On March 19 2011 03:54 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:
Your'e relying on the town having a unanimous vote and everyone who votes for different people from the majority are scum. Let's take a look at some past voting charts.
<snip>
Hey do these votes look unanimous? Imagine if a day ended like this, it's very possible that a person who doesn't have the majority wins the vote.
I never said unanimous in any of my posts. I have continously said majority. And from what I see, all your lists had a majority vote on one person.
On March 19 2011 03:58 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:No it's not
How many more times do I have to say this. The person who is voted to be lynched may not be the person who dies.
If someone reaches majority they will die. If it takes two days, so be it, but they will die. I've played in games (and actually am involved in another game) with a psuedo-similar method of 'lynching'. If a majority is reached, and they don't die, we arn't going "okay, now who's up"...they're going to get killed.
You're taking what I'm saying to specifically; No, voting will not be like any other game and DIRECTLY kill someone, but the majority vote will still end up dead.
On March 19 2011 04:00 chaoser wrote:
I guess the only way to solve this problem is that the person who is majority voted has to be pushed by everyone, whether you voted him or not. Organized town is a good town yes?
It is impossible to expect this- that said, I believe each person who does not comply with the majority should explain their whys. That way, it can be used later or weak reasoning can be pressed.
On March 19 2011 04:02 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:
Let's use this voting tally as an example
<snip>
Let's say that Pandain is where I am and LSB is where OriginalName is. Look, I won the vote but I'm not dying because of where I am on the chart. Oh look, LSB is dying even though he didn't win the vote, he's dying because of where he is on the chart.
Again, there is no majority, and therefor I believe there shouldn't be a PoP period. This keeps close people from being sniped by scum or town who are wrong. I would rather a No Lynch than people just pushing to get someone killed.
On March 19 2011 04:33 GMarshal wrote:
Let me start with a
##Unvote
##Vote Keifru
Hi! Welcome to TL, I want to see how you handle pressure, especially after that terrible OMGUS vote against Meapak
Not an OMGUS- I had suspicion of him, and after exchanges and reading his posts I decided to move him up in my scumspects- putting him first (therefor my vote target). I am absolutely not seeing him even saying a whit pro-votes in the posts, despite his vehemenance to being so. He also spoke of voting in a way I found to be unnecissarily undermining.
On March 19 2011 05:04 GGQ wrote:
Keifru, you've been on Meapak's case for down-playing the organised vote, why have you been going after him so hard while saying nothing about this post from bumatlarge:
Arguing against town organisation and for chaotic individuality gets bumatlarge my vote.
##vote bumatlarge
I have ignored every post before 'Game Start'. I also don't recall him posting of late...
The reason I'm so hard on Meapak's is of the conflict between what he has said.
Burnatlarge: What is your current opinion on organization?On March 19 2011 07:13 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
This whole voting thing is retarded as fuck and is only going to lead to town stagnation and mafia controlling the incinerator. We are using 24 hour day cycles, this is going to go by extremely fast and by bitching around with MEANINGLESS votes you are wasting our time.
I can't remember who said this earlier, but I am going to correct them right now. The voting shit you guys are trying to implement is NOTHING like voting in a normal game for one key reason. In this game voting has no actual weight behind it, it is simply air. Its a bureaucratic waste time tool and it can only fuck us over and give the mafia way more influence. The fact is we don't have time to carefully plan out some elaborate vote in this then decide how to act.
This system is BOUND to fail because we don't have an adequate amount of time to discuss all possibilities, and if we stick with it the mafia will be able to abuse that like what Keifru is doing to keep us in check in fear of looking "scummy" by pushing people and not voting.
Darmouseh made probably one of the best arguments against this for why this voting idea can't possibly work. We have the potential for MASS lynches, while in a normal game its one lynch. How do we decide what vote count qualifies someone to get lynched, then organize votes accordingly? Then make sure everyone follows through? We can't. Trying to force the town into such a rigidly organized manner will inevitably lead to more chaos then it is meant to protect us from. Its simply impossible to enforce, and as a "policy" it is completely anti town.
Hey RoL, you promised to return with something and I don't see it.
The ability to do something doesn't necissarily mean its SMART to do such a thing. I believe we shouldn't kill 2+ people unless there are some really really crazy circumstances that go against probability.
Your point about 'time' is a valid one.
Possibilities? The system of voting is pretty basic and inherent in all non-special type mafia games. No need to make it more complicated than "Majority reached, that person dies, reset and repeat"
I don't remember if I've stated it in this wall of posts:
I don't believe people should have to push/pull someone against their will, (barring the usual crazy circumstances)- the people who are voting the person (the majority) should all be the ones doing the pushing/pulling.
The only way voting can help mafia is if people stagnate on it and don't do it, which means it never gets done and days are wasted (since scum have a night kill)- otherwise, it gives mafia no other benefit. Voting helps us keep everyone accountable for their actions, and makes it harder for the scum to just 'poke' someone into the fire or off the edge.
Its easy to decide the vote count:
Number of Players/2
If Even, Add 1
On March 19 2011 07:24 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
There are a couple of things here. Kita sees one of the issues with the voting idea and goes along with it. Whatever that's not too bad, since others went along with it too, right?
The next thing is mass claiming is really stupid. We have no idea how crazy the abilities can get, and its a gamble either way. We have absolutely no idea how hard the mafia can ream us for that, and since the game has crazy and unique abilities we will have no way of discerning which abilities are lies, and which are legitimate. However the mafia will know which abilities they can exploit, and which to focus down. Mass claiming is stupid. Don't do it. The only set up I have ever seen that a mass claim would work in is Harry Potter mafia, simply because we knew what roles existed and any duplicates were mafia. Hence why it was banned.
The third thing that struck me as really odd was his reference to an ability to increase the incineration zone. It strikes me as something he is pulling out as being similar to one of the mafia's own abilities. Increasing the incineration zone is a move that would be clearly beneficial to mafia since it would allow them to kill off many town at once, possibly even safely if they can control exactly when the zone increases.
I think this is more than enough for a day one lynch and I feel fine with it. If we also wanna push Keifru I would be alright with that too.
I agree that mass claim is absolutely idiotic, but I don't see why you're using the consideration of a mass claim against him. Then again I'm used to mass claim discussion (or soft claim) in every game I've ever played. May be different here.
Your third point, I find reasonable.
I am still somewhat irked that you immediately moved him without bringing this up, and then pushing/pulling him later.
On March 19 2011 11:15 bumatlarge wrote:
I've said that I don't like GM's voting plan. You can get reads on people who PoP early, and from what I've seen of the people shoving darm around, they don't really have a lot of reason to do that as mafia. Fairly simple, but I don't think I'm wrong. Now making excuses for mafia to withhold their PoPs via useless voting poll so they can analyze the game board and the votes to put PoPs where they want.
My main concern is Keifru and his pretty obvious attempt at grabbing town reins. Not going to pointlessly pull him yet since Ace gave an extension, and 7 consecutive pulls is easy to fudge if he actually s mafia. Especially since 4 people PoP'd.
Oh, I'm basically mimicking what RoL said so yeah +1 him.
So your read on RoL's early (first person to PoP? I don't recall off the top of my head) as pro-town?
Obvious attempt at grabbing the reins? Interesting. Last I checked mafia included argueing about your thoughts and what you believe. Barn noted.
EPT
