|
On April 25 2011 22:43 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2011 22:38 Impervious wrote:
Guys, this talk about breadcrumbing is nice and all, but I don't see it going much further at the moment. We should probably wait a while before bringing this up, so we can catch a slip up. Especially if they are trying to hide their posting in the thread.
I think we should talk about the pros and cons of of double-checking anyone who gets the result of "insufficient analysis", to make it easier on the DT.
The pros of double checking are that you are more sure of the result. The cons are that you could be checking someone else instead, therefore checking more people. I really think the cons outweigh the pros in this case.
Thoughts? Even if you double checked someone and got "Incomplete Analysis" it's a waste of time. If you get it once and you checked the person because you assumed they were scum it's better to come out with it and play the odds that they are CL and not that you hit the 25% chance you rolled the wrong result. Also there may be other roles not listed in the OP that have this same effect. Whether they are good or bad you won't know so you could end up wasting another day of your check to get you no further than your first check. Just roll with the odds on this one.
That's pretty exactly what I was thinking. I just wanted to make sure I'm not alone on this one.
|
Ace, I trust your analysis and think you are a smart player, but I don't like the idea of feeding ideas to the cell leader. I don't see how this can be helpful for town as I can think of other methods of comunicating with the sleeper agents that do not involve using the posts in this thread.
|
On April 25 2011 22:39 GMarshal wrote:
I like that question, I'll take the first shot at answering it.
Now, I'm assuming one person is receiving the message.
1.) Ace- "I'm the pardoner from XXXVIII": with a veteran player like Ace I would be trying to get as much information to him as possible, information is power and even with only a little bit of it I'm sure he could get stuff done
2.) Mr. Wiggles - " mafia will post 'serial killer' " or some other breadcrumb that would allow me to reveal myself to him and then the rest of the team. I might think of a more clever breadcrumb than that, and if it were clever enough I might use it for ace instead.
3.) why- same as for wiggles, as a veteran player both of them are people I could count on to work it into their regular posts without worrying too much about them messing up.
Nothing against you, but I haven't played or checked out a game where why has played. I would have put you in the 3rd spot.
|
United States22154 Posts
On April 25 2011 22:38 Impervious wrote:
Guys, this talk about breadcrumbing is nice and all, but I don't see it going much further at the moment. We should probably wait a while before bringing this up, so we can catch a slip up. Especially if they are trying to hide their posting in the thread.
I think we should talk about the pros and cons of of double-checking anyone who gets the result of "insufficient analysis", to make it easier on the DT.
The pros of double checking are that you are more sure of the result. The cons are that you could be checking someone else instead, therefore checking more people. I really think the cons outweigh the pros in this case.
Thoughts?
I think the DT should just push for a lynch on the target 75% chance of having the cell leader is worth the gamble of accidentally getting a town player lynched, IMO. Sure it might suck for the town player getting the shit end of the stick, but hey, we die for the greater glory and all that.
I also think this is usless discussion that allows scum to blend in, I'm sure the mafia is content to debate this to death, rather than worrying about us sabotaging their cutesy plans. Still I want to see what you guys awnser to Ace's question
|
On April 25 2011 22:38 Impervious wrote:
Guys, this talk about breadcrumbing is nice and all, but I don't see it going much further at the moment. We should probably wait a while before bringing this up, so we can catch a slip up. Especially if they are trying to hide their posting in the thread.
I think we should talk about the pros and cons of of double-checking anyone who gets the result of "insufficient analysis", to make it easier on the DT.
The pros of double checking are that you are more sure of the result. The cons are that you could be checking someone else instead, therefore checking more people. I really think the cons outweigh the pros in this case.
Thoughts?
Well it depends on the case. if you suspect someone heavily of breadcrumbing and get "insufficient analysis" there is a great chance of him being the cell leader. if you checked someone who hasn't posted that much the dt should maybe check again as it could be a blue. If i was a DT i would only double check in very extreme cases. Mind that the Cell leader will post a bit to breadcrumb.
|
On April 25 2011 22:46 sandroba wrote:
Ace, I trust your analysis and think you are a smart player, but I don't like the idea of feeding ideas to the cell leader. I don't see how this can be helpful for town as I can think of other methods of comunicating with the sleeper agents that do not involve using the posts in this thread.
Well you can keep those methods to yourself since you don't seem intent on sharing. What I'm doing here is something else. Guess you'll just have to read into it a bit more.
|
I agree with never double checking. I also think the DT should not reveal himself early and try to push for a lynch based on analysis if he gets a positive result. As there are probably 5 mafia in the game and we don't know how many DTs and no medic, trading for mafia 1 for 1 early is not a good deal for town.
|
On April 25 2011 22:47 GMarshal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2011 22:38 Impervious wrote:
Guys, this talk about breadcrumbing is nice and all, but I don't see it going much further at the moment. We should probably wait a while before bringing this up, so we can catch a slip up. Especially if they are trying to hide their posting in the thread.
I think we should talk about the pros and cons of of double-checking anyone who gets the result of "insufficient analysis", to make it easier on the DT.
The pros of double checking are that you are more sure of the result. The cons are that you could be checking someone else instead, therefore checking more people. I really think the cons outweigh the pros in this case.
Thoughts? I think the DT should just push for a lynch on the target 75% chance of having the cell leader is worth the gamble of accidentally getting a town player lynched, IMO. Sure it might suck for the town player getting the shit end of the stick, but hey, we die for the greater glory and all that. I also think this is usless discussion that allows scum to blend in, I'm sure the mafia is content to debate this to death, rather than worrying about us sabotaging their cutesy plans. Still I want to see what you guys awnser to Ace's question
Actually, you're wrong with the "75%" thing.
