as King ever again until two conditions are met:
1.) Half the original players in the game are already dead. 2.) All remaining players have already been chosen (exception to an ousted Hero role)
The Kingmaker may not elect the same player 2 days in a row and may not choose to be King at any time.
A chosen King has 48 hours to execute a player. If no player is chosen, the King will instead be lynched due to the impatient nature of Villagers.
If the King does not choose to lynch a player, he/she may call upon Excalibur the Holy Sword or Merlin the Wizard with holy undergarments. Both of these powers are one time use only and should be carefully considered before using. If you do not take any action in 48 hours the Villagers will once again lynch you.
Every night, the Kingmaker will send me two names: A primary and secondary choice. If the primary choice is killed at night, the secondary choice gets chosen for Kingship.
If the Kingmaker is killed at night, I will randomly choose a new Kingmaker from the remaining pool of townies.
The Kingmaker can not reveal they are the Kingmaker or else they will be modkilled.
PMs are not allowed in this game. The only players allowed to communicate out of thread are the Assassins.
Thou est a new villager to the humble town. Ye has no power but can influence thine wise King to vote! Gather upon the Town Square every day to execute the filthy Assassins who'd steal the crown off the top of the head of thy Majesty! In other words you can't vote, but you can influence and discuss who should be executed!
You are the Kingmaker. Every night you send me a Private Message with 2 names: A primary and secondary King. In the event the primary choice is killed at night, the secondary name will be used as the new King for the next day. You can't choose the same person as King on consecutive days. You also can not choose any other player you made King already as a choice unless the conditions stated in the OP are met. You can not reveal the fact that you are the Kingmaker. You can't nominate yourself to be King either under any circumstances.
You've been chosen by the Kingmaker as the new head of the Town! At any time during the day you may type execute: player X and X will be lynched. You have 48 hours to do so or else you will be lynched by the Villagers! You may instead of executing a player use one of the Relics at your convenience.
You can type Use : Excalibur in the thread to call upon the mighty Sword. It will randomly slice at a remaining player in the game, executing them for you.
Or
You may choose to type Call: Merlin and call forth the crotchety old Wizard to do your bidding. With Merlins power he will reveal one player to you privately that might be an Assassin. Be warned though, sometimes Merlin likes to play tricks on young Kings and may lie! He may even reveal to you that you yourself are an Assassin!
Each of these abilities, except for executing a player, are ONE use for the entire game. Don't forget to be considerate to would be future Kings!
Alas, you are the Hero of the land! You are so awesome that Assassins fear you and the Town loves you. If you are ever about to be executed the Villagers will go berserk and execute the King instead! Behold - it is not wise to make your presence known as the Assassins may night kill you! Once your role is revealed you may not ever be selected as King.
At night, you may kill one player from among the Village. Work with your ally to take control of the Village and bring victory to the Assassin's Legion. You may kill 1 player every night.
On November 08 2010 19:15 orgolove wrote: /in. Actually, do you use the banlist? -_-
For this game I won't. However don't go overboard on the insults. I actually don't mind players getting a little crazy in my game but once the complaints start then tone it down.
Yea to resemble the format of Mini/Micro mafia. I was looking through game setups that would help players learn how to analyze the game and found this. Then I added a few new twists to see how this would work out.
This actually filled up faster than I thought. Game will start tonight at 9PM ET/10 KST. If anyone wants to sign up on the replacement list you are more than welcome to.
At least I made it this time. Perhaps it was fortunate turn of events probably because I would never have signed up for more than two games- and this one seems possibly more interesting than assassin. Slightly lesser reliance on select critical roles messing up the entire game :p
The main thing we should do is establish a pro-town atmosphere. I say that the town should decide what the king does. This way if the kingmaker accidentally makes the assassins the king, they will not be able to access the kingmaker's killpower without exposing themselves.
To do this, we should all have a lynching system, sort of like Callers game where we declared who we were going to start voting for. Say we want to lynch infun, we should type ##King: Infun and the king will kill the person with the most amounts of votes.
Inaddition, we don't just have to vote to kill someone, we can always use the relics.
However I don't like the relics. Excalibur is a random lynch, and doesn't help much. The first day's lynch should be used on scummy/inactive people (more on this later). Merlin is unreliable, but he could be used as an abstain vote, which can be pretty useful by itself. But if we decide to use the relics, we should type ##King: Merlin
I might not be understanding something, but Kingmaker role PM states that he picks his choice during the night, so how is king decided for day 1? Is King randomly chosen between the players, or will Kingmaker have exception of being able to select his candidate for the day during day 1 (hence king has 48 hrs to choose comment on OP)?
Standards for a King: 1.King should not lynch anyone before 24 hours. Don't be impulsive, don't be stupid. Obviously you should in fact wait until last moment possible(but don't forget :p.) There's nothing worse I can imagine than having a king execute someone at the first second. :/ 2.Calling/executing. Also should not be used,especially right now. I'm thinking we could save this towards late game. For example, if there's 2 town and one scum left, king can easily just execute both of them and win the game. With only 9 people, this isn't too impossible either.
Don't be too rash. Follow the majority, at least as a guideline. We should probably decide as a group when to use call/execute. Which reminds me:
Ace, does using execute AND Use: Excalibur mean you can get two kills in one day?
A big problem in every mafia game is inactivity. I don't want another drag_ being able to squeak by with barely any posts. We should immediately show it is not okay to be inactive.
Inactive players hurt the town as they waste lynches down the road as the town will need to try to separate the mafia from the inactives.
We should therefore lynch an inactive day one. This will force the assassins to discuss and not be able to turtle, increasing the chance they will slip up.
The other options are to A) Lynch a scummy person. Take a look at Team Micro Mafia II, they found both scums day 1 B) Use Merlin. This would be like an abstain. If there are no inactives and no one is scummy, it's a good idea to use Merlin C) Use Excalibur. This is just random. I feel this is a waste of an action. We should focus on building a good town environment.
On November 09 2010 11:50 Pandain wrote: Alright, here's some of my thoughts right now.
Standards for a King: 1.King should not lynch anyone before 24 hours. Don't be impulsive, don't be stupid. Obviously you should in fact wait until last moment possible(but don't forget :p.) There's nothing worse I can imagine than having a king execute someone at the first second. :/ 2.Calling/executing. Also should not be used,especially right now. I'm thinking we could save this towards late game. For example, if there's 2 town and one scum left, king can easily just execute both of them and win the game. With only 9 people, this isn't too impossible either.
Don't be too rash. Follow the majority, at least as a guideline. We should probably decide as a group when to use call/execute. Which reminds me:
Ace, does using execute AND Use: Excalibur mean you can get two kills in one day?
Firstly, the king should not have any autonomy at all. The town should decide what the king does.
Secondly, I don't think you understand what the king does. The king can only kill one person each round. He basically decides the lynch (like the mayor)
Thirdly, follow the majority as a rule. This way we can tell if the assassin is the king and just using his role to get an extra KP
On November 09 2010 11:51 LSB wrote: Now as for the day 1 lynch.
A big problem in every mafia game is inactivity. I don't want another drag_ being able to squeak by with barely any posts. We should immediately show it is not okay to be inactive.
Inactive players hurt the town as they waste lynches down the road as the town will need to try to separate the mafia from the inactives.
We should therefore lynch an inactive day one. This will force the assassins to discuss and not be able to turtle, increasing the chance they will slip up.
The other options are to A) Lynch a scummy person. Take a look at Team Micro Mafia II, they found both scums day 1 B) Use Merlin. This would be like an abstain. If there are no inactives and no one is scummy, it's a good idea to use Merlin C) Use Excalibur. This is just random. I feel this is a waste of an action. We should focus on building a good town environment.
Right now we should be pressuring the inactives via voting. I agree, we should encourage EVERYONE to do take part in valuable discussion.
As soon as day starts, I'll vote someone, then once they talk enough, I'll vote someone else. We can talk about who REALLY to lynch later. Which is why I'm thinking for day1 to definitely wait out the whole 48 hours before lynching.
You may instead of executing a player use one of the Relics at your convenience.
By Calling/executing I suppose you mean excalibur. Since it is complete random lynch and I guess by then everyone will have their reads by now, using excalibur is huge fos indicator in my opinion and should never be used as long as voting system holds up. Hell, someone going berserk and executing his suspect against his concensus is less damaging than excalibur usage since it at least gives us concrete read about that King.
On November 09 2010 11:50 Pandain wrote: Alright, here's some of my thoughts right now.
Standards for a King: 1.King should not lynch anyone before 24 hours. Don't be impulsive, don't be stupid. Obviously you should in fact wait until last moment possible(but don't forget :p.) There's nothing worse I can imagine than having a king execute someone at the first second. :/ 2.Calling/executing. Also should not be used,especially right now. I'm thinking we could save this towards late game. For example, if there's 2 town and one scum left, king can easily just execute both of them and win the game. With only 9 people, this isn't too impossible either.
Don't be too rash. Follow the majority, at least as a guideline. We should probably decide as a group when to use call/execute. Which reminds me:
Ace, does using execute AND Use: Excalibur mean you can get two kills in one day?
Firstly, the king should not have any autonomy at all. The town should decide what the king does.
Secondly, I don't think you understand what the king does. The king can only kill one person each round. He basically decides the lynch (like the mayor)
Thirdly, follow the majority as a rule. This way we can tell if the assassin is the king and just using his role to get an extra KP
I disagree, actually. I totally agree that he should follow the town, but sometimes you have to follow your gut. For the early days I highly agree that he should do what the town says, but just leaving that up to the town increases the possibility for scum to manipulate the whole thing. Now, if a king just does whatever he wants, is that suscipcious? Of course! However, leaving him a bit of room is a good thing imo.
On November 09 2010 11:50 Pandain wrote: Alright, here's some of my thoughts right now.
Standards for a King: 1.King should not lynch anyone before 24 hours. Don't be impulsive, don't be stupid. Obviously you should in fact wait until last moment possible(but don't forget :p.) There's nothing worse I can imagine than having a king execute someone at the first second. :/ 2.Calling/executing. Also should not be used,especially right now. I'm thinking we could save this towards late game. For example, if there's 2 town and one scum left, king can easily just execute both of them and win the game. With only 9 people, this isn't too impossible either.
Don't be too rash. Follow the majority, at least as a guideline. We should probably decide as a group when to use call/execute. Which reminds me:
Ace, does using execute AND Use: Excalibur mean you can get two kills in one day?
Firstly, the king should not have any autonomy at all. The town should decide what the king does.
Secondly, I don't think you understand what the king does. The king can only kill one person each round. He basically decides the lynch (like the mayor)
Thirdly, follow the majority as a rule. This way we can tell if the assassin is the king and just using his role to get an extra KP
I disagree, actually. I totally agree that he should follow the town, but sometimes you have to follow your gut. For the early days I highly agree that he should do what the town says, but just leaving that up to the town increases the possibility for scum to manipulate the whole thing. Now, if a king just does whatever he wants, is that suscipcious? Of course! However, leaving him a bit of room is a good thing imo.
Following your gut is an easy way for the Assassin to gain KP. It's easy for an assassin to go against the town and execute a townie because it 'went against his gut'. We would have no read on the king.
Think of it this way. Your way: Townie is king and goes against his gut: High chance of killing town Assassin is king: Easy extra KP
There is no benefit besides an easier job for the Assassin
Your afraid of the scum manipulating the results. This is public, so therefore if they start messing around, we'll be able to tell. However, if the scum is the king and manipulates the results, it's private, we won't be able to tell.
Lastly, remember. we only have 2 mislynches until lylo. We cannot let the scum to gain a hold of any of our lynchs
On November 09 2010 11:50 Pandain wrote: Alright, here's some of my thoughts right now.
Standards for a King: 1.King should not lynch anyone before 24 hours. Don't be impulsive, don't be stupid. Obviously you should in fact wait until last moment possible(but don't forget :p.) There's nothing worse I can imagine than having a king execute someone at the first second. :/ 2.Calling/executing. Also should not be used,especially right now. I'm thinking we could save this towards late game. For example, if there's 2 town and one scum left, king can easily just execute both of them and win the game. With only 9 people, this isn't too impossible either.
Don't be too rash. Follow the majority, at least as a guideline. We should probably decide as a group when to use call/execute. Which reminds me:
Ace, does using execute AND Use: Excalibur mean you can get two kills in one day?
Firstly, the king should not have any autonomy at all. The town should decide what the king does.
Secondly, I don't think you understand what the king does. The king can only kill one person each round. He basically decides the lynch (like the mayor)
Thirdly, follow the majority as a rule. This way we can tell if the assassin is the king and just using his role to get an extra KP
I disagree, actually. I totally agree that he should follow the town, but sometimes you have to follow your gut. For the early days I highly agree that he should do what the town says, but just leaving that up to the town increases the possibility for scum to manipulate the whole thing. Now, if a king just does whatever he wants, is that suscipcious? Of course! However, leaving him a bit of room is a good thing imo.
Following your gut is an easy way for the Assassin to gain KP. It's easy for an assassin to go against the town and execute a townie because it 'went against his gut'. We would have no read on the king.
Think of it this way. Your way: Townie is king and goes against his gut: High chance of killing town Assassin is king: Easy extra KP
There is no benefit besides an easier job for the Assassin
Your afraid of the scum manipulating the results. This is public, so therefore if they start messing around, we'll be able to tell. However, if the scum is the king and manipulates the results, it's private, we won't be able to tell.
Lastly, remember. we only have 2 mislynches until lylo. We cannot let the scum to gain a hold of any of our lynchs
What do you mean, if the king manipulates the results? From what I understand, he does every single one of his actions in thread.
On November 09 2010 11:50 Pandain wrote: Alright, here's some of my thoughts right now.
Standards for a King: 1.King should not lynch anyone before 24 hours. Don't be impulsive, don't be stupid. Obviously you should in fact wait until last moment possible(but don't forget :p.) There's nothing worse I can imagine than having a king execute someone at the first second. :/ 2.Calling/executing. Also should not be used,especially right now. I'm thinking we could save this towards late game. For example, if there's 2 town and one scum left, king can easily just execute both of them and win the game. With only 9 people, this isn't too impossible either.
Don't be too rash. Follow the majority, at least as a guideline. We should probably decide as a group when to use call/execute. Which reminds me:
Ace, does using execute AND Use: Excalibur mean you can get two kills in one day?
Firstly, the king should not have any autonomy at all. The town should decide what the king does.
Secondly, I don't think you understand what the king does. The king can only kill one person each round. He basically decides the lynch (like the mayor)
Thirdly, follow the majority as a rule. This way we can tell if the assassin is the king and just using his role to get an extra KP
I disagree, actually. I totally agree that he should follow the town, but sometimes you have to follow your gut. For the early days I highly agree that he should do what the town says, but just leaving that up to the town increases the possibility for scum to manipulate the whole thing. Now, if a king just does whatever he wants, is that suscipcious? Of course! However, leaving him a bit of room is a good thing imo.
Following your gut is an easy way for the Assassin to gain KP. It's easy for an assassin to go against the town and execute a townie because it 'went against his gut'. We would have no read on the king.
