EPTAlso, once the DT establishes a mouth, this could be a way for the DT to throw off the mafia, by posting false responses in the thread in order to get off the hit list.
TL Mafia XXXV - Page 15
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Also, once the DT establishes a mouth, this could be a way for the DT to throw off the mafia, by posting false responses in the thread in order to get off the hit list. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Either the DT says what they check correctly, and the mafia will home in on them, or else they lie to keep them off their trail. The problem arises when they start to lie. If they are killed, then we would ideally go back and look at what they said peoples roles are, but if they start faking it, we won't know which are real and which are fake, unless there is already an established mouth who comes out and tells us. But then you might get multiple people claiming different things about what the DT told them, which make the DTs claims near useless, as we won't be able to discern truth from falsities. Unless there's something I"m missing, or don't know about how the game is played, this doesn't look like it'll help that much in the end. If this is actually a tried and true method and I look really stupid right now, please let me know. Thanks.  | ||
|
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
Basically, we need to hear from people. Inactive towns do not last. LSB and Annul are having a cute little back and forth, which is productive, but it needs to happen tenfold. So Pandain, we want to hear from you. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 03:02 Mr. Wiggles wrote: The problem with that though, is that it almost defeats the purpose, it's a lose-lose situation for the town. Either the DT says what they check correctly, and the mafia will home in on them, or else they lie to keep them off their trail. Remember, if we pull this off, all thirty people will be telling what's going on. Basically you have a 50/50% of getting someone's role right. (Okay maybe a bit less, but not much). A dt can easily hide within the mass of people getting the roles correct Now as for the fakeout The problem arises when they start to lie. If they are killed, then we would ideally go back and look at what they said peoples roles are, but if they start faking it, we won't know which are real and which are fake, unless there is already an established mouth who comes out and tells us. But then you might get multiple people claiming different things about what the DT told them, which make the DTs claims near useless, as we won't be able to discern truth from falsities. Exactly, the DT will only do this when there is an established mouth. Unless there's something I"m missing, or don't know about how the game is played, this doesn't look like it'll help that much in the end. If this is actually a tried and true method and I look really stupid right now, please let me know. Thanks. I don't know if this has been tried before. But the issue I'm trying to address is when the DT gets killed before he's able to disclose what he found. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
On December 28 2010 00:56 LSB wrote: EBWOP It doesn't do anything about inactives. It just says we make a list of inactives and see what happens. We've done this practically every single game. Does it work? Not really. LunarDestiny, can you elaborate a bit more then? I don't like the idea of pressuring a certain person to speak up one at a time. If the mafia choose to pressure a townie and that townie is afk, then we are falling into mafia's trap. Looking at the voting thread, there are 3 people that were voted. Mr.Wiggies quickly responded after pandain voted on him. Pandain also respond after the mass vote on him. But Jackal had yet to respond after being voted by pandain. Accusing someone encourages participation from that that person. But what if that person is afk? He won't be able to respond. Also, IF pandain is mafia, then town will be sidetracked. Other inactive mafia will go under the radar. We should consider all inactive. When day1 is half way over, we should come up with a list of people who are inactive/all spam/suspected and discuss who to lynch. Maybe then, those people on list will speak up and defend themselves. I am saying that we should not target inactive (afk/spam/suspect) at a time for day 1 lynch. At some point on day1, we should come up with a list of possible lynch and that will encourage those people on the list to speak up. Again all of the above is for day 1's lynch when town have almost no information. I want to put pressure on all inactives to speak up and maybe contribution. | ||
|
Jackal58
United States4264 Posts
Seems to me day 1 lynch is nothing more than a crap shoot at best. And I still haven't decided who to pick as my vote. | ||
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