There's a 1/15 chance that the cell leader will be checked tonight (based on pure percentages). There's a 14/15 chance that a non cell leader will be checked tonight (also based on pure percentages).
If the cell leader is checked, it will show up as insufficient analysis. If a non cell leader is checked, it'll show up as insufficient analysis in 25% of the checks.
Ultimately, this means that a result of insufficient analysis tonight leads to a 22.2% chance of actually being the cell leader..... IT IS NOT 75%.
However, lynching them is still the best move. Assuming 4 sleeper cells and the cell leader, out of a total of 15 people who could be checked, it adds up to about a 50% chance of hitting a red by lynching anyone who gets "insufficient analysis" tonight.
When you add in factors like intentionally checking scummy players (increasing your chance of checking the right people), then this is by far the best choice.
|
On April 25 2011 22:54 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2011 22:46 sandroba wrote:
Ace, I trust your analysis and think you are a smart player, but I don't like the idea of feeding ideas to the cell leader. I don't see how this can be helpful for town as I can think of other methods of comunicating with the sleeper agents that do not involve using the posts in this thread. Well you can keep those methods to yourself since you don't seem intent on sharing. What I'm doing here is something else. Guess you'll just have to read into it a bit more.
I'm going to post my three people without the msg then.
Ace, GM, Mr. Wiggles.
I would inform them of all other mafia players so they can operate normally without the fear of mislynching one of the other agents.
|
I forgot my 3:
1.) Eiii
If I recall I played in a Mafia game with him a long time ago. I think he's the only one here that was around more than 2 years ago? If so I could send him a message and it would be clearly obvious it was from me.
2.) Jackal58
I think I've also played a game with him before and he didn't suck.
3.) GMarshal/darmousseh/GGQ
I've modded games with all 3 of them participating. All 3 of them played decently in the last game I ran so they'd be prime choices.
|
sandroba post your messages too. I'd like to know your relations to whoever you picked.
|
I'm not going to post it because I can reveal any 5 people with 20 chars, and maybe the cell leader can't.
|
Also my list is based purely on who I think are the best players in this game. Don't feel ofended if I didn't pick you as I've read only a limited number of mafia games.
|
huh? I dont understand that.
|
On April 25 2011 22:58 sandroba wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2011 22:54 Ace wrote:On April 25 2011 22:46 sandroba wrote:
Ace, I trust your analysis and think you are a smart player, but I don't like the idea of feeding ideas to the cell leader. I don't see how this can be helpful for town as I can think of other methods of comunicating with the sleeper agents that do not involve using the posts in this thread. Well you can keep those methods to yourself since you don't seem intent on sharing. What I'm doing here is something else. Guess you'll just have to read into it a bit more. I'm going to post my three people without the msg then. Ace, GM, Mr. Wiggles. I would inform them of all other mafia players so they can operate normally without the fear of mislynching one of the other agents.
Well thanks for that. And how would you transmit this information? You said you can do so without posting anything in the thread. I'm curious how that mechanic would work. You can't send names. You can only contact 1 at a time. You have 5 words or 20 characters/msg.
Please don't answer that. God forbid the cell leader gets his hands on super secret stealth communications abilities.
Please stop posting pointless "I would do something but I'm not telling you what it is" posts.
This thread is for discussion. If you don't feel you can discuss something don't mention it. You're beginning to look a lot like somebody that wants to post a lot of useless stuff just to appear to be contributing.
|
Are we voting in this thread, or another thread yet to be created?
|
My 3 would be
tnkted
Tackster
GMarshall
My messages to all 3 would be from shared game experiences
tnkted would be a simple one My beloved. He would know exactly who sent it.
Tackster would be just as easy. You're easiest. He also would know who it was from.
GMarshall would be a bit more difficult but it would refer to LSB's Clues and Puzzles game where we were both scum together and LSBs first clus was basically Jackal is scum. I'd have to think about how I wrote it but it would allude to that.
All of these are fun and all but basically what I'm seeing from all of these is the CL can reveal himself to cell members one at a time. Does nothing for each cell member to id each other.
For that to happen something has to be left in the thread.
|
United States22154 Posts
Also I suppose its time I started generating discussion.
##Unvote
##Vote: Mr.Wiggles
do you know why I'm voting for you Mr.Wiggles?
|
it wouldn't matter who I sent my 3 to, I'd just have to write: "Twinkle Twinkle Little Scum 3rd" and they'd know who I am.
Technically, theres no reason that scum needs to know who their buddies are if they know who the CL is. The CL can use them like a conductor, posting a scumlist or an analysis that triggers the agents to pick a certain person, perhaps the person third in the list or something (ie the 3rd from above). So I'll be watching scumlists to see if anybody dies from that.
IMO, the cell leader is going to be posting with the best of us this game. He's got to blend in more than anyone, and since he's godfather he's immune to checks. I'm guessing that the first time the DTs 'insufficently' checks a vig and the vig is lynched, we're going to be a lot less likely to lynch on results from DTs.
|
On April 25 2011 23:28 Jackal58 wrote:
My 3 would be
tnkted
Tackster
GMarshall
My messages to all 3 would be from shared game experiences
tnkted would be a simple one My beloved. He would know exactly who sent it.
Tackster would be just as easy. You're easiest. He also would know who it was from.
GMarshall would be a bit more difficult but it would refer to LSB's Clues and Puzzles game where we were both scum together and LSBs first clus was basically Jackal is scum. I'd have to think about how I wrote it but it would allude to that.
All of these are fun and all but basically what I'm seeing from all of these is the CL can reveal himself to cell members one at a time. Does nothing for each cell member to id each other.
For that to happen something has to be left in the thread.
OFFTOPIC:
LOL. dude, i was searching for that post in insane 2 and i couldn't find it, you don't happen to remember what page it was on do you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