Think of it this way. Your way: Townie is king and goes against his gut: High chance of killing town Assassin is king: Easy extra KP
There is no benefit besides an easier job for the Assassin
Your afraid of the scum manipulating the results. This is public, so therefore if they start messing around, we'll be able to tell. However, if the scum is the king and manipulates the results, it's private, we won't be able to tell.
Lastly, remember. we only have 2 mislynches until lylo. We cannot let the scum to gain a hold of any of our lynchs
What do you mean, if the king manipulates the results? From what I understand, he does every single one of his actions in thread.
Lets say the town's votes to kill Infun. But suddenly the king decides to kill deconduo instead. The king claims that he had a 'gut feeling', or some other reasoning.
This would be indistinguishable from a assassin kill.
I understand maybe deconduo could be a mafia. However, the fact that if we allow any lax in this rule means that it's a free hit for the scum. Allowing scum to get a free kill is far worse than a small chance of maybe hitting a scum
9 little Villagers meet in the Town Square 5 of them are good, noble and fair 1 is the maker of Kings with power 1 is a Hero, known for his valor 2 of them villains that make you cower And one shall be crowned King at this important hour!
A Kingmaker has been found! Alas, ye has no King yet! But wait a bit and play with ye wit!
The game has started. A King shall be nominated within 2 hours! When the King is nominated none of you will know who the King is (except the Kingmaker). The King will obviously be revealed before the 48 hours is up. Good luck!
Another thing to note is the setup. As Ace did not reveal the number of each roles, we have to figure it out ourselves. Compared to the standard setups, there's 2 disadvantages to the town:
1. a red could randomly be chosen as the mayor, leading to an auto -1 town. Actually, eventually one of the reds WILL be chosen as a mayor since the kingmaker is forced to switch his choice every day to a different player. 2. there is no reliable detective. This is huge.
So I assume there can't be any more than 2 Assassins.
As for the rest, considering the mechanics, There has to be just 1 hero. This leaves us with:
2 Assassin 1 Kingmaker 1 Hero 1 King 4 Town
Right now. Since Assassins can PM each other and coordinate, we must make sure the king waits out the full 48 hours every day to have maximum chance the reds can slip up.
Oh great, you post that right before I post my conjecture. -_-
Anyway, Since the King will be different during each day, I say the King should reveal himself the first thing in the morning. It will only benefit the town by preventing the Assassins, if chosen, from plotting through PM, and we'll have the overall context of where's the vote's being headed immediately. There's no special day kill power in this game, so he's safe in that regard.
On November 09 2010 12:09 orgolove wrote: Another thing to note is the setup. As Ace did not reveal the number of each roles, we have to figure it out ourselves. Compared to the standard setups, there's 2 disadvantages to the town:
1. a red could randomly be chosen as the mayor, leading to an auto -1 town. Actually, eventually one of the reds WILL be chosen as a mayor since the kingmaker is forced to switch his choice every day to a different player.
I do agree with the king following the majority. There's absolutely no reason we should not do that.
It really brings to question why DrH, who's usually a good player, is against this. Really brings a FoS on him.
On November 09 2010 12:13 LSB wrote:even if an assassin is chosen as king, nothing will happen.
That's not gonna work. -_- You have to remember that an assassin king is an automatic 2KP that can be bought at the cost of 1 life. In the case where there's 5 players left (end of night 2), an Assassin king can just kill a town immediately, then kill the next town at night, gaining an automatic win.
Above all else it is extremely important for the kingmaker to not choose a red king.
On November 09 2010 12:13 LSB wrote:even if an assassin is chosen as king, nothing will happen.
That's not gonna work. -_- You have to remember that an assassin king is an automatic 2KP that can be bought at the cost of 1 life. In the case where there's 5 players left (end of night 2), an Assassin king can just kill a town immediately, then kill the next town at night, gaining an automatic win.
Above all else it is extremely important for the kingmaker to not choose a red king.
Ah yes of course, the lylo situation. There's not much that can be done anyways. However do you agree that this would work outside of lylo? It defiantly would help day1 and day2
Being that this is the first time any of us have seen this game run, just some things to point out:
1.) Merlin is an unreliable detective check. The King asks for it publicly but gets the result in the private. Still it can be used to stall for a day if need be and is good if you have strong suspicions.
2.) Excalibur is a random lynch. Use it wisely.
3.) Remember both Relics can only be used ONCE the entire game. Think about the future Kings also.
4.) The Kingmaker is just as important as any other role. The KM will probably end up choosing an Assassin as King but must balance that out with picking an Assassin early and hoping they screw up (like lynching the Hero) or by picking a strong player with a good plan/analysis and hoping they find an Assassin early.
5.) Assassins don't necessarily get free KP as if chosen King, they are trying to avoid a Hero lynch.
6.) If you are an Assassin you really just want to be picked King at the perfect time. Who knows when that will be?
Well, I'm looking at the "lynch an inactive" plan, and I don't really think it's that smart, given that we especially don't want to get anywhere near LYLO. I think we really should be trying to drop an Assassin right now: it's totally doable this stage in the game, and if we fall into the "hurr durr lets just lynch inactive" trap TL town usually falls into, it's going to bite us in the ass.
On November 09 2010 12:36 BrownBear wrote: Well, I'm looking at the "lynch an inactive" plan, and I don't really think it's that smart, given that we especially don't want to get anywhere near LYLO. I think we really should be trying to drop an Assassin right now: it's totally doable this stage in the game, and if we fall into the "hurr durr lets just lynch inactive" trap TL town usually falls into, it's going to bite us in the ass.
Inactives are very bad for the town. In practically every game, an inactive is either a) Mafia, or b) a townie that just gets lynched.
If we're going to use a lynch, it should be day 1. Although I'm all for going after an Assassin, we should first establish that being inactive is not okay.
Oh, I still agree that having the king be dependent on the town's decisions is the best course of action.
Yeah, it's not totally riskless for the reds to be chosen as a king. But the hero lynch also works against townie kings as well. Even if the reds don't get chosen as a king during the first two nights, they have two night kills to hit the hero. Plus, there's 2 days where they can try to manipulate the town into lynching a blue, who has a 1/7 and 1/5 chance, respectively of being a hero. Given this, I think there's better than 1/2 odds that the hero will be revealed at the end of 2nd night.
And I don't get it. Pandain, wtf? You just start off right away by randomly voting against a player with no basis? At best, you're bringing suspicion onto yourself as a red who doesn't care who dies as it's not one of your faction. At worst it's going to bite you in the ass if you indeed are red given the many common tells between voting and posting patterns.
On November 09 2010 12:41 orgolove wrote: Oh, I still agree that having the king be dependent on the town's decisions is the best course of action.
Yeah, it's not totally riskless for the reds to be chosen as a king. But the hero lynch also works against townie kings as well. Even if the reds don't get chosen as a king during the first two nights, they have two night kills to hit the hero. Plus, there's 2 days where they can try to manipulate the town into lynching a blue, who has a 1/7 and 1/5 chance, respectively of being a hero. Given this, I think there's better than 1/2 odds that the hero will be revealed at the end of 2nd night.
And I don't get it. Pandain, wtf? You just start off right away by randomly voting against a player with no basis? At best, you're bringing suspicion onto yourself as a red who doesn't care who dies as it's not one of your faction. At worst it's going to bite you in the ass if you indeed are red given the many common tells between voting and posting patterns.
Did you not read my statement? I'm voting someone until they talk enough, then I'll change it. I'm doing this to get everyone talking, as anyone actually voting someone is either 1.mafia or 2. stupid. This is called pressure, not lynching.
Well, obviously, but I'm too used to seeing a bunch of people vote on an inactive, go AFK for the rest of the cycle, and then the poor guy dies, even if he shows up.
I'm just saying, king should be using his judgement here. If town wants to kill a dude "for being inactive" but the dude has posted, should king go ahead and kill the dude? Not unless the king thinks he's actually an assassin, or the king himself is an assassin.
Part of the awesome part of having a King is that the king reveals a lot about HIS role by how he acts. If we force him to be our puppet, that doesn't tell us much at all. Giving the kings a bit more leeway might actually make an Assassin-King work in our favor - we thrust him into the spotlight, make him more likely to screw up, and thus stand a better chance of catching him.
I'm in favor of ADVISING the king, but not forcing him to follow our orders. Gives us more to work with.
Also, whoever is the king should be held to a VERY HIGH standard of activity, for the same reason: we know they're king, but we want to know as much more about them as we can.
Pandain. Can you shape up this game? Since this is micro mafia, I'd rather not want to waste a lynch killing a spammer for the sake of them confusing us.
Just a thought. Remember, the hero can claim if needed. This is crucial as the hero could be a good counter to an assassin king, and could make sure a townie king does not hit him. (The actual situation is going to be a bit more complex, but we should talk about that when it actually happens)
On November 09 2010 12:45 LSB wrote: Pandain. Can you shape up this game? Since this is micro mafia, I'd rather not want to waste a lynch killing a spammer for the sake of them confusing us.
Just a thought. Remember, the hero can claim if needed. This is crucial as the hero could be a good counter to an assassin king, and could make sure a townie king does not hit him. (The actual situation is going to be a bit more complex, but we should talk about that when it actually happens)
I think he wants you to start doing more than just pressure lynching - propose ideas, debate strategy, that kind of thing. Basically, do what others are doing.
On November 09 2010 12:47 BrownBear wrote: I think he wants you to start doing more than just pressure lynching - propose ideas, debate strategy, that kind of thing. Basically, do what others are doing.
I have earlier, but now I'm just watching day9 then going to bed. So I might as well stop posting :/
On November 09 2010 12:43 BrownBear wrote: Well, obviously, but I'm too used to seeing a bunch of people vote on an inactive, go AFK for the rest of the cycle, and then the poor guy dies, even if he shows up.
I'm just saying, king should be using his judgement here. If town wants to kill a dude "for being inactive" but the dude has posted, should king go ahead and kill the dude? Not unless the king thinks he's actually an assassin, or the king himself is an assassin.
Part of the awesome part of having a King is that the king reveals a lot about HIS role by how he acts. If we force him to be our puppet, that doesn't tell us much at all. Giving the kings a bit more leeway might actually make an Assassin-King work in our favor - we thrust him into the spotlight, make him more likely to screw up, and thus stand a better chance of catching him.
I'm in favor of ADVISING the king, but not forcing him to follow our orders. Gives us more to work with.
Also, whoever is the king should be held to a VERY HIGH standard of activity, for the same reason: we know they're king, but we want to know as much more about them as we can.
Remember though, we can easily switch to the Merlin (abstain), so if the inactive shows up and everyone is contributing, we can easily not lynch anyone. The problem is that in your situation, that mostly happens if the town HAS TO kill someone.
It would be great if we had 5 days of lynches to be able to check out how a king acts, and make sure that the king isn't an assassin. However, remember, we only will have three lynches. First day it's going to be hard to see what the king does. Second day, what if the king goes against the grain and kills someone? It should be easy to pick out a random townie. Third day, we're unlucky and king is an assassin. GG.
As for holding to him to a high level activity. I agree with that, but in order to pull that off, we need to make sure he claims at the start of the day. I see no reason why the king should not claim
On November 09 2010 12:47 BrownBear wrote: I think he wants you to start doing more than just pressure lynching - propose ideas, debate strategy, that kind of thing. Basically, do what others are doing.
^This Pandain.
Could you address the issue of forcing a 'puppet king', and day 1 inactive lynch?
I agree with DrH that the King should not solely rely upon the majority to make a decision. It will be better for the spirit of the game for the King to listen to what the town has to say, but instead the King should ultimately make his own decision, and live with it.
As far as using the relics I don't think using the random kill is wise. This is a better gambit for the end of the game, when the probability of hitting someone increases. It would be against the interest of the assassins to use this ability except early on, when the probability of hitting themselves is drastically lower. Therefore no King should use the random lynch.
If we really aren't okay with someone being killed for Day 1 we should use the ability to gain some possible intel. It's not a guarantee but it will give us a better start for day 2.
So the Kingmaker knows who he chose as King. Obviously, we all want the king to claim in thread. Thus, stands to reason that a king who doesn't claim until he executes is basically scum.
I'm trying to think if there's any merit to the Kingmaker claiming and posting who he chose as king in order to force the king out... obviously though, an Assassin King can delay with Excalibur/Merlin.
Actually, question - does a king using Merlin/Excalibur mean he remains king next cycle, or is a new king chosen?
On November 09 2010 12:52 BrownBear wrote: Hmm... more ideas.
So the Kingmaker knows who he chose as King. Obviously, we all want the king to claim in thread. Thus, stands to reason that a king who doesn't claim until he executes is basically scum.
I'm trying to think if there's any merit to the Kingmaker claiming and posting who he chose as king in order to force the king out... obviously though, an Assassin King can delay with Excalibur/Merlin.
Actually, question - does a king using Merlin/Excalibur mean he remains king next cycle, or is a new king chosen?
If the kingmaker reveals himself, he just gets killed by the mafia. And anyways, we should just expect the king to claim in thread.
The Kingmaker can't claim. He's modkilled if he does claim. -_-
Regarding some questionables: 1. Pandain - I don't think a red would bring so much suspicion onto himself immediately after the game starts. Despite his early vote, I don't think he's one of the assassins.
2. DoctorHelvetica/Amber[Light] - I see any defense of giving the King a free reign as a red trying to leave open the possibility of one of them getting away with killing a green as the king without consequence. I think LSB covered this already, but let me repeat again - there is NO advantage to the town to let the king decide the lynch on himself. The very definition of townies are weaklings whose only advantage is their numbers - how can a rational green throw their only advantage away?
Lets see here...
On November 09 2010 12:52 Amber[LighT] wrote: I agree with DrH that the King should not solely rely upon the majority to make a decision. It will be better for the spirit of the game for the King to listen to what the town has to say, but instead the King should ultimately make his own decision, and live with it..
You aren't providing any real beneficial reason why it would be beneficial for the town to do this, instead relying on the excuse of adhering to some mysterious "spirit of the game."
On November 09 2010 12:52 Amber[LighT] wrote:As far as using the relics I don't think using the random kill is wise. This is a better gambit for the end of the game, when the probability of hitting someone increases. It would be against the interest of the assassins to use this ability except early on, when the probability of hitting themselves is drastically lower. Therefore no King should use the random lynch.
Of course you'd say this. On the surface, this seems like a pretty neutral post. But look at this from the standpoint of a mafia. They know who each other is, and thus by analogue already know who they should lynch. A red King will never use the excalibur. And a red king will later refer to this very post to argue why he isn't using it.
On November 09 2010 12:52 Amber[LighT] wrote:If we really aren't okay with someone being killed for Day 1 we should use the ability to gain some possible intel. It's not a guarantee but it will give us a better start for day 2.
Here you're banking on the fact that 1. merlin can only be used ONCE, and 2. It is UNRELIABLE. Thus, seen from a red point of view, anything the merlin may possibly reveal could comparatively easily be discussed away as bad information.
overall, I see Amber's latest post as very condemning.
I see the King as being like a mayor role. He should never do what the town tells him to do. When they agree to conform to the towns will, the mafia will become active and control the decisions the king makes.
The king needs to scumhunt somewhat independently and ultimately make his own decision.