-Lurkers who post bare minimum to stay alive. There is a lower chance that framer will framer a lurking town. I encourage dts to check these people. There is the downside where these people are more likely to be modkilled because they might be people who lost interest in the game. Without more people as replacement, dt checks might be wasted. So dts have to judge between lurkers who lost interest in the game and those who are posting minimum to stay alive. -People who have taken a huge stand on issues and are in long debates with others. These people are most likely to be framer's target since there are, at most, a few of people in this categories. The probability of successful framing of these people is higher than probability of successful framing on lurking town. And even if a dt check says that a person of these categories comes out to be mafia, this information is useful, but less compared to other mafia games where there are no framer To summarize, dts should use checks on lurkers to avoid framer. But should judge between real lurkers and discouraged players. | ||
|
d3_crescentia
United States4054 Posts
On December 28 2010 03:43 LunarDestiny wrote: I don't like the idea of pressuring a certain person to speak up one at a time. If the mafia choose to pressure a townie and that townie is afk, then we are falling into mafia's trap. Looking at the voting thread, there are 3 people that were voted. Mr.Wiggies quickly responded after pandain voted on him. Pandain also respond after the mass vote on him. But Jackal had yet to respond after being voted by pandain. Accusing someone encourages participation from that that person. But what if that person is afk? He won't be able to respond. Also, IF pandain is mafia, then town will be sidetracked. Other inactive mafia will go under the radar. We should consider all inactive. When day1 is half way over, we should come up with a list of people who are inactive/all spam/suspected and discuss who to lynch. Maybe then, those people on list will speak up and defend themselves. I am saying that we should not target inactive (afk/spam/suspect) at a time for day 1 lynch. At some point on day1, we should come up with a list of possible lynch and that will encourage those people on the list to speak up. Again all of the above is for day 1's lynch when town have almost no information. I want to put pressure on all inactives to speak up and maybe contribution. It doesn't really matter that the person is afk; that's why the day cycles are so long. What we especially have to watch out for is if everyone is *too complacent* in letting the target die. If there isn't adequate discussion that's been generated then we KNOW we haven't picked someone important. With that said I think I'd like to suggest something I was thinking of in my last game: every person take a look at the posts of the person below you on the page 1 list and post an analysis of said person on Day 3. That should give us enough time to accumulate a good amount of analysis. If said person is up for the chopping block then post what you have sooner than later. I think player death shouldn't cause too many problems with this plan and it should help newer players participate. | ||
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
On December 27 2010 18:34 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Meh I'll just start now, I have some time. We need to very carefully consider the framer role. It is often advised to detectives, by mafia, that a big town target should be checked to get "information". DT's should check the targets they think are most likely scum based on post behavior and that's pretty much all there is to it until later in the game when a lot of information actually can be gleaned from an alignment check. Framer Strategy: mafia railroads/advises DT to check a big town target with a lot of attention (for an example of this level of attention look at me in insane mafia) and then simply frame them. Pandain was effectively framed on day 1 of haunted and a DT checked him, because Pandain was an active poster but there was nothing scummy about any of his posts. It was a bad check. So beware of attempts to railroad you into checking certain targets especially if it happens in PM. I imagine myself, Pandain, LSB, and RoL will all be strong frame targets that is if they aren't going to be hit since they are likely to be checked. I'm not saying don't check veteran players, I'm saying check people you think are scum. Also DT's shouldn't claim if they find a red and definitely not in PM either. Build a case on that person. Read through their posts and seriously consider them. Read them as though they are mafia, what are they doing to hurt/mislead the town and does it make sense? They might be a miller (there are probably 2, that is the normal count) and they might also have been framed. When you checked someone and now they are mafia or are nearly certain you build a good case to get them lynched, you don't claim straight away because it's still possible the mafia won't hit you and if they do it become immediately apparent why you pushed so strong for a specific lynch which means the mafia have to do a lot of damage control especially if they tried to spread distrust/attack that DT. The timing of his ban should have nothing to do with what role he may or may not be. Or rather what role I may or may not be. I'm gonna say this about vig's: don't shoot until night 3 or night 4. As the game progresses it gets easier and easier to find mafia and that's when efficient town KP use becomes super important. Don't blow your hit early, you'll more than likely miss. Your goal is to not get killed. As far as this Pandain bandwagon Idon't see why that is. This isn't a mafia thing it's just stupid but he did roleclaim village idiot to me in PM before the game started, not sure what that means. Probably nothing because he's just bad. If he's scum I'll catch him pretty quickly so