EPTChanged my mind.
Don't Lose Yo Mafia - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
Changed my mind. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
| ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
| ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
| ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
And Coagulation is acting wierd. Then again, from what I've seen in other Mafia games, he's always wierd, so I dunno to make of that. chaoser waiting until the last second to make a vote seems a little wierd as well..... I'm not sure what to make of it. Wanting to get a replacement for Mr. Wiggles and chaokel (now Subversion) seems to indicate some kind of important role for at least one of them. Subversion being added and now wanting to catch up seems to indicate that either he's got some kind of important role, or he is doing it as a show, and he doesn't give a shit about his role (town). I'm still not sure what to make of it at the moment, however. Some others have been quiet. Not sure what to make of it either yet. It's still pretty early in the game. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
On January 17 2011 22:25 SouthRawrea wrote: What are you trying to pull here? You're obviously joking about the first part (well hopefully) but you proceed to list a couple tidbits of info concerning the game and give a huge "Well, I don't know what they mean"? I can tell you that Chaoser was being modkilled because he was inactive. INACTIVE. That explains the timing of his vote and the reason for voting on OriginalName was so that he himself would not get lynched. Simple. Moving on. This game only has 9 roles and there was a list for replacements. It would be strange if Deconduo DIDN'T replace the two of them. What you're trying to say doesn't make any sense. There's nothing here to suggest that Subversion is a townie. Of course you don't know what to make of it because you made a premature conclusion before trying to analyze his behaviour. As for quiet. That can be said for everyone in this game. There has been little stir or aggressive behaviour. ALSO: I can give you guys some reassuring information as I was PMing Hesmyrr before he got killed. They were not aware of the stalker's role because he considered me as a gambiting stalker at one point in the night and was consulting his partner. Now what does this have to do with you? Well in association with Hesmyrr, you've had some friendly banter with Hesmyrr concerning the role. Subsequently this post caught my attention. The mafia as a whole could not win by finding out the stalker because we couldn't all be converted. So why is this a good option for us? It's not: It's a good option for the masons. You basically give them the power to choose who to give victory to and give them an assured win. Also literally half an hour after Hesmyrr changes his vote: he follows suit with no reason at all other than that he changed his mind. My vote rests on Impervious ##Vote Impervious Your biggest post so far. Congrats! Especially considering one of your earlier ones was: On January 12 2011 16:21 SouthRawrea wrote: Tracker track me. Don't ask questions. Just do it. Which is pretty interesting in itself. Maybe I wanted to get some discussion going? Especially since my post you quoted was full of shit at parts (If you don't see it, I feel sorry for you). I'm more concerned about your accusing tone against me. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
Although, like last time, I still might change my mind. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
On January 18 2011 05:49 SouthRawrea wrote: That's better than spamming up the thread. Maintaining a passive tone while inserting no thoughts of your own is not helpful. Of course I see your post was full of shit. That's why I quoted it. Why would you post shit in this game? Oh and excuse me for wanting to get somewhere as the "town" in this reverse mafia game. I was playing with WIFOM early on to establish some reliability as a mason while I was fishing from Hesmyrr. And, for all I know, your "fishing" that you claim to have done could be complete bullshit as well. And, clearly, the tracker would actually visit someone that told them what to do..... Brillaint move..... Didn't help anything either..... The fact is - there is no freaking discussions going on at all..... Without something, it's a bunch of blind guessing, by both sides. If the Stalker can get enough info he can eliminate the a mason or the Vigilante at night, and we can lynch the masons. Or we could trick the masons into going after the stalker by accident. That'd be pretty useful, don't you think? | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
And ya, pretty much everyone is just hiding..... It's not gonna help, cause if the masons get to 3 members, there won't be much to stop them from eventually persuading everyone into lynching the wrong person..... | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
| ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