I still believe it would be best for king to follow the majority. If what King thinks conflicts with the town's will, his responsibility should be to logically lay out his arguments why he thinks that player is more scum than the alternatives. Should his argument be superior I'm sure he can convert majority to his cause instead of acting like some sort of independent dictator- that's just breeding ground for conflict and misdirections.
Okay, note this. Say we decide to let town always dictate King's execution choice A.K.A. the lynch occurs by majority. What does it result in? The normal F9 mafia setup! You know, the setup that is actually thought to be balanced despite of mafia's ability to influence the lynch choice. I think the fancy and new theme is preventing people from seeing how easily we can turn this into normal mafia settings. I absolutely do not see why we should instead take alternative path, where we introduce whole new set of unknown variables and theoretical massive advantage to the scum when he/she is wrongly chosen as the king.
Also my thoughts about Hero role. Last thing Hero should do is play like Paranoid Gun Owner hoping to get kill in. Since the town has higher probability of being town than scum playing scummily deliberately can be disastrous. Instead Hero should act as normal vanilla townie and contribute until the majority vote swings against you, whenceupon he can claim. The advantage to lying low is humongous. Since Hero is the sole role, he has the benefit of being able to roleclaim and verify himself 100% anytime into the game- something that grows in strength in the late game where there are lesser number of players.
tl;dr Just make lynch based on majority and let's play normal mafia, instead of that other path which can lead to huge damage for town when mafia is picked as town.
On November 09 2010 13:10 orgolove wrote: The Kingmaker can't claim. He's modkilled if he does claim. -_-
Regarding some questionables: 1. Pandain - I don't think a red would bring so much suspicion onto himself immediately after the game starts. Despite his early vote, I don't think he's one of the assassins.
2. DoctorHelvetica/Amber[Light] - I see any defense of giving the King a free reign as a red trying to leave open the possibility of one of them getting away with killing a green as the king without consequence. I think LSB covered this already, but let me repeat again - there is NO advantage to the town to let the king decide the lynch on himself. The very definition of townies are weaklings whose only advantage is their numbers - how can a rational green throw their only advantage away?
On November 09 2010 12:52 Amber[LighT] wrote: I agree with DrH that the King should not solely rely upon the majority to make a decision. It will be better for the spirit of the game for the King to listen to what the town has to say, but instead the King should ultimately make his own decision, and live with it..
You aren't providing any real beneficial reason why it would be beneficial for the town to do this, instead relying on the excuse of adhering to some mysterious "spirit of the game."
On November 09 2010 12:52 Amber[LighT] wrote:As far as using the relics I don't think using the random kill is wise. This is a better gambit for the end of the game, when the probability of hitting someone increases. It would be against the interest of the assassins to use this ability except early on, when the probability of hitting themselves is drastically lower. Therefore no King should use the random lynch.
Of course you'd say this. On the surface, this seems like a pretty neutral post. But look at this from the standpoint of a mafia. They know who each other is, and thus by analogue already know who they should lynch. A red King will never use the excalibur. And a red king will later refer to this very post to argue why he isn't using it.
On November 09 2010 12:52 Amber[LighT] wrote:If we really aren't okay with someone being killed for Day 1 we should use the ability to gain some possible intel. It's not a guarantee but it will give us a better start for day 2.
Here you're banking on the fact that 1. merlin can only be used ONCE, and 2. It is UNRELIABLE. Thus, seen from a red point of view, anything the merlin may possibly reveal could comparatively easily be discussed away as bad information.
overall, I see Amber's latest post as very condemning.
##Vote Amber[Light]
Don't you think it would be wise for the assassins to take advantage of eliminating these roles so they can't be used in the late game?
You completely misinterpreted my post and went ahead to stretch what I thought about how to execute this game in such a way to make me appear as though I'm negative. It would be wise for you to do a little more research before jumping to conclusions on the vote train.
Hopefully the king is not going to act irrationally and come to ridiculous conclusions and justifications for their kills. I'm not going to "vote" for anybody for now since I don't really believe it's going to create a good pro-town atmosphere. The first day kill is going to be bitter for everybody regardless of who we choose.
1.) Remember a new King is chosen every day. Refer to the OP to make sure you understand everything about the King and Kingmaker. The King can be Villager or Assassin. The Kingmaker is always a Villager and thus innocent.
2.) Excalibur and Merlin are one shot uses for the entire game, not once per King.
Also whoever is the kingmaker, I hope you're taking extra care with who you are choosing. Pick players who aren't afraid to step outside of the box. Most importantly, pick people who can scumhunt without simply bending to the majority.
Kings shouldn't really claim so quickly. It's going to twist constructive discussion in this thread. There's gonna be a lot of ass kissing too and the kings mind may be tainted by irrational thread discussion, hence why a player who is an independent thinker and someone who has a good scum-dar should be our kings. Work downward. Don't feel bad ranking individuals based upon their skill in other games. The kingmaker is [i]soooooo important so hopefully he's already got a good long-term game plan..[/b]
I agree with hidden king plan. As his role will be revealed anyway when making the kill, I do not see benefit to it now. In fact I would generally not favour claiming until the moment of deed itself. Can anyone offer up constructive argument on why king shouldn't follow the majority besides the vague "mafia can influence lynch" please?
On November 09 2010 14:20 Amber[LighT] wrote: Don't you think it would be wise for the assassins to take advantage of eliminating these roles so they can't be used in the late game?
You completely misinterpreted my post and went ahead to stretch what I thought about how to execute this game in such a way to make me appear as though I'm negative. It would be wise for you to do a little more research before jumping to conclusions on the vote train.
Hopefully the king is not going to act irrationally and come to ridiculous conclusions and justifications for their kills. I'm not going to "vote" for anybody for now since I don't really believe it's going to create a good pro-town atmosphere. The first day kill is going to be bitter for everybody regardless of who we choose.
Don't forget... there's only 9 of us...
Here you give no actual substantive response to both me and several others in the thread that point out the enormous advantages given to the town, and instead rely on a weak defense that I'm stretching your words. How is it remotely a good idea to give the reds any possibility to kill a townie without consequence? As Hesmyrr mentioned, following this pattern means we will simply default to the standard F9 setup, which has been proven time and time again to be reasonably balanced for the town despite the mafia's ability to influence the arguments. Right now it just appears that you're just trying to leave room for the reds to kill a town without consequence when a red mayor comes around.
In your haste, you yourself proved why we should not allow the king to kill whomever he wants, as he can then
act irrationally and come to ridiculous conclusions and justifications for their kills
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
I agree. The king should not roleclaim. This way the mafia can not manipulate the king directly and he can participate in the town discussion without being pushed in a direction intentionally.
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
the only ones that really "need to find out what the king is thinking" are the assassins.
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
the only ones that really "need to find out what the king is thinking" are the assassins.
How so?
Note that there are no actions from the assassins before the king decides who to kill. The assassins will just have to post and discuss like the rest of town. It's a small game, shouldn't be that hard to keep active and post at least semi-constructively.
So. I just woke up, and I skimmed through the thread. I agree that we should really push inactive players to talk, but I disagree that king should listen to town. It should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town.
So no, excuses like "I had a gut feeling" won't really hold if 8 people are voting for someone and the king choses to kill someone else. That would be an obvious tell.
WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
On November 09 2010 14:20 Amber[LighT] wrote: Don't you think it would be wise for the assassins to take advantage of eliminating these roles so they can't be used in the late game?
You completely misinterpreted my post and went ahead to stretch what I thought about how to execute this game in such a way to make me appear as though I'm negative. It would be wise for you to do a little more research before jumping to conclusions on the vote train.
Hopefully the king is not going to act irrationally and come to ridiculous conclusions and justifications for their kills. I'm not going to "vote" for anybody for now since I don't really believe it's going to create a good pro-town atmosphere. The first day kill is going to be bitter for everybody regardless of who we choose.
Don't forget... there's only 9 of us...
Here you give no actual substantive response to both me and several others in the thread that point out the enormous advantages given to the town, and instead rely on a weak defense that I'm stretching your words. How is it remotely a good idea to give the reds any possibility to kill a townie without consequence? As Hesmyrr mentioned, following this pattern means we will simply default to the standard F9 setup, which has been proven time and time again to be reasonably balanced for the town despite the mafia's ability to influence the arguments. Right now it just appears that you're just trying to leave room for the reds to kill a town without consequence when a red mayor comes around.
In your haste, you yourself proved why we should not allow the king to kill whomever he wants, as he can then
act irrationally and come to ridiculous conclusions and justifications for their kills
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
So, here I ask again:
King, who are you?
You have some incredible invested interest in me, and I'm flattered. I also find it ironic that we're sitting on complete opposite ends of the spectrum, and as you try and incriminate me you're also looking for the king. This leads me to believe that you are not the king. So I know the kingmaker did a good job picking a good and reasonable king.
King, despite what the above says, roleclaiming so quickly is not smart. Stay in the shadows and decide for yourself. Feel free to post, but don't outright claim.
PMing is not something we should worry about. You're using a game mechanic to justify your faulty reasoning for a roleclaim. The ability to PM was an incredibly strong mechanic in the hands of the town, not the assassins. You are twisting facts with mechanic discussion, all while trying to push for my death. You got balls.
There is an incredible disadvantage to the town knowing who the king was. I stated it already, but you shrugged it off. So I'm going to shrug your nonsense off. If you want I'll continue to discredit you all game. I have no problem doing this, and I'd be more than happy to play the game this way.
You should probably pick a plan that's going to benefit the town in the long run, not gun for a player and hope things get better tomorrow. Hope everyone is seeing what exactly is going on here lol.
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
If there's a 5-3 split chances are the mafia influenced a decision. This is such a small game where math can actually be used to determine alignment. Want to vote? Fine lets vote. It's going to give the assassins one extra opportunity to get their camouflage set up to remain unnoticed. The assassins have a lot of power here. They can manipulate the vote count in either favor.
They can push on the majority (5-3 2 mafia votes on majority). This means that the town would know that 2 people on the list of 5 are probably mafia. They can push on the minority (5-3 2 mafia votes on minority). This means that the assassins are looking to assimilate themselves into the town. They're going to use this to their advantage. They could split votes (5-3 1 mafia vote on each). This means we have no shot of knowing where the assassins want their votes to go. We just know that our 2 choices were bad. In this scenario using the merlin ability on Day 1 is highly advantageous. This cancels the day 1 vote and gives us shifty intel. Whether we choose to use the information gained is up to us and the king at the time, ultimately. They could also vote for someone completely different. This would be highly unlikely and easy for the town to spot if they look carefully. Problem is a villager will flip and the town will accuse the two major parties.
The voting system is incredibly flawed in this type of a game. Giving the King ultimate say relieves a lot of the burden of analyzing the game simply on voting trends. The King makes a decision, and we hold the King accountable depending on the analysis of the day. We can vote, but the King should not be bound to the majority. He's a King after all, and we didn't vote for him.
Just one question though, if we use the relics on day one, there's an off-chance that we slay the kingmaker or the hero.
Both of these are somewhat bad to the town in the long run: 1. The kingmaker dies -> New kingmaker -> Could be better, could be worse, but in the end it's one blue dead so overall it's bad for the town.
2. The hero dies -> This is obviously bad because in the event that one of the kings decides to kill the hero, it will blow up in their faces, and we'll also have one (possibly two) blues confirmed.
I'm just saying that statistically speaking, using a relic will most likely get a townie killed (if I understand this correctly). So I'm not sure it's a smart idea.
On the other hand, I was lynched in day1 in the king-assassin game because I dared to defend myself, so I'm not sure if the "majority decision" is better.
Firstly, we need a united town. We need some sort of policy regarding the kings. If we're going to decide to let the king lynch people independently, we cannot make the argument later that 'you should have followed majority'. At the same time, if we force the king to follow majority, the must hold him accountable
On November 09 2010 16:22 DoctorHelvetica wrote: I agree. The king should not roleclaim. This way the mafia can not manipulate the king directly and he can participate in the town discussion without being pushed in a direction intentionally.
And we fear this because the assassins have sercretz mind control abilities </sarcasm>
You are saying that 1) The king is smart enough to make his own decisions. and 2) The king is too easily influenced.
On November 09 2010 16:22 DoctorHelvetica wrote: I agree. The king should not roleclaim. This way the mafia can not manipulate the king directly and he can participate in the town discussion without being pushed in a direction intentionally.
Read my earlier post about why the king should roleclaim.
If we force the king to obey the vote then the game itself loses purpose. He must have at least SOME freedom of choice. Perhaps make his vote count more? I'm thinking something in the lines of: players number divided to 3, rounded up if it's over x,5 and down if it's under x,5
So he'll have 3 votes on day one (but this includes his own vote as a townie, ofc), two votes on day 2 (assuming 3 people died), and so on.
I fail to see the point in having a new king each day if he'll just have to 100% follow the majority. It would be just pointless.
As for him revealing or not, I think it should be up to him. He will be revealed after he makes his move anyway, so you can't make a really strong argument either way. It should be up to them, actually.
Overall, I think you guys are taking a lot out of this game by trying to make the king as non-powerful as possible.
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
the only ones that really "need to find out what the king is thinking" are the assassins.
Coagulation, could you please be a bit more active and join the discussion?
Thanks
Anyways, we should now move discuss whether or not we should use Merlin I am against using Merlin, as it is a waste of a lynch. Remember, lylo is not delayed when we use Merlin.
On November 10 2010 02:28 LSB wrote: Okay. This is going to be quick
Firstly, we need a united town. We need some sort of policy regarding the kings. If we're going to decide to let the king lynch people independently, we cannot make the argument later that 'you should have followed majority'. At the same time, if we force the king to follow majority, the must hold him accountable
On November 09 2010 16:22 DoctorHelvetica wrote: I agree. The king should not roleclaim. This way the mafia can not manipulate the king directly and he can participate in the town discussion without being pushed in a direction intentionally.
And we fear this because the assassins have sercretz mind control abilities </sarcasm>
You are saying that 1) The king is smart enough to make his own decisions. and 2) The king is too easily influenced.
Please clarify
Unless the king is Coagulation I think he should be allowed to scumhunt on his own. most of the players in this game are decent or good.
No I'm not saying the assassins have secretz mind control. But if both get active, they can manipulate the shit out of the town. If they know the king then they can push him directly and put pressure on him directly to do what they want to do.
If they don't the king, then they can't. They have to focus manipulation on the town as a whole which is much more difficult. Honestly just one good scum poster can totally change the direction of a bandwagon. Early game bandwagons are very often directed by scum when the town has no real viable scumtargets, that's why I think the king should act somewhat independently.
If the town doesn't know the king, it doesn't bust their balls at all. At the end of the day, the king is held accountable for what he does and he must reveal himself eventually.
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
If we allow the king to go against majority, all that's going to happen is the assassins are going to be able to crowned, write up an analysis against a random player. Post the analysis and get the town to waste a lynch.
I don't buy the 'the king should have fun' argument. Remember, the problem is that the King is a very big danger and hold lots of power. Play to win, not to 'roleplay'
On November 10 2010 02:28 LSB wrote: Okay. This is going to be quick
Firstly, we need a united town. We need some sort of policy regarding the kings. If we're going to decide to let the king lynch people independently, we cannot make the argument later that 'you should have followed majority'. At the same time, if we force the king to follow majority, the must hold him accountable
On November 09 2010 16:22 DoctorHelvetica wrote: I agree. The king should not roleclaim. This way the mafia can not manipulate the king directly and he can participate in the town discussion without being pushed in a direction intentionally.
