EPTActive List of Mafia Games - Page 180
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31495 Posts
| ||
|
GreYMisT
United States6736 Posts
But i propose we move this to the misc mafia thread. | ||
|
VayneAuthority
United States8983 Posts
On August 08 2013 07:14 Ace wrote: You've got 48 hours to debate on a lynch - how much more time do you really need to argue and fight over who are worthy candidates? :/ I guess I just find it more fun to argue and persuade people to move votes and reach a consensus. I have to engage in discussion with multiple players, and once I know someone will not vote the way I want I've gotta go elsewhere. I prefer this as it forces interaction for consolidation and I get to see reasons for why people won't vote a certain way. Aids in Scumhunting as Town and helps me know who has reads on who as Scum so I can manipulate the voting easier next time around. When people don't have to consolidate on votes then you get stupidity like people dying with 6 votes in a 20 player game because other players do not have to vote at all for any competing wagons. Go look at how our Scum team gamed the Town in Nuclear Winter Mafia - once you guys dropped a Scum wagon we didn't even need to persuade you to vote the way we wanted. They got out of having the most votes? Whatever, let Town lynch who they want. Some of them will lurk anyway and MVW will take care of the rest. Somebody will always be lynched and it can be argued allowing for 100% lynch rate is as Anti-Town as it gets. If you feel that No lynching is Anti-Town then in ML you could even chastise the people not allowing the lynch to happen and call for Policy Vigi shots on them. Bottom line is the game of Mafia is about player interaction and I find Majority Lynch promotes it better than Most Vote Wins in most setups. Obviously the larger the player list is, the less impact ML has on the game because of clutter and logistics in dealing with so many people. Here MVW shines as its just practical. I loved NWM, it was very interesting what happened in hindsight on that game. I prefer the reads part of the game as opposed to the persuasion part so you can see why I dislike majority heavily. Im just glad I was able to have this conversation because I won't feel bad now for not voting with the majority in majority lynch. I felt like a dick in titanic for not wanting to consolidate after learning the rules. For a recent example, Ideally I find stuff like what happened in sicilian mafia day 1 to be the most interesting. 3 Different bandwagons and it was very close until the end and no one had any idea who was going to get lynched. Kind of kills any suspense or fun part of the flip if its just Ace : durp 1, durp 2, durp 3, etc | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Vayne you probably would prefer Instant Majority Lynch then. If your wagon ever hits Majority you get lynched. If no one has reached Majority by deadline then Most Votes Wins at the end of the day. This way you still get the option of tons of wagons back and forth which is what I think you like. | ||
|
geript
10024 Posts
On August 08 2013 07:14 Ace wrote:When people don't have to consolidate on votes then you get stupidity like people dying with 6 votes in a 20 player game because other players do not have to vote at all for any competing wagons. Go look at how our Scum team gamed the Town in Nuclear Winter Mafia - once you guys dropped a Scum wagon we didn't even need to persuade you to vote the way we wanted. They got out of having the most votes? Whatever, let Town lynch who they want. Some of them will lurk anyway and MVW will take care of the rest. Somebody will always be lynched and it can be argued allowing for 100% lynch rate is as Anti-Town as it gets. If you feel that No lynching is Anti-Town then in ML you could even chastise the people not allowing the lynch to happen and call for Policy Vigi shots on them. Not quite fair. Half the town lurked hardcore in that game and only a handful of players were reasonably active. The setup I think was probably ok, but not for majority lynch. The fact that the fucking dumbasses you left alive decided to believe your nuke on Maju was retarded. You won the game because of complete bullshit dumbassery and 'pretty words.' If I could convince people half as well as you could town wins that game easy. Voting system doesn't matter when 50% of town is inactive. Scum wins that hands down unless they all out and out scum claim. The real problem is that town doesn't get enough vigs and/or that vigs go to bad players. | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31495 Posts
On August 08 2013 08:49 geript wrote: Not quite fair. Half the town lurked hardcore in that game and only a handful of players were reasonably active. The setup I think was probably ok, but not for majority lynch. The fact that the fucking dumbasses you left alive decided to believe your nuke on Maju was retarded. You won the game because of complete bullshit dumbassery and 'pretty words.' If I could convince people half as well as you could town wins that game easy. Voting system doesn't matter when 50% of town is inactive. Scum wins that hands down unless they all out and out scum claim. The real problem is that town doesn't get enough vigs and/or that vigs go to bad players. I don't know if you can say town diidnt get enough vigs in a nuke game. I've already suggested I think posting minimum needs to be raised. | ||
|
DarthPunk
Australia10859 Posts
| ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9389 Posts
Ppl afk for several reasons, some unforseen. I still think it's crap ppl sign up for multiple games and then afk. That's an example of a forseen reason but if u ban ppl for this, 3/4 of the forum will be banned. I dont know a solution other than perhaps more protection so the powerhouses are auto killed and can influence end game, this allowing town to actually purge lurkers naturally. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25563 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9389 Posts
On August 08 2013 16:00 Blazinghand wrote: A simple solution to people signing up for multiple games is just have hosts not let in people who are in other games. But it's so fine line. As mafia time lengths are unpredictable. Some finish literally in 3 days and then u have to wait sometimes 2 weeks for sign ups for a new game. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
| ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31495 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On August 09 2013 07:18 WaveofShadow wrote: lulz how many setups do you have planned? Four. I also have plans for TL Mafia LXVI and a currently unflavored mega mafia. | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25563 Posts
| ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
On August 08 2013 16:00 Blazinghand wrote: A simple solution to people signing up for multiple games is just have hosts not let in people who are in other games. +1 If I was booted on these grounds I wouldn't mind for one. Sees this right below On August 08 2013 16:31 Sylencia wrote: This is really the wrong thread for this discussion =( I facepalm upon my own tomfoolery | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
| ||