I'm not worried about him at all. LunarDestiny's posts so far come off as the most scummy but that's just barely, no good target has presented itself yet to me for the lynch so I'll vote for myself. My work schedule is unpredictable and I don't want to get modkilled for it. As an addendum to the first part of this post. I don't think DrH hit it just right. Don't waste your time checking "big name" players. Since a GF is chosen you will get back a blue/green role on them pretty much no matter what. The way I play a detective role can be seen slightly in HP mafia. There were people I thought very likely to be scum, but there were two players I couldn't decide on, but was leaning towards mafia or jackass. OpZ and Orgolove. Night 1 I decided to Orgolove, but either check would of been adequate for my criteria. Usually a host RNG's the player list and makes mild adjustments for balance. The odds of a more recognized/good player getting into the mafia is increased and therefore they are likely to be the godfather. The only game where I would say the "veteran" player IMO wasn't GF was in Salem. They chose SouthRawrea over Radfield, but that could of been because of PM's and knowing where the check was going, or because radfield knew he was going to be inactive. So when you are a DT check someone who is playing aggressively/scummy and someone who you can't quite decide on their alignment. With a framer the odds are increased that you will get a bad check on a "veteran" player because they will either be godfather or framed. On that note though, the only real check we can use is a medic. If a medic protects someone and the day post is mafia KP-1 they can be almost 100% sure they protected someone good, especially if they are a "veteran" player. Anyway, I don't like making it seem like the DT role is so important which this seems like, I in fact view DT as a handicap that clouds a persons judgment. I would rather trust my behavioral analysis over DT checks any day of the week. I urge the utmost caution in using DT checks in this game, because I don't feel like having SouthRawrea 2.0 after I die and everyone becomes too stupid to realize who the leak was. Anyway, I got work in a little bit I will probably be back around 10ish. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
The problem is when we focus too much on inactives we start calling people scum just because they didn't post enough when the far more disturbing trend is posting a lot/posting big posts and saying absolutely nothing helpful: aidnai in exmima radfield in salem kavdragon in pokemafia etc. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On December 28 2010 04:35 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: As an addendum to the first part of this post. I don't think DrH hit it just right. Don't waste your time checking "big name" players. Since a GF is chosen you will get back a blue/green role on them pretty much no matter what. The way I play a detective role can be seen slightly in HP mafia. There were people I thought very likely to be scum, but there were two players I couldn't decide on, but was leaning towards mafia or jackass. OpZ and Orgolove. Night 1 I decided to Orgolove, but either check would of been adequate for my criteria. Usually a host RNG's the player list and makes mild adjustments for balance. The odds of a more recognized/good player getting into the mafia is increased and therefore they are likely to be the godfather. The only game where I would say the "veteran" player IMO wasn't GF was in Salem. They chose SouthRawrea over Radfield, but that could of been because of PM's and knowing where the check was going, or because radfield knew he was going to be inactive. So when you are a DT check someone who is playing aggressively/scummy and someone who you can't quite decide on their alignment. With a framer the odds are increased that you will get a bad check on a "veteran" player because they will either be godfather or framed. On that note though, the only real check we can use is a medic. If a medic protects someone and the day post is mafia KP-1 they can be almost 100% sure they protected someone good, especially if they are a "veteran" player. Anyway, I don't like making it seem like the DT role is so important which this seems like, I in fact view DT as a handicap that clouds a persons judgment. I would rather trust my behavioral analysis over DT checks any day of the week. I urge the utmost caution in using DT checks in this game, because I don't feel like having SouthRawrea 2.0 after I die and everyone becomes too stupid to realize who the leak was. Anyway, I got work in a little bit I will probably be back around 10ish. I agree the DT is isn't all important but it's a damn strong power and it should be used right don't you think? They're still a high priority for mafia hits and thats why I don't want them claiming. I agree this game should be about analysing behavior before anything else. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 04:40 DoctorHelvetica wrote: I'm all for pressuring inactives to speak day 1 but no DT's should absolutely not come public with their claims that is a terrible and awful idea and I won't even begin to consider. What do you think of my plan? What do you think about the use of DT mouths? The problem is when we focus too much on inactives we start calling people scum just because they didn't post enough when the far more disturbing trend is posting a lot/posting big posts and saying absolutely nothing helpful: aidnai in exmima radfield in salem kavdragon in pokemafia etc. Indeed I agree that it could be a mafia tell. I do have a few people in mind in this game. However, these people are so much easier to analyze than someone like Oceanic in Pokemafia. | ||