And we fear this because the assassins have sercretz mind control abilities </sarcasm>
You are saying that 1) The king is smart enough to make his own decisions. and 2) The king is too easily influenced.
Please clarify
Unless the king is Coagulation I think he should be allowed to scumhunt on his own. most of the players in this game are decent or good.
No I'm not saying the assassins have secretz mind control. But if both get active, they can manipulate the shit out of the town. If they know the king then they can push him directly and put pressure on him directly to do what they want to do.
If they don't the king, then they can't. They have to focus manipulation on the town as a whole which is much more difficult. Honestly just one good scum poster can totally change the direction of a bandwagon. Early game bandwagons are very often directed by scum when the town has no real viable scumtargets, that's why I think the king should act somewhat independently.
If the town doesn't know the king, it doesn't bust their balls at all. At the end of the day, the king is held accountable for what he does and he must reveal himself eventually.
This is assuming that the king decides to go with his 'gut decision'. The king being influenced wouldn't be an issue if he is following the vote of the majority. This problem only arises if we allow an independent king.
I don't understand what you mean by Early Game bandwagons. Sure, if this was micro mafia iv where people ran around not knowing what to do. But this town is pretty experienced. We are talking about people with multiple games underneath their belt. People aren't going to jump on a bandwagon because it looks cool.
Lastly, you forget the town. We can stop manipulations. In fact, public discussion is best because it show manipulations and brings light to the mafia. In games where not much discussion occurs, mafia easily lay back and watch the town turn on themselves.
Let's look at your plan. The king should stay hidden, and 1 hour from the end, pop up, and kill someone because 'he thought he was scummy'. This is extremely mafia favored.
To me, all it seems like what you are doing is trying to create a mafia favored environment where the town has no control over the lynches
This is the big issue. Making sure the town has control over the lynches Town KP is Always Always Always better than mafia KP
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
If we allow the king to go against majority, all that's going to happen is the assassins are going to be able to crowned, write up an analysis against a random player. Post the analysis and get the town to waste a lynch.
I don't buy the 'the king should have fun' argument. Remember, the problem is that the King is a very big danger and hold lots of power. Play to win, not to 'roleplay'
Fair enough.
You don't have to explain the easy bandwagons, as I said, I got raped for simply counter-attacking the guy who attacked me in the Assassin game. Nobody even bothered to read my posts and see if they made any sense from a Bodyguard point of view. But I digress.
However, the king is only a big danger if he's on his own. There is NO way that a king who will go against the majority will not be held accountable. I think that it's very well worth having the king go totally against town and kill a blue if in return he will get killed day 2 and flip red.
So no, I don't think it's very easy for someone to get away with killing whoever they want, and bandwagons can be started by anyone, king doesn't have much to do with that.
At the very least king should have one extra vote or something. You are only judging from the perspective of being a townie, but what if there's a king who is really sure (based on a gut feeling) that someone is an assassin? What will he do? He might even invoke Merlin or do silly things like that just out of frustration of not being listened to by the town.
Either way, I'll go with any decision, but forcing king to be normal townie will probably cause more bad than it does good. Just my two cents.
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
If we allow the king to go against majority, all that's going to happen is the assassins are going to be able to crowned, write up an analysis against a random player. Post the analysis and get the town to waste a lynch.
I don't buy the 'the king should have fun' argument. Remember, the problem is that the King is a very big danger and hold lots of power. Play to win, not to 'roleplay'
Fair enough.
You don't have to explain the easy bandwagons, as I said, I got raped for simply counter-attacking the guy who attacked me in the Assassin game. Nobody even bothered to read my posts and see if they made any sense from a Bodyguard point of view. But I digress.
However, the king is only a big danger if he's on his own. There is NO way that a king who will go against the majority will not be held accountable. I think that it's very well worth having the king go totally against town and kill a blue if in return he will get killed day 2 and flip red.
So no, I don't think it's very easy for someone to get away with killing whoever they want, and bandwagons can be started by anyone, king doesn't have much to do with that.
At the very least king should have one extra vote or something. You are only judging from the perspective of being a townie, but what if there's a king who is really sure (based on a gut feeling) that someone is an assassin? What will he do? He might even invoke Merlin or do silly things like that just out of frustration of not being listened to by the town.
Either way, I'll go with any decision, but forcing king to be normal townie will probably cause more bad than it does good. Just my two cents.
Exactly. The issue I'm seeking to prevent is what if the king goes against majority. If we have no definitive statement, there will be no way to tell if a king is scum or town.
But I see your point about a frustrated townie. Although I usually would say "suck it up and do what's best". I just thought of this.
New thought How about this. The king can announce, at least 24 hours beforehand who he is going to lynch. And then he must defend his lynch and reasoning, and satisfy the town, or go with the majority opinion.
I am okay with this, as it's a lot more transparent, and we can easily tell if the king is trying to find scum, or if the king is just trying to make a flimsy case against someone.
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
If we allow the king to go against majority, all that's going to happen is the assassins are going to be able to crowned, write up an analysis against a random player. Post the analysis and get the town to waste a lynch.
I don't buy the 'the king should have fun' argument. Remember, the problem is that the King is a very big danger and hold lots of power. Play to win, not to 'roleplay'
Fair enough.
You don't have to explain the easy bandwagons, as I said, I got raped for simply counter-attacking the guy who attacked me in the Assassin game. Nobody even bothered to read my posts and see if they made any sense from a Bodyguard point of view. But I digress.
However, the king is only a big danger if he's on his own. There is NO way that a king who will go against the majority will not be held accountable. I think that it's very well worth having the king go totally against town and kill a blue if in return he will get killed day 2 and flip red.
So no, I don't think it's very easy for someone to get away with killing whoever they want, and bandwagons can be started by anyone, king doesn't have much to do with that.
At the very least king should have one extra vote or something. You are only judging from the perspective of being a townie, but what if there's a king who is really sure (based on a gut feeling) that someone is an assassin? What will he do? He might even invoke Merlin or do silly things like that just out of frustration of not being listened to by the town.
Either way, I'll go with any decision, but forcing king to be normal townie will probably cause more bad than it does good. Just my two cents.
Exactly. The issue I'm seeking to prevent is what if the king goes against majority. If we have no definitive statement, there will be no way to tell if a king is scum or town.
But I see your point about a frustrated townie. Although I usually would say "suck it up and do what's best". I just thought of this.
New thought How about this. The king can announce, at least 24 hours beforehand who he is going to lynch. And then he must defend his lynch and reasoning, and satisfy the town, or go with the majority opinion.
I am okay with this, as it's a lot more transparent, and we can easily tell if the king is trying to find scum, or if the king is just trying to make a flimsy case against someone.
I am on board with this idea. The King could probably give a list of 2 people that should be up for a lynch. This might encourage more discussion. By putting on player under the radar you're going to have 1 player vs. the town. No one is going to step up and defend someone unknowingly. Giving the King the task of identifying and examining 2 players means that his analytical reasoning should remain constant, and it gives the town more leeway.
I could only imagine an assassin King coming up with some BS as to why candidate X should be lynched, and the town just idly agrees while candidate X is screaming at the other players that they aren't being reasonable. This is where the King should absolve his power. When it comes to discussion, he should remember that he is still just another townie.
When should the King announce his presence? Right at the start of day? Wait 24 hours after each day post?
no it's not about taking town control away from the lynches
listening to the "town" 9 times out of 10 is listening to the mafia. the king should not be a robot that does whatever the "town" says, he should of course seriously consider the town discussion
but do you really think the assassins won't manipulate the shit out of bandwagons? the whole point of the king is to take that away from scum
if we just have the king do whatever the town says, we're handing the mafia the power to control our lynches not the opposite
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
If we allow the king to go against majority, all that's going to happen is the assassins are going to be able to crowned, write up an analysis against a random player. Post the analysis and get the town to waste a lynch.
I don't buy the 'the king should have fun' argument. Remember, the problem is that the King is a very big danger and hold lots of power. Play to win, not to 'roleplay'
Fair enough.
You don't have to explain the easy bandwagons, as I said, I got raped for simply counter-attacking the guy who attacked me in the Assassin game. Nobody even bothered to read my posts and see if they made any sense from a Bodyguard point of view. But I digress.
However, the king is only a big danger if he's on his own. There is NO way that a king who will go against the majority will not be held accountable. I think that it's very well worth having the king go totally against town and kill a blue if in return he will get killed day 2 and flip red.
So no, I don't think it's very easy for someone to get away with killing whoever they want, and bandwagons can be started by anyone, king doesn't have much to do with that.
At the very least king should have one extra vote or something. You are only judging from the perspective of being a townie, but what if there's a king who is really sure (based on a gut feeling) that someone is an assassin? What will he do? He might even invoke Merlin or do silly things like that just out of frustration of not being listened to by the town.
Either way, I'll go with any decision, but forcing king to be normal townie will probably cause more bad than it does good. Just my two cents.
Exactly. The issue I'm seeking to prevent is what if the king goes against majority. If we have no definitive statement, there will be no way to tell if a king is scum or town.
But I see your point about a frustrated townie. Although I usually would say "suck it up and do what's best". I just thought of this.
New thought How about this. The king can announce, at least 24 hours beforehand who he is going to lynch. And then he must defend his lynch and reasoning, and satisfy the town, or go with the majority opinion.
I am okay with this, as it's a lot more transparent, and we can easily tell if the king is trying to find scum, or if the king is just trying to make a flimsy case against someone.
I am on board with this idea. The King could probably give a list of 2 people that should be up for a lynch. This might encourage more discussion. By putting on player under the radar you're going to have 1 player vs. the town. No one is going to step up and defend someone unknowingly. Giving the King the task of identifying and examining 2 players means that his analytical reasoning should remain constant, and it gives the town more leeway.
I imagine it to be more like. 1 player vs. the king. Basically its a test to see how well the king's reasoning works. If the king's reasoning sucks and is just BS, the king will have to switch targets.
This should solve the problem with defense, as people are pretty prone to attacking arguments.
The only problem with putting up a list of two people, is the mafia could just put up a list of 2 townies. One player means we can always switch to a second choice if needed.
I could only imagine an assassin King coming up with some BS as to why candidate X should be lynched, and the town just idly agrees while candidate X is screaming at the other players that they aren't being reasonable. This is where the King should absolve his power. When it comes to discussion, he should remember that he is still just another townie.
I don't think this is going to be a problem, especially considering how active this game is currently. I will commit to analyzing arguments. And I expects others to do the same
When should the King announce his presence? Right at the start of day? Wait 24 hours after each day post?
So here are what I believe are acceptable options for the king.
Roleclaimed King The King Roleclaims ASAP, and then the town discusses who to lynch. The King then will execute whoever has the most vote, with the king's vote counting as 1.5 votes (to break ties). This is if the King has not found a scum yet, or is not confident in his own abilities.
Judgment king King Roleclaims Before 24 hours are up. He then declares who he is going to execute (make sure you don't accidentally execute them), and has a long post with all his reasoning. The town will then discuss this and the king will defend his arguments.
If the kings arguments hold up. He can proceed to lynch. If the kings arguments fail, he can either 1) Find someone else to attack, or 2) Go with town majority opinion of who to lynch (The town can decide to use a relic)
On November 10 2010 03:37 DoctorHelvetica wrote: no it's not about taking town control away from the lynches
listening to the "town" 9 times out of 10 is listening to the mafia. the king should not be a robot that does whatever the "town" says, he should of course seriously consider the town discussion
but do you really think the assassins won't manipulate the shit out of bandwagons? the whole point of the king is to take that away from scum
if we just have the king do whatever the town says, we're handing the mafia the power to control our lynches not the opposite
What do you think about the new idea? That should help with the 'manipulating bandwagons'. Secondly, you forget about town defense against scum. We can see how these manipulations are working, and scum hunt from these manipulations.
Lastly, the king will be drawing his decisions from the thread, who says the scum isn't manipulating the thread? You propose to 'remove scum manipulations' however it will not work
You have consistently ignored the possibility of an assassin king. What is your solution? Throw in the hat and call it a game? I'm not doing that
I am the king and I am going to lynch coagulation. He is our worst player and offers little value to the town while he also fits the bill of "inactive"
No one comes off as scummy to me quite yet. I disagree with a lot of what LSB is saying and I don't like the extremity of the conclusions he is drawing but thats not enough.
There's one part of the Merlin description that makes me irk: "Merlin likes to play tricks on young Kings and may lie!"
Now I don't know what that means, but it could be that it would lie if you use it early? Or it would only tell the truth to kings that were elected once before? I don't know but it just seems odd.
On November 10 2010 05:11 Pandain wrote: Are we not going to use merlin then? I mean, if we're not sure at all, doesn't 'merlin give us the best chance?
Of course, at the very least, wait for him to respond.
Merlin just brings us close to lylo. Remember the town only can have 2 mislynches before lylo.
If we use the merlin, we can only have 1 mislynch before lylo.
On November 10 2010 05:47 BrownBear wrote: Let's hear Coag defend himself before we go ahead and execute.
how can you defend being inactive and bad
1.You could wait for him to talk for one... 2.It's not just that about coag, by waiting longer we can have more time, having more people talk. More information=good.
On November 10 2010 05:47 BrownBear wrote: Let's hear Coag defend himself before we go ahead and execute.
how can you defend being inactive and bad
Because we don't want to lynch based off of JUST being inactive and bad?
-----
Player 1: "Hey, Player 2 is inactive and terrible. I'm king. I'm going to kill him before the end of the day because of this."
Players 3-9: "Well, Player 2 is inactive and bad. I guess I don't have any problems with killing him..."
Player 1: "Awesome! EXECUTE PLAYER 2!!!"
Player 2 flips green
Player 1: "Well, shit. At least he was inactive and bad. Now, lets look at the posts today and analyze... wait... fuck."
-----
That shit ain't gonna fly here. If no better option exists at or near the end of the day, go ahead and lynch Coag, but under no circumstances should you be executing people until the last possible minute.
If anyone turns this into Bang Bang Mafia I will make it my personal goal to get them executed as soon as possible.
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
the only ones that really "need to find out what the king is thinking" are the assassins.
Coag's second post (of 2). This is kind of just blatantly wrong. Town absolutely needs to figure out what the king's thinking and logic is. Kingmaker is not infallible, an Assassin-King could absolutely be chosen, and it's town's duty to not only advise the king on a scummy player to lynch, but also attempt to figure out the King's role. If the king is acting scummy/not agreeing with town/being evasive/executing without fully discussing why or explaining himself... chances are he's got something to hide.
The thing I can't tell here is whether this is Coag deliberately trying to mislead town, or whether it's just Coag being an idiot.
Analysis is hard when the player doesn't give you anything to analyze.
On November 10 2010 05:47 BrownBear wrote: Let's hear Coag defend himself before we go ahead and execute.
how can you defend being inactive and bad
1.You could wait for him to talk for one... 2.It's not just that about coag, by waiting longer we can have more time, having more people talk. More information=good.
@Lsb: How does merlin affect the # of mislynches?
Lets assume that no assassins get killed.