On January 16 2011 03:36 LunarDestiny wrote: Got about 3 hours left... I am always uncomfortable voting without reason. Voting for lurkers is lame because they are going to get modkilled anyway. Anyway, can we have debate whether lynching Chaoser or OriginalName is better? Or should I just flip a coin or something? This post, and LunarDestiny's vote, is what made me change my vote. And here's the thought process: As the Vigilante, you'd want to have as many people left as possible, to draw hits instead of yourself. As a Stalker, you'd want to do the same. His vote + modkill mentality seems to indicate that he wants as few people left as possible. From that, I kinda threw those two roles off. As a Townie, you'd want to eliminate any masons, the Tracker, or the Vigilante. Which is why a coinflip would be a terrible idea (way more likely to hit a fellow townie than anything else at that point in the game). I figured it was possible, but less likely than the remaining roles. As a Tracker, you want to find the Stalker (possibly the Vigilante as well, but the key target is definitely the Stalker) and then be converted to a Mason (more useful role once you have the information you're looking for), so having as few people as possible left are what you'd want, to increase the chance of finding the Tracker (+ Vigilante) and a Mason. As a Mason, you'd want as few people involved as possible, so you can influence lynches to go your way. Because of that, and what LunarDestiny said and did, I figured it was likely he had one of those two roles. However, there was no way we'd get a vote on him at the time. He voted for OriginalName. As much as I find him very suspicious, because he has such an original name (yes, I am joking here), my thought was that if we had to lynch one of the two players (since the momentum was already there), the one he voted to lynch would be the best one to keep alive, and the one he wanted to keep alive was the best one to lynch (small chance of getting a fellow mason or tracker if the tracker had found the masons already). Changing my vote is what ended up getting the majority at the end of the day, which eliminated one of the roles that I figured chaoser might have had, if LunarDestiny had one. If it was just a fluke, it was just a fluke. However, if my thought process is right, LunarDestiny is a mason. His in-depth analysis of the two schools of thoughts that the Masons could be using seem harmless, but it really seems like a ploy to throw attention away from himself now. Alot like that "coin flip" comment he made before picking someone to vote for, rather than voting for no lynch. I wanted to wait another day before putting these thoughts out there, to see what LunarDestiny did, but if I'm gonna have some suspicion and votes thrown on me already, may as well put it out there before I die. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
## Unvote No Lynch ## Vote LunarDestiny | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
On January 18 2011 13:48 LunarDestiny wrote: Your analyze on how different roles play the game is incorrect. There is no way that vig and stalker would want to have the similar amount of people alive because THEY ARE OPPOSITE ALIGNMENT. Really? They may be opposite alignment, but they have similar roles, respective to their actual alignment - they are the ones with power to kill at night. They need to outmaneuver eachother, and the first one to find the other nets a considerable advantage for their side. As unconverted traitors, your current winning condition is winning with stalker. If you think you will be converted in the future, you want to win with town. As I pointed out earlier, because masons don't want to risk converting the stalker, you aren't likely to be converted so you should put winning with mafia as your current goal. Wait, what? Until you're converted, the last thing you should be doing is trying to help the masons, because unless you actually get converted, you're helping the wrong side..... For town: If you can get to the late game with good amount of allies, your chance of winning is high. Also you want to get to the late game as soon as possible because you don't want stalker to rolecheck any town roles and kill them the following night. Then mason would have to risk converting the stalker if one of them is killed. Exactly why we should be trying to lynch masons right now - put even more pressure on them. If the masons were going with the pair mentality, then there were only two last night. One got killed. Meaning there is one left. If we lynch that mason now, we've got a solid chance of winning. If they were going for the larger group mentality, and we can lynch another one right now, we've knocked them down to 1, which puts a lot of pressure on them, possilbly forcing a slipup. For stalker: Opposite of town. You actually have two choices of plan. Plan #1) Get to the late game slower if you can trick mason into recruiting you. Plan #2) Get to the late game faster if you doubt mason will recruit you. This is because the mason group won't die by the lynches and night kills. The probability that there will be 2 correct mason lynch and nightkill. (refer to THIS) When I say faster and slower, I mean the choice of using your nightkill to reduce the number of players. No, they probably won't die from lynching and nightkills, however, the more lynches and nightkills you successfully do, the more they have to convert, and that means they are more likely to slip up. We should be actively hunting masons for that reason - not necessarily to kill them off completely by lynching/nightkilling the last one, but by forcing a slipup. As of now, traitors should be on stalker's side. Mason don't need a lot of people to stay alive. They can convert more people if they are in danger of being annihilate. Though, they could try recruiting more people in the early game since the risk of recruiting stalker is smaller. I suggest traitors and stalker should vote for NO LYNCH to get the late game. Doing this because town want to get to the late game as fast as possible so we should do the opposite of what they want. I know my reasoning for No Lynch is iffy and glad to discuss if not lynching is the best way to win with stalker (not likely that mason would want to risk if they don't have to). ##Vote: No Lynch Then why did you not go for a "no lynch" during the previous day? I'm sticking with my gut instinct here. Something's fishy. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