|
Pandain
United States12989 Posts
But first, I'd like to congragulate everyone and helping keep this thread so far much better than others, with long posts and everything. ![[image loading]](http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/glitters/y/yay_we_did_it-6035.gif) Fadoodle yeah! But going forward, I still see no reason to vote me. So far I have been doing what I do every game, that is, getting town in a postive way forward with content oriented posts. What I'm doing actually isn't so much getting more analysis(although it is), its encouraging an atmosphere of contribution and thought. I voted Mr. Wiggles because he hadn't really been contributing, he had just been spamming. But lately he has actively been contributing with long well thought out posts. Mission accomplished. I voted Jackal for the same reason, but actually am inclined now to vote for someone else with his excuse, but will actively be pressuring him in PM land to contribute more so. Jackal, that's why your being voted. Contribute more and I'll lay off you. But as I was reading, Lunar destiny was right. What if they're just afk? Then we could just spend a whole day voting osmeone but they won't even read the thread to be able to respond! Which is partly why I'm unvoting jackal as of now. I will be looking for someone else to vote. You guys are voting me. I urge you to help me in getting this town on the right track. Too many times town ends up in day 2 with nothing more than like 10 one line posts over the course of day 1, because there was just too much spam/not real discussion. So far I've been pleased with how this has been going so far. But just want to now start talking about what's currently been happening. 1.I do not think we should vote LSB. Plainly, he has been contributing alot so far, more than most of the people already. Plainly, if he is mafia, then we'll most likely catch him anyway. We should not be lynching actives, even if we have a slight suspicion that he's mafia. Obviously if we have a good inkling I suppose we should go for it(as in team melee mafia 2 incog fingered lsb day 1) but right now there's really nothing on LSB, and I wouldn't want to lynch an expierenced player. Plus there are some problems with your analysis, but I'll just name a few. 1. If you are hit, then u should claim. LSB was right. Becuase mafia can't tell if ur vet or just protected or what. 2.You're mistaking jokes for real content. (aka when lsb said coag got banned so dr. h could join) 3.The only real suspicious thing about him is his somewhat spammy nature. The most important of which being number 3, but that is certainly not a reason to lynch him when he's already contributed alot. As for the DT checks, that's more appropiate for talk during the night(less time for mafia to manipualte) but we can talk about it now. Personally I'm leaning towards checking people who "contribute without contributing." Don't just check the inactives, they're most likely bored townies. Don't just check big name players, most likely they're going to be framed/picked godfather. We should pick those who seem to be pro town, but fail to actually contribute. Obviously this can change. If you really have a good read on someone, check them But that's just some advice. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
I agree that behavior analyze is important. Especially in this game, mafia check by dt on people who are in long debates are less convincing compared to other games because they are likely to be a framed townie. | ||
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
On December 28 2010 01:15 LSB wrote: Firstly, pointing out that someone isn’t on topic isn’t analysis. It’s just plain distracting. Why don’t you include my two posts at the start of the game? Their spam too! Please read Pokemafia. Thanks! Help me then. What analysis could I do at that point? Read the thread please Do you seriously think that I need to pretend to be active? Why don't you analyze my defense of Pandain, what does it say? Nice ‘analysis’ yourself btw. | ||
|
Barundar
Denmark1582 Posts
At some point on day1, we should come up with a list of possible lynch and that will encourage those people on the list to speak up 1) Lists are a good way to appear like you are contributing, without actually adding anything. I want to put pressure on all inactives to speak up and maybe contribution. 2) Pressure is not done in general, pressure is specific to make the player unable to hide. Your list of pressuring “all” inactives is the same as pressuring none. 3) There is a fine line between a plan, and suggestions that make you appear to be active while sending the town on a goosechase. Your plan requires no work from yourself (“we” should do this and that), is very general (“at some point”), and it’s limited to inactives instead of scumhunting, making it mechanic, so even when we hit town, the mafia is not guilty. In general, the player list is a little more stacked with active players than Pokemafia/HPmafia, so inactives shouldn’t be as much as a problem (even if I just replaced one…) | ||
| ||