Day 1: 7-2 Night 1: 6-2 Day 2: 5-2 Night 2: 4-2 Day 3: 3-2 LYLO
Lets say we use merlin
Day 1: 7-2 Merlin! Night 1: 7-2 Day 2: 6-2 Night 2: 5-2 Day 3: 4-2 LYLO
On November 10 2010 04:04 LSB wrote: If coagulation doesn't do anything else besides the two posts that he has right now, I'm willing to support you.
Coagulation. If your town, please start giving input on the few ideas that have been presented. I want to hear your opinion on
1) Lynching inactives http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=167304¤tpage=2#30 generally from what i have seen so far lynching inactives only gets a town role killed. i dont think lynching an inactive is the way to go in any mafia game and i have never ever used it as a reason. if your lynching inactives you might as well just lynch the most active. 2) Old plan, should the king be forced to follow the town's opinion? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=167304¤tpage=2#27 no the king needs to vote who he feels he personally needs to vote. this is the best aspect of the game that puts it in towns favor. a vote outside the influince of the scums grasp is. 3) New plan, do you agree? Disagree? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=167304¤tpage=6#101 I dont think the king should be forced to role claim. i think it only gives the scum extra information that they can use when there is absolutely no reason at all that town needs to know who the king is during a lynch debate. In fact, it would be best if everyone made sure they have addressed, or will address these three issues
On November 10 2010 04:04 LSB wrote: If coagulation doesn't do anything else besides the two posts that he has right now, I'm willing to support you.
Coagulation. If your town, please start giving input on the few ideas that have been presented. I want to hear your opinion on
1) Lynching inactives http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=167304¤tpage=2#30 generally from what i have seen so far lynching inactives only gets a town role killed. i dont think lynching an inactive is the way to go in any mafia game and i have never ever used it as a reason. if your lynching inactives you might as well just lynch the most active. 2) Old plan, should the king be forced to follow the town's opinion? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=167304¤tpage=2#27 no the king needs to vote who he feels he personally needs to vote. this is the best aspect of the game that puts it in towns favor. a vote outside the influince of the scums grasp 3) New plan, do you agree? Disagree? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=167304¤tpage=6#101 I dont think the king should be forced to role claim. i think it only gives the scum extra information that they can use when there is absolutely no reason at all that town needs to know who the king is during a lynch debate. In fact, it would be best if everyone made sure they have addressed, or will address these three issues
On November 10 2010 07:35 Coagulation wrote: generally from what i have seen so far lynching inactives only gets a town role killed. i dont think lynching an inactive is the way to go in any mafia game and i have never ever used it as a reason. if your lynching inactives you might as well just lynch the most active.
The difference is that an inactive does not help the town in away way shape or form. Mafia have no incentive to hit an inactive person as they are essentially sheep. Inactive people will cause us to waste a lynch later on the road. I would say that inactive players are anti-town due to the problem with separating the wolves from the sheep.
no the king needs to vote who he feels he personally needs to vote. this is the best aspect of the game that puts it in towns favor. a vote outside the influince of the scums grasp is.
What if the scum is the king? Check back through the thread, I made some points on this already
I dont think the king should be forced to role claim. i think it only gives the scum extra information that they can use when there is absolutely no reason at all that town needs to know who the king is during a lynch debate.
Again, please look at the 'what if the scum is king' argument. We need to make sure the king doesn't just do anything he wants. What extra information would the scum get once they know someone is king?
I have to admit, though, LSB has been kinda making me wonder all game... he's not playing the way I've come to expect out of him. Not enough to make me say "YO LETS KILL DIS MOTHAFUCKA" but enough to worry about him. A lot.
On November 10 2010 07:42 BrownBear wrote: influEnce. Not influInce.
Jesus.
I have to admit, though, LSB has been kinda making me wonder all game... he's not playing the way I've come to expect out of him. Not enough to make me say "YO LETS KILL DIS MOTHAFUCKA" but enough to worry about him. A lot.
On November 09 2010 11:56 LSB wrote: Incase you haven't noticed. I'm going to try to cut my spammyness, I want to see how this will go
if scum is king then there is nothing we can do about making his decision help town anyway regardless.
we will see who he is after the lynch right? at that point he would probably be in alot of trouble if he didnt use his head and play pro town. its a double edged sword but i think the benefits outweigh the cons.
On November 10 2010 07:47 Coagulation wrote: if scum is king then there is nothing we can do about making his decision help town anyway regardless.
we will see who he is after the lynch right? at that point he would probably be in alot of trouble if he didnt use his head and play pro town. its a double edged sword but i think the benefits outweigh the cons.
Basically your saying if the king lynches a green, he's probably scum and should be executed the day after?
On November 10 2010 07:47 Coagulation wrote: if scum is king then there is nothing we can do about making his decision help town anyway regardless.
we will see who he is after the lynch right? at that point he would probably be in alot of trouble if he didnt use his head and play pro town. its a double edged sword but i think the benefits outweigh the cons.
Are you kidding? If we scumhunt properly, we can get a scum king to work for us, or out himself as scum as well. It's a win-win situation.
On November 10 2010 07:47 Coagulation wrote: if scum is king then there is nothing we can do about making his decision help town anyway regardless.
we will see who he is after the lynch right? at that point he would probably be in alot of trouble if he didnt use his head and play pro town. its a double edged sword but i think the benefits outweigh the cons.
Basically your saying if the king lynches a green, he's probably scum and should be executed the day after?
nonono not at all.
theres a difference between lynching a green on accident that had scummy behaviors and just lynching a green randomly who was clearly town roled
On November 10 2010 07:47 Coagulation wrote: if scum is king then there is nothing we can do about making his decision help town anyway regardless.
we will see who he is after the lynch right? at that point he would probably be in alot of trouble if he didnt use his head and play pro town. its a double edged sword but i think the benefits outweigh the cons.
Basically your saying if the king lynches a green, he's probably scum and should be executed the day after?
nonono not at all.
theres a difference between lynching a green on accident that had scummy behaviors and just lynching a green randomly who was clearly town roled
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
If we allow the king to go against majority, all that's going to happen is the assassins are going to be able to crowned, write up an analysis against a random player. Post the analysis and get the town to waste a lynch.
I don't buy the 'the king should have fun' argument. Remember, the problem is that the King is a very big danger and hold lots of power. Play to win, not to 'roleplay'
On November 10 2010 07:47 Coagulation wrote: if scum is king then there is nothing we can do about making his decision help town anyway regardless.
we will see who he is after the lynch right? at that point he would probably be in alot of trouble if he didnt use his head and play pro town. its a double edged sword but i think the benefits outweigh the cons.
Basically your saying if the king lynches a green, he's probably scum and should be executed the day after?
nonono not at all.
theres a difference between lynching a green on accident that had scummy behaviors and just lynching a green randomly who was clearly town roled
On November 09 2010 18:56 Hesmyrr wrote: WTF are you keep talking about. So if there is 5-3 split and king goes, "oh guy with 3 votes seem more suspicious imma hammer him" do you have any idea what chaos would ensure thereafter? At the point where king makes a decision where town opinion is not so decisive as your example, everything goes to shit whether the king turns out to be town or not. Like I said, if the king has valid excuse behind his push, then it should be enough to convince the majority into believing his case.
In fact please explain how "t should be pretty obvious if he goes with the general "stream of thought" that the town is going with, or if he just chooses to lynch someone who seems completely random to the town" somehow turns into support for the statement "I disagree that king should listen to town."
Yeah that's pretty much what I'm saying.
I'm sorry, but the king is a cool role. Why do we have to spoil it? It's the player's chance. IF there's a 5-4 vote split, (king's vote is on the 4) the king can lynch whoever he wants, no? That's fair, the imbalance is not that big.
If there's a 5-3 vote split (assuming one player died), then the king has one of those 3 votes. So in fact, it's just a 5-2 vote split (not counting king's vote), so the imbalance is fairly obvious. King has the option of going with the majority, or taking a huge risk and killing the "2-vote". If the 2-vote turns blue, then the king will have a lot to explain for, and it won't be an easy way out. Also, the other 2 voters will be in trouble.
So no, given the fact that there are only 9 players, I don't think there's any way for the king to explain un-town-like moves. I fail to imagine a scenario where the king could justify a "gut feeling" blue kill, unless the votes are actually quite close (note the 5-4 split I was talking about earlier).
If we allow the king to go against majority, all that's going to happen is the assassins are going to be able to crowned, write up an analysis against a random player. Post the analysis and get the town to waste a lynch.
I don't buy the 'the king should have fun' argument. Remember, the problem is that the King is a very big danger and hold lots of power. Play to win, not to 'roleplay'
how about its 100% Circumstantial. Each scenario that occurs and actions chosen will need to be dissected and analyzed and acted upon based on the situation at hand.
there is no 1 overall general strategy that we can adhere to and have a perfect resolution every time.
On November 10 2010 07:39 Coagulation wrote: 1) Lynching inactives generally from what i have seen so far lynching inactives only gets a town role killed. i dont think lynching an inactive is the way to go in any mafia game and i have never ever used it as a reason. if your lynching inactives you might as well just lynch the most active 2) Old plan, should the king be forced to follow the town's opinion? no the king needs to vote who he feels he personally needs to vote. this is the best aspect of the game that puts it in towns favor. a vote outside the influince of the scums grasp 3) New plan, do you agree? Disagree? I dont think the king should be forced to role claim. i think it only gives the scum extra information that they can use when there is absolutely no reason at all that town needs to know who the king is during a lynch debate.
[/red][/b][/i]
1. Wrong. This is a 9 people game. We can't have one dude hiding and giving him the benefit of a doubt. If there were 30+ people I'd get it, but in a small game such as this you have to play your role. You just have to. We just can't have one or two players not being active (thus never drawing suspicion by posting/contributing) and not being punished for it. I'm not gonna have any of this.
2. Yes and no. King should have a stronger hand in voting, but shouldn't go on his own. I mean he could, but he should and probably will be held accountable for any dumb moves.
3. I'm fine either way. But all kings should do the same or pick from the same two options in our plan.
I'll take a compromise plan if it means taking some power away from them. Also it's not matter of having perfect strategy - there hardly is never one except in broken setups - it is just trying to eliminate unnecessary variables and default back to what is familiar.
Also will try to get my opinion on Coagulation and others later on. Nothing wrong with diversifying our interests I guess.
i think we should use random lynch random lynch would have a higher chance of hitting a red than lynching me im gonna tell you this right now im not a fucking red dont waste the lynch on me its just gonna slow town down.
Well no offence Coag, but nobody wants to get lynched.
And if we were to use Excalibur, then even the king, the kingmaker and the town hero is in danger of being slain. Why would we bother with that instead of picking someone who hasn't been active, helpful, etc.
So far it's just 6-7 pages of posts, so the lynch is gonna be mostly random anyway, but I'd rather lynch someone who looks particularly scummy or not helpful, then risk losing the hero/kingmaker which might be the strongest weapons that the town have.
Heck, even if the king chooses to lynch the town hero, we'd still have one blue confirmed out of 8 (12,5%) remaining, which is better than Excalibur killing him and being sure of 0/8.
Hesmyrr is flying a little bit under the radar, kinda parroting points, not really contributing much. I'd consider lynching him over Coagulation if Coag wasn't such a nuisance on both sides of the coin.
I feel bad for Coag though, if this keeps up he'll be day 1 lynch in every game he plays.
I don't think Coag is the new Bill Murray... I think we're too focused on him honestly. I'd have him as a execute-if-we-have-no-better-options candidate.
It's more of a meta-thing, but I feel like he's posting out of character, and a lot of his posts just rehash stuff already said, ask other people for their opinion, or correct other people, rather than add new content. He could be a mafia flying under the radar, or I could just be paranoid.
Either way, I'll look at his posts later. Tired now.
On November 11 2010 11:22 BrownBear wrote: It's more of a meta-thing, but I feel like he's posting out of character, and a lot of his posts just rehash stuff already said, ask other people for their opinion, or correct other people, rather than add new content. He could be a mafia flying under the radar, or I could just be paranoid.
Either way, I'll look at his posts later. Tired now.
Very interesting. I understand the posting out of character. But can you please tell me about this 'rehashing'? Or flying under the radar?
Off with his head! Off with his head! Off with his head!
The Villagers chant, they scream and they growl! They want Justice tonight and they want it right now! Do your duty dear King for the Assassins do prowl! Let the blade cut deep and hope thy blood does run foul!
The Executioner grabs Coagulation's struggling body and forearms him to the back of the head.
Coagulation: Oh come on my dear man, what ever happened to some bloody dignity! I'm innocent! Unhand me!
The Executioner quickly stuffs some pork lining into his mouth to quiet his squelching. There shall be no saving this poor villain!
As King DoctorHelvetica sits on his throne, he wonders aloud - My, My, this beard sure has grown.
The Executioner winds back and the blade starts to twirl The Villagers are fascinated their minds in a whirl The steel strikes the flesh and the King starts to frown
It is now Night 1, so send in your actions! You have 24 hours to make do with your faction! Tomorrow, a new King shall rise to lead you to victory. But be careful my friends - some of them may be tricky...
I feel like If I didn't bump this, no one would remember it and it would go down in oblivion. And I would know that, but just laugh to myself and bump it in a year for future laughs.
It's kinda arbitrary right now. I really wish the king revealed himself early and we went through the strict vote-for-lynch system. Do it any other way and the mafia has way too much sway over what could happen.
And the kingmaker probably didn't even look at the "red"-ness of any player and just chose DrH because he's experienced.
Note that DrH has been a red in every single game except 1 - hopefully you'll consider your choice a bit longer before just insta-choosing an experienced player.
On November 12 2010 17:12 orgolove wrote: It's kinda arbitrary right now. I really wish the king revealed himself early and we went through the strict vote-for-lynch system. Do it any other way and the mafia has way too much sway over what could happen.
And the kingmaker probably didn't even look at the "red"-ness of any player and just chose DrH because he's experienced.
Note that DrH has been a red in every single game except 1 - hopefully you'll consider your choice a bit longer before just insta-choosing an experienced player.
how is me being a red in other games even a point?
thats a pretty shitty attempt at making me look bad. I don't see why it's worth mentioning unless you want to talk about my behavior as mafia vs my behavior as town
please don't pursue a grudge against me like you did in the last game, it clouds your judgment and makes you look bad. this is just metagaming without purpose. if the kingmaker has to choose a king within an hour of the game starting how is he able to make a choice based on "redness"? that's laughable. of course the kingmaker should pick an experienced player lol
oh but i've been red in every game except 1 therefore i MUST be red in this one kingmaker is such an idiot
who should I have lynched instead orgolove? I didn't lynch amber because i thought your arguments were bogus and no one seems to have given any serious dissent to my opinion. although I'm sure with your expert pro-town play you would have surely 100% gotten a red on the first day eh
Alas, oh look! A new King has been chosen! It is now Day 2, and all have awoken! But mischief is back! Evil is afoot! People are dying, things are not well Too bad for the Villagers, our good Doctor now rots in Hell
Doctor.H, Town Hero has been killed!
7 little Villagers meet in the Town Square 5 of them are good, noble and fair 1 is the maker of Kings with power The Hero is dead, once known for his valor 2 of them villains that make you cower And one shall be crowned King at this important hour!