Still something fishy though. ## Unvote LunarDestiny ## Vote No Lynch | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
On January 19 2011 04:06 LunarDestiny wrote: Winning condition as stalker: All town roles killed. Winning condition as town: Stalker killed. Unconverted traitors: Win when stalker wins. Since vig is a part of town, he wins with town. So their choice of longer game or shorter game is the same. But you also say that Stalker's choice of longer game or shorter game is the same as the vig. Then that means that stalker and town's choice of longer game or short game is also the same. This is not logical. The only way that they all want the same length of game is that some of them have misinformation which affects them to misinterpret the game. You can't really have much misinformation in a short game. A short game can lead to mistakes made due to lack of information as well. There's not as much difference in the overall results as you're making it out to be. As I pointed out. Unconverted traitors do not know if they will be converted or not. Also mason would not want to make unnecessary conversion, so they should play the current game to win with stalker. If this is a defence on my behave, thank you. Trying to help the masons while you're a traitor is flawed thinking..... Almost every traitor could be converted to a mason by the end of the game, but if we initially try to help them before being converted, and they win while you're still a traitor, you lose. Lynching people when you are not sure if they are mason (or town) will have high risk that the one being lynched is traitor or even stalker. If we are using active lynching as a plan to kill town roles, we first have to discuss how many traitors and masons there are. We also need to discuss if vig is truly converted. If the raw probability (not taken into analysis into account) of town lynch is higher than the raw probability of traitor or stalker lynch. Then it is a very viable tactic. But you also have to taken account of how much masons can influence the voting. Which is why we need to figure that out. Pure statistics tells us that lynching anyone at this point is futile (initially why I went for no lynch both days). However, we can make some kind of educated guess as to who has a role by watching the behavior, and because of that, improve our chances of getting a good lynch. If that improved chance is greater than the chance of lynching a townie, then we, statistically speaking, should attempt it (there's more factors involved, I'll admit, but it is not as terrible as you're making it sound at the moment). This is gambling. We can't be sure that it will be a successful town lynch. Look at game is the past where scumhunting often lead to bad lynch. If we are lynching someone, it must be very, very good reasons behind. Look at it another way, if we decide to use no lynch as the general tactic. No one will die because of the lynch. Stalker have the ability to rolecheck every night. If the rolecheck is town positive, the nightkill next night will be good. We still not sure if vig is holding fire or converted, so town may or may not have the ability to shoot. Also, voting for no lynch also put pressure on Mason to convert because it is the only chance they have to win. If we use this tactic, when someone call for a lynch, then they are mason (not very certain on this sentence). There are draw back to this plan because we are leaving everything to the stalker. Yes, we should have good reasons behind it. I thought your initial posting was a little suspicious, and your actions during the first vote were as well. I decided to vote the opposite of your vote, for the reasons I already stated (momentum for a lynch + chance at hitting a role). Maybe it was a fluke, maybe you're a mason and knew about chaoser, maybe you're the vigilante and chaoser had already found you, I dunno. But there was something wierd about how you reacted in that first vote, and have acted since. Then why did you not go for a "no lynch" during the previous day? I'm sticking with my gut instinct here. Something's fishy. At the time, the two likely lynch is chaoser or originalname. No one mention voting for no lynch so I didn't thought about no lynch I will admit that I am wrong with the mentality of going for originalname instead of chaoser. Based on my post, I say that town wants shorter game and mafia wants longer game. At that time, I didn't think about this part of the game. I can not reason out this mistake of mine. I misvote.[/QUOTE][/quote] I initially went for no lynch..... In the post prior to yours..... Someone else, plz confirm that there is something suspicious here, and I'm not just screwed in the head. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
## Vote No Lynch I'll let the Stalker figure this one out. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
 | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
So, what's everyone's favorite beer? | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
I'ma have to think about this. You not voting for chaoser is kinda wierd, considering that you say you knew about his role..... I didn't vote for you in the end because I figured you might be the stalker. However, I'm not 100% convinced yet..... I've still got time to vote. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4216 Posts
Still not 100% convinced you're it tho. | ||
| ||