Day 2 ends @ 11:00 ET/12:00KST on Saturday November 13th
Seriously, if town wants to stand a chance in this game then everyone should get to posting. This game has been much slower than I expected, and if people don't post then we might as well random-kill, which will probably lose the game for town.
At this point it's much to easy for mafia to sit back and slay whoever they want.
I've gone through the posts and Dr.H didn't do anything that would even hint at him being town hero, so I don't think he got killed because of that. He also didn't straight-out accuse anyone other than Coag, who was proven town, so basically we have zero leads at the start of day 2.
All I can hope for is that people start playing. As far as there's no posts involved, I'd vote for the inactives. I know it's a crappy idea since they are probably town, like BrownBear said, but, as I said before, this is too small of a game. Only 7 people left. We need to hear opinions, see people trying to play. Come on guys, wake up.
Mmm I just realized I might be actually into this game now that my evil deeds are done in Insane Liquidonia. So contribution time!
Some notes: I doubt orgolove is red, since why would he make himself linked to Dr. H when the night actions I would've assumed would already have been sent(past original time.) This could just be a whole wifom thing, but I doubt it.
Idk don't discount Orgolove just yet. Just because DrH flipped doesn't guarantee anything. It would seem that the assassins went for a dead-end route. They picked a target that wouldn't lead back to any mafia connections. Think about the people who targeted who on Day 1. Think of everyone who put pressure on Coag. Chances are one of the people in that list is mafia. DrH did more-or-less enhance the lynching but the chances of the assassins backing that decision were probably pretty high.
I think Orgolove is my biggest suspect since he was the only person that threw out a blank accusation yesterday (against me). The pressure wasn't pushed after DrH stepped up and named his lynch, so I'm a bit suspicious of this.
I'd like to hear more from BrownBear & Hesmyrr since they're playing on the fairly quiet side.
On November 12 2010 22:55 Amber[LighT] wrote: Idk don't discount Orgolove just yet. Just because DrH flipped doesn't guarantee anything. It would seem that the assassins went for a dead-end route. They picked a target that wouldn't lead back to any mafia connections. Think about the people who targeted who on Day 1. Think of everyone who put pressure on Coag. Chances are one of the people in that list is mafia. DrH did more-or-less enhance the lynching but the chances of the assassins backing that decision were probably pretty high.
I think Orgolove is my biggest suspect since he was the only person that threw out a blank accusation yesterday (against me). The pressure wasn't pushed after DrH stepped up and named his lynch, so I'm a bit suspicious of this.
I'd like to hear more from BrownBear & Hesmyrr since they're playing on the fairly quiet side.
Only thing about Orgolove is just right before the day post, he decided to make a (kindof sucky) accusation against DoctorH. And I don't think the mafia is dumb enough to attack someone who they are going to kill.
However, we can't discount the fact that possibly Orgo was looking for anti-Doc sentiment in the town
FOS: Brownbear Brownbear makes three significant points in the game.
1) Brownbear dodges the main debate He argues against lynching inactives + Show Spoiler +
On November 09 2010 12:36 BrownBear wrote: Well, I'm looking at the "lynch an inactive" plan, and I don't really think it's that smart, given that we especially don't want to get anywhere near LYLO. I think we really should be trying to drop an Assassin right now: it's totally doable this stage in the game, and if we fall into the "hurr durr lets just lynch inactive" trap TL town usually falls into, it's going to bite us in the ass.
On November 09 2010 12:43 BrownBear wrote: Well, obviously, but I'm too used to seeing a bunch of people vote on an inactive, go AFK for the rest of the cycle, and then the poor guy dies, even if he shows up.
I'm just saying, king should be using his judgement here. If town wants to kill a dude "for being inactive" but the dude has posted, should king go ahead and kill the dude? Not unless the king thinks he's actually an assassin, or the king himself is an assassin.
Part of the awesome part of having a King is that the king reveals a lot about HIS role by how he acts. If we force him to be our puppet, that doesn't tell us much at all. Giving the kings a bit more leeway might actually make an Assassin-King work in our favor - we thrust him into the spotlight, make him more likely to screw up, and thus stand a better chance of catching him.
I'm in favor of ADVISING the king, but not forcing him to follow our orders. Gives us more to work with.
Also, whoever is the king should be held to a VERY HIGH standard of activity, for the same reason: we know they're king, but we want to know as much more about them as we can.
Although this isn't necessarily pro-town or anti-town, its more of an attempt to lurk and try to get some easy posts in. The inactive debate has happened countless times before and brownbear easily could pull arguments without actually contributing to the town. Now, if this was the only debate at the time, I wouldn't worry. But the issue was whether or not the king should claim and follow the majority. This is pretty crucial as the mafia defiantly would want to go against the plan. And brownbear is absent from the debate
2) Contradicts himself in order to seem better Slightly against the Coag lynch + Show Spoiler +
On November 10 2010 05:47 BrownBear wrote: Let's hear Coag defend himself before we go ahead and execute.
how can you defend being inactive and bad
Because we don't want to lynch based off of JUST being inactive and bad?
-----
Player 1: "Hey, Player 2 is inactive and terrible. I'm king. I'm going to kill him before the end of the day because of this."
Players 3-9: "Well, Player 2 is inactive and bad. I guess I don't have any problems with killing him..."
Player 1: "Awesome! EXECUTE PLAYER 2!!!"
Player 2 flips green
Player 1: "Well, shit. At least he was inactive and bad. Now, lets look at the posts today and analyze... wait... fuck."
-----
That shit ain't gonna fly here. If no better option exists at or near the end of the day, go ahead and lynch Coag, but under no circumstances should you be executing people until the last possible minute.
If anyone turns this into Bang Bang Mafia I will make it my personal goal to get them executed as soon as possible.
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
the only ones that really "need to find out what the king is thinking" are the assassins.
Coag's second post (of 2). This is kind of just blatantly wrong. Town absolutely needs to figure out what the king's thinking and logic is. Kingmaker is not infallible, an Assassin-King could absolutely be chosen, and it's town's duty to not only advise the king on a scummy player to lynch, but also attempt to figure out the King's role. If the king is acting scummy/not agreeing with town/being evasive/executing without fully discussing why or explaining himself... chances are he's got something to hide.
The thing I can't tell here is whether this is Coag deliberately trying to mislead town, or whether it's just Coag being an idiot.
Analysis is hard when the player doesn't give you anything to analyze.
On November 10 2010 07:47 Coagulation wrote: if scum is king then there is nothing we can do about making his decision help town anyway regardless.
we will see who he is after the lynch right? at that point he would probably be in alot of trouble if he didnt use his head and play pro town. its a double edged sword but i think the benefits outweigh the cons.
Are you kidding? If we scumhunt properly, we can get a scum king to work for us, or out himself as scum as well. It's a win-win situation.
Firstly, Brownbear started yelling at Coag for his anti-town analysis, he was pretty much anti Coag for a while. And this post
On November 11 2010 11:09 BrownBear wrote: I don't think Coag is the new Bill Murray... I think we're too focused on him honestly. I'd have him as a execute-if-we-have-no-better-options candidate.
Honestly, I'd go with Hesmyrr or LSB over Coag.
This is a slight defense of Coag. He's saying that he doesn't want Coag lynched. This is even after Brownbear flamed Coag for anti-town ideas. And lets take a look at who he wants lynched. Hesmyrr- Hesmyrr has been inactive. Brownbear is supposedly against lynching inactives LSB- more on this later, but Brownbear just makes a random accusation and then disappears, not stating why.
All this post is so that he can buy some kudos points when coag flips blue. This wishy washy view is to slightly influence the town in the direction he wants.
3) He makes a random accusation with no weight He accuses me, for no apparent reason + Show Spoiler +
On November 11 2010 11:09 BrownBear wrote: I don't think Coag is the new Bill Murray... I think we're too focused on him honestly. I'd have him as a execute-if-we-have-no-better-options candidate.
On November 11 2010 11:22 BrownBear wrote: It's more of a meta-thing, but I feel like he's posting out of character, and a lot of his posts just rehash stuff already said, ask other people for their opinion, or correct other people, rather than add new content. He could be a mafia flying under the radar, or I could just be paranoid.
Either way, I'll look at his posts later. Tired now.
Very interesting. I understand the posting out of character. But can you please tell me about this 'rehashing'? Or flying under the radar?
On November 12 2010 01:56 BrownBear wrote: Mk, well, night discussion was kind of a wash...
Maybe you could look at my posts? I know that you said that you were going to do so.
Its a slip up that he said, "I feel that LSB is mafia." At the time, he was just looking for someone to accuse and say that they are mafia. I did this (as mafia) back in TMMM, when I said that "Oh, Southrawer/Divinek is mafia". I couldn't back up my claim and that was a great scumtell. Brownbear, can you black up your claim?
All my suspicion is still on the first guy that started the bandwagon against the voting system - Amber[Light]. Stop calling it unfounded accusation - I have plenty of reasons to believe you're a red, and you know it.
As I repeated time and time again, the town is just crippling themselves by not going the route of revealing the king immediately and actually voting on the lynch. I repeated myself so many times, showed reasons over and over and over and over again, but you are so obtuse.
Why are you so focused on the "Kingmaker" mechanic? How many times do i have to tell you that if we follow the voting system, this game is just a rehash of the F9 setup? You know, the F9 setup that has been the standard mafia setup and was proven to be pretty balanced, despite all your arguments that the mafia could "influence" the arguments?
Revealing and voting for the king's lynch is the ONLY way we can stop the crazy disadvantage the town could get if the kingmaker happens to choose a red and they insta-lynch a town.
@DoctorH, your own "grudge" is showing by how emotionally you're responding to my posts -_- You just assume I'm posting negatively against you because of my grudge? I wrote that post against you based on two things:
1. anyone who thinks even for a second realizes that revealing the king and voting on his lynch is the best way to go about it. 2. You call yourself an "experienced" player and yet you were against this, even before the king was chosen.
But despite this, the kingmaker still unwisely chose you as the king. I honestly don't know what you were thinking - if you were the hero, then shouldn't you especially be thinking about what's best for the town?
And now, we already lost two towns, one of them our ONLY blue. And yet you refuse to reveal the king and vote on the lynch.
Just think about the friggin mechanics. We are already crippled from the start with the lack of a reliable detective. The standard F9 setup is balanced around having one rolechecker and two mafia. Now we not only have a rolechecker, but the mafia is given a chance to control the lynch as they please. It is a setup highly favored for the reds.
The only way town has a chance to prevent this is by understanding this and exploiting the town's only advantage - THE NUMBERS. Why are the townies here, if any, still resistant to voting for the lynch? Jesus christ - it's so simple, and yet people are so blinded by the "kingmaker" gimmick that they refuse to see simple logic.
I've fought all the way throughout the game to make you guys aware of this. But no...
I'm highly suspicious of anyone at this point who keeps arguing for a secret king decision instead of a majority guided vote. This isn't a matter of anger or emotion - it's simple logic. If you are against something that is 100% in favor of giving more power to the town, then you are either a red or a green who will only be a burden to the rest of the town.
So I put it here again. My vote is to lynch the first fool that raised the bandwagon against voting:
Sorry for being afk for so long, I am being somewhat busy due to university matters and haven't had time to focus on this game particularly. Just to eliminate unnecessary discussion material and focus town's discussion on scumhunting, I am revealing that I have been selected as the King this round. I'm going to use the voting system to determine the lynch, so I hope to see the opinions you guys currently have. Only ~24hrs left but hopefully I can get something by then.
Although you mention the debate about the voting as unnecessary discussion, I think it is integral to consider here, at least for this lynch.
As I mentioned before, Amber[Light] is highly suspicious given he was the first to oppose the vote-lynch system. Any townie who logically considers the circumstances will realize that in fact, having the king follow the vote of the majority is the only way to keep the king under the town's control, and indeed, the only way the town possibly has a chance in this mafia favored setup.
Again, this game's setup is simply the standard F9, except there is no reliable detective and the mafia is given a chance to insta-lynch if the "kingmaker" does not think it through carefully. Considering that F9 is balanced around 2 mafia-1 rolechecker-(1doctor)-6 (5) town, you can see where I'm going.
We can't do anything about not having a 100% detective, but we can minimize the chance of mafia becoming the king and insta-killing a town arbitrarily then getting away with it by saying "oh he just looked scummy."
This is important especially given that we lost our only natural defense against a mafia king. With no hero, a mafia king can kill with impunity.
So what's my point? All these arguments shown above were clearly posted not once, but several times. And yet Amber[Light] has time and time again disagreed with forcing the king to follow a majority rule. Only a mafia (or a really dumb townie) would keep going for something that so completely goes against the town's interests.
I don't think Amber Light is neccesarily wrong. I mean, Dr. H supported Amber Light's idea and he was blue. And even I do somewhat. I agree it should be a guideline, and the king should outline his reasons why in thread he's going to do something, but just because he's saying the king doesn't have to follow the town's majority isn't bad.
Look, anyone can "outline his reasons" to lynch someone to be believable enough that he wouldn't be considered a red - at worst, he'd be considered dumb for suspecting him. Letting a king lynch whoever he wants without any input from the town is just dumb. A quote from before:
I could only imagine an assassin King coming up with some BS as to why candidate X should be lynched, and the town just idly agrees while candidate X is screaming at the other players that they aren't being reasonable.
How many town did we start with? 7. How many scum? 2. That's the only defense we have against the mafia. They know it too, and that's why if you're a mafia, you'd be clearly hoping for the king to be allowed to kill whoever he wants instead of listening to the masses. Plus, you'd be giving yourselves an opening to escape scrutiny even if a red becomes the king, given how easy it would be to say "oh damn, I made a mistake."
Thus, only a mafia would keep pushing to establish something that is so anti-town.
I went through all the posts carefully, because town really really really doesn't want to lose another blue tonight.
Baiscally, everyone has made a decent or half-decent point, but to me there's not enough information to actually VOTE for anyone. My instincts still say that we should target inactives. Not for lynching per se, but in order to get them to talk. It's too easy for the reds to just stay low and watch us slaughter each other. Also, there are two mafia in this game. I have yet to see two opinions that were in alignment with one another, so I really doubt that we're gonna hit a red so far, unless one mafia is active and the other one passive (which, I must say, is not a bad plan I guess).
I'll keep thinking about this, but even though I suspect people, I don't suspect anyone enough in order to send them to be lynched. I'll try to take a step back and look at the whole picture again, when I come back in a few hours, and cast my vote then.
I must say I'm not happy with the reasoning so far. There are some valid points, as I said, but nothing that's even 75% sure to get us a red lynch.
woops, did not mean to hit post there. my bad. Let me flesh out my point...
So far, I don't see a logical reason to kill Amber. However, there's some fun little gems...
On November 12 2010 22:55 Amber[LighT] wrote: BLAH BLAH ORGOLOVE BLAH BLAH
I'd like to hear more from BrownBear & Hesmyrr since they're playing on the fairly quiet side.
And then 2 posts later...
On November 12 2010 23:35 LSB wrote: FOS: Brownbear GRRR MAFIA BLAH BLAH GRRR
And currently, LSB has completely ignored, to the point where he hasn't even acknowledged, the bandwagon forming on Amber so that he can continue to dump suspicion on me. There are connections, they're actually pretty obvious.
Note, LSB, I never actually said you were red. I said you have given me a bad vibe all game. It's hard to throw up hard analysis based on gut feelings, because falling into that trap is a bad way to play the game.
On November 09 2010 12:09 orgolove wrote: Another thing to note is the setup. As Ace did not reveal the number of each roles, we have to figure it out ourselves. Compared to the standard setups, there's 2 disadvantages to the town:
1. a red could randomly be chosen as the mayor, leading to an auto -1 town. Actually, eventually one of the reds WILL be chosen as a mayor since the kingmaker is forced to switch his choice every day to a different player.
This is not a very good argument for lynching an inactive. This is a game of 9 people, where we really cannot afford to slip up much at all, so under no circumstances should we be just "lynching an inactive because we have nothing better to do" we should be finding something better to do. Let's be honest, it's a pretty poor argument, but you say it in such certain terms. Generally, the people I've seen going "This is what we should do" about stupid shit are more likely than not to be mafia trying to mislead town.
So, I never FoS'd you or said "HEY GUYS LSB IS RED" I just said you were giving me a bad feeling. And now you're connected (kinda tenuously, but still) to Amber, who's been coming under some hard suspicion.
lot more people need to vote since the point of voting system is to overwhelm with numbers, if three more people are not going to join in with the vote I am going to decide between the players who have vote on them. I am sure you guys don't want that so chop chop. I'll start scouring the thread now to place my vote too (which will count as normal 1 vote if the condition I just specified is met).
Also I am guessing that deadline is November 12 2010 17:32 TL time (9 hours from now) which is 48 hrs after like stated in OP right? The deadline night 1 post is kinda confusing (Pandain? thought the deadline was yesterday for god's sake).
Also re-emphasizing that people need to vote with their reasonings or else.
I'll vote Amber, for now. I'm mostly curious to see if the possible connection between Amber and LSB is actually a connection as opposed to my paranoia.
On November 14 2010 08:45 BrownBear wrote: I'll vote Amber, for now. I'm mostly curious to see if the possible connection between Amber and LSB is actually a connection as opposed to my paranoia.
So... yeah.
Vote: Amber
There is no connection. Just like how there was none between DrH and me. It will be a wasted lynch.
On November 13 2010 10:16 Pandain wrote: I don't think Amber Light is neccesarily wrong. I mean, Dr. H supported Amber Light's idea and he was blue. And even I do somewhat. I agree it should be a guideline, and the king should outline his reasons why in thread he's going to do something, but just because he's saying the king doesn't have to follow the town's majority isn't bad.
Basically this. Because he supported this isn't nearly a good enough reason to lynch someone.
On November 12 2010 23:35 LSB wrote: FOS: Brownbear GRRR MAFIA BLAH BLAH GRRR
And currently, LSB has completely ignored, to the point where he hasn't even acknowledged, the bandwagon forming on Amber so that he can continue to dump suspicion on me. There are connections, they're actually pretty obvious.
Note, LSB, I never actually said you were red. I said you have given me a bad vibe all game. It's hard to throw up hard analysis based on gut feelings, because falling into that trap is a bad way to play the game.
On November 09 2010 12:09 orgolove wrote: Another thing to note is the setup. As Ace did not reveal the number of each roles, we have to figure it out ourselves. Compared to the standard setups, there's 2 disadvantages to the town:
1. a red could randomly be chosen as the mayor, leading to an auto -1 town. Actually, eventually one of the reds WILL be chosen as a mayor since the kingmaker is forced to switch his choice every day to a different player.
This is not a very good argument for lynching an inactive. This is a game of 9 people, where we really cannot afford to slip up much at all, so under no circumstances should we be just "lynching an inactive because we have nothing better to do" we should be finding something better to do. Let's be honest, it's a pretty poor argument, but you say it in such certain terms. Generally, the people I've seen going "This is what we should do" about stupid shit are more likely than not to be mafia trying to mislead town.
So, I never FoS'd you or said "HEY GUYS LSB IS RED" I just said you were giving me a bad feeling. And now you're connected (kinda tenuously, but still) to Amber, who's been coming under some hard suspicion.
It doesn't really add up to me.
In case you haven't noticed, my case against you Brownbear began when I was wondering why you suspected me. It didn't just began because Amber[Light] asked me to nicely.
Also, Brownbear did not directly address points 2 and 3. (He just has an excuse for point number one, saying that he was inactive). Instead he just resorted to attacking me. However, his argument is increadibly flawed.
Secondly, it would be one thing to suggest lynching an inactive on the first day, but another thing to push for lynching an inactive.
Brownbear completely ignored this post.
On November 10 2010 02:52 LSB wrote: As for lynching inactives, Coagulation is the only 'inactive' left, and based on his recent play, he's not the type to suddenly afk on the town.
And no, I do not agree with the King not revealing himself once chosen. We need to find out what the king is thinking. We have a different king each day, and the game setup does not have any day kills. So there is absolutely no disadvantage to the king being revealed to the towns, and it will only give the Assassins, with their ability to PM, an even better chance to plot behind their backs. Remember - there are -no- PMs for townies!
the only ones that really "need to find out what the king is thinking" are the assassins.
Coagulation, could you please be a bit more active and join the discussion?
Thanks
Anyways, we should now move discuss whether or not we should use Merlin I am against using Merlin, as it is a waste of a lynch. Remember, lylo is not delayed when we use Merlin.
I said that there we no inactive left. And indeed the reason why I supported the Coag lynch was not because of his inactivity (He was quiet active under pressure). But because his answers to my questions were not satisfactory
My thoughts as I read the thread from the game's beginning:
LSB {http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6902462) Neutral read, can see this post coming out from either side.
Advocates going for scummy/inactive people and suggest Merlin is abstain vote, which is definitely not useful at all as he helpfully suggests since there is no medic in this setup.
I'Ill also throw in thought process of mine, since I was staunchest supporter of King voting system I believe that Kingmaker has to be one of those who supported it in thread. Unlike mafia, Kingmaker does not have to WIFOM about picking his target since even if he is found out and killed, another will simply be nominated in its place- and because his role is not claimable, there is no reason for him to try to keep his identity hidden via picking someone who went against the idea he stated in the thread. So +1 potential townie brownie point in my mind for anyone who supported this idea from beginning to end, that on my mind time to continue...
Okay, saw his followup post and I am definitely more concerned. Greater weight on going for inactive, but that's always common theme in TL, what alarms me is
A) Lynch a scummy person. Take a look at Team Micro Mafia II, they found both scums day 1 B) Use Merlin. This would be like an abstain. If there are no inactives and no one is scummy, it's a good idea to use Merlin
idk seems to put pretty little weight on lynching scummy player option, and his wording just seem too ambiguous to me. Also I have no idea why he advocates the use of Merlin which is clearly anti-town. I think someone pointed this out already, so looking forward to his response I guess. Only minor thing going for him is that he supports king having no autonomy at all.
Pandain (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6902525) I am looking forward to how you behave when day begins.
Next post details details him taking the position FOR king autonomy Btw didn't someone vote for amber[light] thinking he was the first to push for the king autonomy?
Pandain and DoctorHelvetica disagreeing with my thoughts, I respect their opinions but meh =/ Pandain really was going for King autonomy wasn't he? Then he agrees with Merlin d1? WTF? -1 townie point.
NIGHT 0 STARTS
Pandain starts out with RV following his previous post I guess, LSB suggets king should claim upon nomination, orgolove agrees, LSB going for town credibility? Here he solidifies his opinion about inactive lynch.
orgolove (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6902760) Agrees with majority lynch, also feels like "no red king" paragraph is kinda forced in my opinion, possibly for townie points. Honestly I wish DrH (or nominated king d1) had been scum b/c if we mislynch today kingmaker is going to have peachy time trying to select 1 townie out of 3.
BrownBear (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6902855) argues for going for scummy player, LSB goes against. My playstyle preference maybe but not looking at LSB positively for moment. The difference in opinions nonwithstanding, why list the possibilities and state as if you are not really against them at the beginning?
I still like BrownBear, but he does argue for partial king autonomy so I am scratching him off the kingmaker list especially since he states that king should have high activity, and that is anything but me. Doesn't mean he is not town though.
Pandain (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6902919) might be trying to get away with d1 by RVing everyone here. If he does not contribute anything else by the time I finish this, I am so voting him. In mafiascum someone blatantly announcing he was pressure voting without any other reasoning was always good scum tell.
LSB (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6902974) also states that abstain is good idea, and says in same post that town only have three lynches. wth.
Amber[Light] (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6902983) His first posts, starts with support for king autonomy (maybe the voters reason was "bandwagoning" not "being the first to propose" it. Still itchy reason. Probably will look hard over that vote when I get to it). States that relics are useless, obviously, and this last sentence confuses me:
If we really aren't okay with someone being killed for Day 1 we should use the ability to gain some possible intel. It's not a guarantee but it will give us a better start for day 2.
Holy god, this is going to take long time. Posting this partial segment before I start day 1. I currently do not like Pandain at all, and minor fos on LSB. Only time (hopefully only few more hours) will tell whether I stick to this opinion.
As for merlin, I wasn't aware it counts as an action. I thought we could use it as well as an execution. That's why I asked how merlin affect mislynches, because I was confused.
DAY 1 STARTS F*** this, I am NOT going to discuss individual posts. I lack too much patience for that.
orgolove-Amber[Light] twit twat While I agree with generic content of the post that started this, attack on Amber[LighT] feels bit stretched considering lot other people besides him unanimously agreeed Excalibur was useless before you spoke up. I still do not understand Amber[LighT]'s last sentence, and I equally do not understand what orgolove is attacking him on, but if what amber says is what I think he is saying ("we should use excalibur d1") then yeah, -1 townie points for him since that is wrong in so many levels =/
But then amber replies
Don't you think it would be wise for the assassins to take advantage of eliminating these roles so they can't be used in the late game?
so I don't think that is it either. Can either of you please explain what you guys were talking about because I have hard time understanding it. I am sorry but English is not my first language, so I am declaring this null read for now due to lack of information.
Third paragraph is still worthy of mentioning though. He understands the possibility of King making irrational and possibly disputable choices and yet he would go for king autonomy? THEN he refuses to vote for the sake of "[creating] a good pro-town atmosphere"? I thought the good pro-town atmosphere for the mafia was where everyone was discussing their opinion about other players, not trying to refrain from attacking each other / cartering to other player's feelings ("buddying"). My suspicion metre of Amber[LighT] has shot up immeasureably, but I only touched beginning of the argument so I can possibly have joy of orgolove pulling off equally scummy maneuver.
orgolove's response is acceptable, though I'll take into note that he asked the king to claim.
Amber[LighT]'s reply only focuses on the second paragraph where orgolove askes for king claim and ignores the first paragraph. I don't like that. Okay, that's unfair since I just saw he effectively answered why he do not like voting system in his response to me, but seriously? You are going to call voting system which was used in mafia games for aeons "flawed" and state King autonomy is going to be better? First, there will be scum king some point in the game so argument that voting is bad because mafia can influence the lynch is null. Giving all the power into the king leads to danger of town spotlight being focused entirely on the king itself. The voting system allows everyone to be held accountable for their actions, not just the king. This is seriously weak argument rehashed into WoT.
orgolove disappears here and don't return for rest of the day methinks. orgolove and Amber[LighT] both had somewhat miffy points some point in their argument, but I definitely find amber to be worse. I might be suffering from DoctorHelvetica complex so I will withhold my vote until I finish the entire game, but I will probably looking over him hard as I do this.
(to be continued, b/c day 1 has motherload of posts. I feel like that time where I tried to cram for mid-term all in one night.)
I'm having a game of tenhou to clear my thoughts before I get back to this chore. Expect rest of my day1 analysis to be late. Nice to see other people have joined in, more work for me to do weeeee
On November 14 2010 11:05 Hesmyrr wrote: DAY 1 STARTS F*** this, I am NOT going to discuss individual posts. I lack too much patience for that.
orgolove-Amber[Light] twit twat While I agree with generic content of the post that started this, attack on Amber[LighT] feels bit stretched considering lot other people besides him unanimously agreeed Excalibur was useless before you spoke up. I still do not understand Amber[LighT]'s last sentence, and I equally do not understand what orgolove is attacking him on, but if what amber says is what I think he is saying ("we should use excalibur d1") then yeah, -1 townie points for him since that is wrong in so many levels =/
Don't you think it would be wise for the assassins to take advantage of eliminating these roles so they can't be used in the late game?
so I don't think that is it either. Can either of you please explain what you guys were talking about because I have hard time understanding it. I am sorry but English is not my first language, so I am declaring this null read for now due to lack of information.
Third paragraph is still worthy of mentioning though. He understands the possibility of King making irrational and possibly disputable choices and yet he would go for king autonomy? THEN he refuses to vote for the sake of "[creating] a good pro-town atmosphere"? I thought the good pro-town atmosphere for the mafia was where everyone was discussing their opinion about other players, not trying to refrain from attacking each other / cartering to other player's feelings ("buddying"). My suspicion metre of Amber[LighT] has shot up immeasureably, but I only touched beginning of the argument so I can possibly have joy of orgolove pulling off equally scummy maneuver.
orgolove's response is acceptable, though I'll take into note that he asked the king to claim.
Amber[LighT]'s reply only focuses on the second paragraph where orgolove askes for king claim and ignores the first paragraph. I don't like that. Okay, that's unfair since I just saw he effectively answered why he do not like voting system in his response to me, but seriously? You are going to call voting system which was used in mafia games for aeons "flawed" and state King autonomy is going to be better? First, there will be scum king some point in the game so argument that voting is bad because mafia can influence the lynch is null. Giving all the power into the king leads to danger of town spotlight being focused entirely on the king itself. The voting system allows everyone to be held accountable for their actions, not just the king. This is seriously weak argument rehashed into WoT.
orgolove disappears here and don't return for rest of the day methinks. orgolove and Amber[LighT] both had somewhat miffy points some point in their argument, but I definitely find amber to be worse. I might be suffering from DoctorHelvetica complex so I will withhold my vote until I finish the entire game, but I will probably looking over him hard as I do this.
(to be continued, b/c day 1 has motherload of posts. I feel like that time where I tried to cram for mid-term all in one night.)
I'm going to address your points as best as possible. I apologize for any discrepancies w/ regards to the language barrier. I understand not everyone speaks English first, so I will address what I can...
The use of the relics:
My thought when I read the description of the game and the various roles, even before Day 1 began, was that the relics could be used for a couple of scenarios:
a. The assassins could use this as a mechanism to divert blame away from making a decision that could bite them in the ass. This could increase trust with the King that used the relic because they felt that the town could benefit as a whole by not having a lynch directly come back to them later.
b. The assassins could use them to make sure that the town could not take advantage of these abilities later in the game. When you think about it, using Merlin for pro-town purposes is most beneficial during the first day, and the first day only. The worth of using this ability decreases day after day. The assassins could eventually use this ability to cause utter confusion at any point, making the worth of using it stay relatively the same throughout the game. The opposite actually applies for the other relic. That ability will increase in worth as the days go on, since the odds of hitting an assassin increase (see below) :
*Assuming assassins never get hit: Day 1 --> 2/9 chance Day 2 --> 2/7 chance Day 3 --> 2/5 chance Day 4 --> 2/3 chance (useless by then, but still worth noting)
**I am \ assuming that the sword also takes out the sitting king by random. If not then subtract 1 person per day. The worth of the ability would increase for an assassin king to use though.
It would appear that using the sword early is risky, but beneficial for the mafia. By today though, the worth of either ability has diminished so I doubt either party will jump to use them.
By today though I think even talking about the relics is pointless. I think the consensus of the town is that we would rather not use them. I am okay with this decision.
Also I replied to the most pressing issue in Orgoloves post. If he felt I did anything to not fulfill a complete response he could have asked me to respond again and rephrase the question. He did not. He made another post today that rehashed similar posting habits from his day 1 posts and I replied accordingly.
Also don't think that there is a 100% chance that there will be a mafia king. The kingmaker could actually be lucky enough to analyze players that are playing very pro-town. It's important for the kingmaker to do his part and analyze the players behind the scenes and avoid picking scum players. We could go through the whole game without ever having an assassin king. Congrats to the kingmaker if that happens.
urrrrgh it looks like unless CubEdin votes for BrownBear I'll have to decide the lynch. I am having nightmares of micro-mafia again -_-
On that note, CALL: EXCAILBUR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
since amber agrees that neither faction wants to use it anyway just let dice rule town's fate k. + Show Spoiler +
j/k. It's use, not call and I deliberately mispronounced it just for insurance reasons too so you guys don't have to put me down as the worst king in history. I'll take a look at everyone's argument, focus specifically on Amber[LighT] and BrownBear (because I don't think I can look over the entire thread, unless someone else is willing to propose alternative suspect) and make my decision then so I'd appreciate it if anyone had other suspicious things they wanted to share.
Sorry for not waiting CubEdin's vote but really need to sleep. Almost 4 AM already =/ I apologize if I have made a wrong decision. LSB's arguments were definitely the most persuasive one I have seen in this thread, but there were some things I just could not get over and I somewhat trust orgolove/less so on Pandain at moment. Still extremely hard decision.
My drowsiness induces me to kill CubEdin for just sake of him going MIA but that's kinda unfair, considering I have yet to pay any attention to him at the moment... either way good night.
Oh fuck me, I didn't get back last night till about 3am and I was kinda tipsy and forgot to vote.
But even if I had, I wouldn't have had time to go over the posts carefully again due to my "condition". I'm really sorry.
In retrospect, though, I wouldn't have voted for BrownBear simply because his posts during the first day seemed very pro-town. I would have been inclined towards LSB but simply because his attacks don't seem be to be based on much. On there other hand, there's not much ELSE to go on, so I guess he has a point.
As for Amber, I get the reasons he was voted for, but I really don't think he's red. I don't think ANYONE that has been arguing here is red, I think the mafias are actually lurking, but I guess we will know for sure soon.
(Glad the day post hasn't been up so I get to post this before the "revelation". )
After looking and reading, during day 3 I will probably be focusing on Pandain and Orgolove, Pandain because he's been flying under the radar and Orgolove because I find his arguments to be a bit shifty. I guess it's no use to stir up stuff now, but we'll see after the night passes.
Oh Hessmyrr, Oh Hessmyrr, King filled with fire Couldn't take it anymore, Amber's head is now on the pyre Burn him! Burn him! All the town screamed with rage! They want to see blood! No more time to gauge! Is he innocent? Is he guilty? Oh what the hell, get on with the execution Time to see...
It is now Night 2, so send in your actions! You have 18 hours to make do with your faction! Tomorrow, a new King shall rise to lead you to victory. But be careful my friends - some of them may be tricky...
Note that since Hero is dead and no PR present, there is greater incentive for all of us to talk during the nigjht so Kingmaker has better idea on which individual to nominate.
I definitely don't think we should lynch Hesmyrr. I mean, if we lynch Brownbear and he turns red, then definitely. Right now though Hesymrr did do his reasons for why he voted Amber, and did a whole bunch of analysis. I'll do an examination of BB later, as well as LSB.
On November 14 2010 15:35 Hesmyrr wrote: ##Vote: Amber[Light] execute: Amber[Light]
Sorry for not waiting CubEdin's vote but really need to sleep. Almost 4 AM already =/ I apologize if I have made a wrong decision. LSB's arguments were definitely the most persuasive one I have seen in this thread, but there were some things I just could not get over and I somewhat trust orgolove/less so on Pandain at moment. Still extremely hard decision.
My drowsiness induces me to kill CubEdin for just sake of him going MIA but that's kinda unfair, considering I have yet to pay any attention to him at the moment... either way good night.
Wondering why Hesmyrr didn't pay attention to my Brownbear stuff.
On November 14 2010 11:05 Hesmyrr wrote: DAY 1 STARTS F*** this, I am NOT going to discuss individual posts. I lack too much patience for that.
orgolove-Amber[Light] twit twat While I agree with generic content of the post that started this, attack on Amber[LighT] feels bit stretched considering lot other people besides him unanimously agreeed Excalibur was useless before you spoke up. I still do not understand Amber[LighT]'s last sentence, and I equally do not understand what orgolove is attacking him on, but if what amber says is what I think he is saying ("we should use excalibur d1") then yeah, -1 townie points for him since that is wrong in so many levels =/
But then amber replies
Don't you think it would be wise for the assassins to take advantage of eliminating these roles so they can't be used in the late game?
so I don't think that is it either. Can either of you please explain what you guys were talking about because I have hard time understanding it. I am sorry but English is not my first language, so I am declaring this null read for now due to lack of information.
Third paragraph is still worthy of mentioning though. He understands the possibility of King making irrational and possibly disputable choices and yet he would go for king autonomy? THEN he refuses to vote for the sake of "[creating] a good pro-town atmosphere"? I thought the good pro-town atmosphere for the mafia was where everyone was discussing their opinion about other players, not trying to refrain from attacking each other / cartering to other player's feelings ("buddying"). My suspicion metre of Amber[LighT] has shot up immeasureably, but I only touched beginning of the argument so I can possibly have joy of orgolove pulling off equally scummy maneuver.
orgolove's response is acceptable, though I'll take into note that he asked the king to claim.
Amber[LighT]'s reply only focuses on the second paragraph where orgolove askes for king claim and ignores the first paragraph. I don't like that. Okay, that's unfair since I just saw he effectively answered why he do not like voting system in his response to me, but seriously? You are going to call voting system which was used in mafia games for aeons "flawed" and state King autonomy is going to be better? First, there will be scum king some point in the game so argument that voting is bad because mafia can influence the lynch is null. Giving all the power into the king leads to danger of town spotlight being focused entirely on the king itself. The voting system allows everyone to be held accountable for their actions, not just the king. This is seriously weak argument rehashed into WoT.
orgolove disappears here and don't return for rest of the day methinks. orgolove and Amber[LighT] both had somewhat miffy points some point in their argument, but I definitely find amber to be worse. I might be suffering from DoctorHelvetica complex so I will withhold my vote until I finish the entire game, but I will probably looking over him hard as I do this.
(to be continued, b/c day 1 has motherload of posts. I feel like that time where I tried to cram for mid-term all in one night.)
I'm going to address your points as best as possible. I apologize for any discrepancies w/ regards to the language barrier. I understand not everyone speaks English first, so I will address what I can...
The use of the relics:
My thought when I read the description of the game and the various roles, even before Day 1 began, was that the relics could be used for a couple of scenarios:
a. The assassins could use this as a mechanism to divert blame away from making a decision that could bite them in the ass. This could increase trust with the King that used the relic because they felt that the town could benefit as a whole by not having a lynch directly come back to them later.
b. The assassins could use them to make sure that the town could not take advantage of these abilities later in the game. When you think about it, using Merlin for pro-town purposes is most beneficial during the first day, and the first day only. The worth of using this ability decreases day after day. The assassins could eventually use this ability to cause utter confusion at any point, making the worth of using it stay relatively the same throughout the game. The opposite actually applies for the other relic. That ability will increase in worth as the days go on, since the odds of hitting an assassin increase (see below) :
*Assuming assassins never get hit: Day 1 --> 2/9 chance Day 2 --> 2/7 chance Day 3 --> 2/5 chance Day 4 --> 2/3 chance (useless by then, but still worth noting)
**I am \ assuming that the sword also takes out the sitting king by random. If not then subtract 1 person per day. The worth of the ability would increase for an assassin king to use though.
It would appear that using the sword early is risky, but beneficial for the mafia. By today though, the worth of either ability has diminished so I doubt either party will jump to use them.
By today though I think even talking about the relics is pointless. I think the consensus of the town is that we would rather not use them. I am okay with this decision.
Also I replied to the most pressing issue in Orgoloves post. If he felt I did anything to not fulfill a complete response he could have asked me to respond again and rephrase the question. He did not. He made another post today that rehashed similar posting habits from his day 1 posts and I replied accordingly.
Also don't think that there is a 100% chance that there will be a mafia king. The kingmaker could actually be lucky enough to analyze players that are playing very pro-town. It's important for the kingmaker to do his part and analyze the players behind the scenes and avoid picking scum players. We could go through the whole game without ever having an assassin king. Congrats to the kingmaker if that happens.
What was there for me to answer? (to Amber[LighT]'s post)
And yes, I stated that I struggled with the decision and I wouldn't have so if I had simply chosen to ignore your argument. The voter composition was in fact one of the decisive factors that decided me on my choice of lynch for the day. The fact that majority of Amber[LighT] post was all about discussion of mechanics over other players - which orgolove and BrownBear did, at least in paltry amount - did not help matters either. BrownBear being mia and not answering my question was kinda stupid but so was Amber[LighT] and Pandain.
Your main issue with Amber[LighT] was that he supported king autonomy, and how he didn't respond to half a post. He explained himself, and argued that there is a pretty good chance that the mafia wouldn't be king.
If you want, you could have argued with him over it. However you did,'t.
You choose to lynch the person who wasn't responsive at all, and dismissed accusations as
On November 14 2010 11:15 BrownBear wrote: ugh. There seems to be a lot of pressure on me, for really stupid reasons.
Okay, I can concede on that point besides repeating that I thought voting/executing Amber[LighT] was better decision than voting/executing BrownBear. Both were scummy, but I clearly thought amber was more suspicious. I also believe my support of BrownBear is rather tenuous scum read until BrownBear flips as red. We'll see how it turns out in the next day though.
I will need to hear orgolove and pandain's arguments or else they're the prime suspects on my list.
Sorry, but after tonight there will be only 5 people left, and I really can't stand semi-lurking. I was away too, and it's the weekend, fine, but we need to hear arguments.
Also, if we're gonna use merlin, it will have to be now. If we flip a red, we'll have 2v2 (after the reds kill one player, that night), and one red will be revealed, thus killed, leading to a 2v1 situation, which is basically a coin-flip for the king-maker.
I'm not saying it's the best solution, since to me, the chances of uncovering a red now are relatively close to random, so we might as well use the sword and have a kill as well. It's a tough choice, but this is where the game gets interesting. It might be do-or-die.
Ima go sleep. If I die, please consider what I just said.
Side-note, just thought of it: the merlin situation can backfire if the day after flipping a red, the other red gets elected king (which is possible, 33% chance). It will be 2v2 and with a red king it will be instant-win for the mafia. So not really the best scenario :/
On November 15 2010 08:55 CubEdIn wrote: Bleh. Nobody is paying attention to me.
I will need to hear orgolove and pandain's arguments or else they're the prime suspects on my list.
Sorry, but after tonight there will be only 5 people left, and I really can't stand semi-lurking. I was away too, and it's the weekend, fine, but we need to hear arguments.
Also, if we're gonna use merlin, it will have to be now. If we flip a red, we'll have 2v2 (after the reds kill one player, that night), and one red will be revealed, thus killed, leading to a 2v1 situation, which is basically a coin-flip for the king-maker.
I'm not saying it's the best solution, since to me, the chances of uncovering a red now are relatively close to random, so we might as well use the sword and have a kill as well. It's a tough choice, but this is where the game gets interesting. It might be do-or-die.
Ima go sleep. If I die, please consider what I just said.
Uhh... Day already ended. We can't use merlin anymore. (It's a day action)
Oh yes! We're back! Let's get things right on track! It's Day 3! Oh gee! A new King for free! Just one more mistake - this town is goner Hope the Village does right cuz this game is a yawner Then again, if they do mess up this time at least I can stop with these corny rhymes
LSB, Villager has been killed
5 little Villagers meet in the Town Square 3 of them are good, noble and fair 1 is the maker of Kings with power The Hero is dead, once known for his valor 2 of them villains that make you cower And one shall be crowned King at this important hour!
Oh but be careful, for this can end dreadful 3 Villagers, 2 Assassins, how did this end up so awful It's do or die, the last stand, LYLO some call it whatever happens today someone surely will forfeit
I have a few things on my mind but I want to know who's the new king.
No point in voting just yet, as we can cause a fuss over nothing and get another blue lynched. If we don't get a red lynched then town is fucked.
So hold your horses for a bit till we know who king is. Otherwise, you can get into dumb arguments. Like say, if Brownbear is king, then he will surely not kill himself, and maybe go for orgolove for voting for him. This is not wise, not at this very scary time.
Let's just calm down and try to make a good choice, at least once.
At least I made the best choice out of two townies that were proposed to me, but honestly I would have preferred to be idiot who lynched townie over mafia than lose the game Thought orgolove was kingmaker for some reason, perhaps gave too much credit to theory that avid supporter of non-king autonomy in thread would only choose to nominate me. But yeah, even if I lynched Pandain in fit of perfect reversal of my prior position, I wouldn't have looked at orgolove too hard so this game was probably over by then.
Edit: But seriously, why Pandain out of all people -_- I thought he was regarded as suspicious by both BB and amber camp in day 2.
Oh wait, for some reason kept thinking orgolove was second maf instead of CubEdin (probably because of CE's troll after Pandain finished BB off). Remind me to read the official posts carefully again xD Things makes lot more sense now.
Just on a semi-amusing side-note. We were discussing on night 1 whether we should kill DrH or Brownbear. Dr.H proved to be a great choice, but in retrospect, it's funny that we were discussing town hero or kingmaker on night 1.
I totally would have argued that orgolove was town during the night, except that I felt it was pointless since kingmaker couldn't pick himself Can you tell us the reasoning behind your three picks?
I honestly thought DrH was mafia from how he just lynched coagulation. -_- And I don't see why they kicked LSB when it was obvious he was trying to get Brownbear. It's illogical, really.
On November 16 2010 12:42 orgolove wrote: I honestly thought DrH was mafia from how he just lynched coagulation. -_- And I don't see why they kicked LSB when it was obvious he was trying to get Brownbear. It's illogical, really.
Well, your first post after LSB died was "omg so he was right about BrownBear! KEEEEEEEEEL" (or something among those lines). Which is exactly the effect we were going for.
He was squeezing BB a lot and he said "pick me as king if you want bb dead". So it was only natural that people would look towards bb if LSB died. Basically with your post, it was already three people of 4 against brownbear (if you include me and pandain ofc), so unless he got chosen king, he would've been gone. Either that or they'd turn on you. But as Mafia we were safe with most scenarios.
...Excalibur was basically the best chance imo. 40% chance of whacking a mafia in the end would've been worth it.