|
On July 05 2011 19:18 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 19:12 sandroba wrote:
@Curu Based on last game. I thought I read it in the op, but it says "night kills", so I'm probably wrong. Still all the more incentive to have double lynches every day.
Vigs work well because they are hidden and can claim their shot in thread afterwards to confirm themselves etc (since they are protown in most setups). Nukes are NOTHING like that because they have to be announced in thread, which tends to generate hate and retaliation when the player flips green and turn into a chain reaction of townie deaths. Independant thinking is gonna lead us to disaster, you can mark my words (or read WaW 1). If you want to nuke a player that badly just fucking explain us why and we will vote on it. Whatever. I'm not gonna shit up the thread by discussing a bad plan, I'm going to rely on people not being dumb as fuck.But hey, if anyone wants to play your little stifling game, then all the power to you.
Here is about the 3rd post where you called the plan bad. Also if you are suposedly able to spot bad nukes mataza should be auto scum and you should be voting for him.
|
hey sandy, how do you know Mafia has 1kp? I kinda hate to vote on something that obvious.
|
My vote was already on mataza afaik Sandroba
|
Mataza did you really nuke Sandroba not because you thought he was scummy, but because he might be the conspirator? The odds of actually hitting the conspirator with everyone in the game still alive aren't very good. I also don't know why everyone assumes the conspirator being gone will remove the radiation issue considering it says in the op EVERYONE DIES once we hit the cap. WaW had no conspirator and had the cap.
|
@Kurumi Yes, my analysis ALSO contains meta. It shows a clear discrepancy and change of behaviour in an extremelly anti-town way. Ver uses meta a lot on his analysis, are you calling his analysis bad?
|
FOR THE 4TH TIME for those not reading the thread. I don't know how many kp mafia has. I assumed it was 1 because last WaW they had 1. After I reread the OP carefully I noticed "mafia votes on night kills" so they probably have more than one.
|
Palmar isn't playing like his RTM meta, at all. At first I thought he was suicidal because he didn't really want to play (he has a new job), but he has been very active so now I'm leaning more towards to his behaviour being plain scummy.
|
On July 06 2011 17:29 sandroba wrote:
@Kurumi Yes, my analysis ALSO contains meta. It shows a clear discrepancy and change of behaviour in an extremelly anti-town way. Ver uses meta a lot on his analysis, are you calling his analysis bad?
Meta is just not reliable in the most cases.
|
No matter which philosophy you believe, Mataza broke them both.
He nuked without voting consent, breaking Sandroba's policies.
He nuked without first pushing with an analysis, breaking my policies.
He should definitely be the one to hang tonight.
|
I'm pretty sure Mataza is town. This is the weakness of the plan; dumb townies.
|
On July 06 2011 17:47 syllogism wrote:
I'm pretty sure Mataza is town. This is the weakness of the plan; dumb townies.
I still think he needs to be hanged, if we don't do it we might see scum that are not under suspicion at current do the same, and then just hide behind their good reputation.
That's why it's a policy, we need to enforce it.
|
I'm not going to lynch someone I think is town, especially if the nuke didn't actually get launched
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On July 06 2011 17:54 syllogism wrote:
I'm not going to lynch someone I think is town, especially if the nuke didn't actually get launched
His reasons for wanting to nuke don't hold up
I doubt He's scum but I doubt he is a Townie either. I am leaning to him being a conspirator. Take care of him and then see if palmar does anything more stupid to clarify his role in my opinion.
also Caller is a baller at everything.
|
i bet drazerk has a role that forces him to praise caller every time he posts
|
rofl
On July 05 2011 22:32 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 22:17 GMarshal wrote:On July 05 2011 22:08 chaos13 wrote:On July 05 2011 21:41 Palmar wrote:
Here's what I think about your plan
##Nuke: Sandroba Don't try to be a hero. Not only have you already stated you have no nukes, making this worthless and not about to help anything, but it's the night phase and you can't even use actions. If you don't agree with his plan, don't follow it. Simple as that. So far I'm seeing ten pages of "herp" "derp" "herp" "derp". I don't agree with any of the plans that have been proposed, and people didn't agree with what I suggested in lieu of them. All this arguing is doing is giving scum and conspirators a barrier to hide behind, and I can guarantee you that the conspirator(s) are somewhere in this discussion trying to influence our nuke policies. Have we done any scumhunting so far? No. So here's the deal. Come day 1, absolutely no more discussion about nuke policy. If we haven't decided on anything by then, too bad, but at that point we start scumhunting. This means that if you have a plan that you want put into effect, you need to be persuasive. If you have a plan, outline it as follows. (Your Name)'s Plan for Not Letting the Conspirator WinNuke PolicyFire/Don't Fire under the following circumstances: PunishmentThis is what happens if you break the rules: WhyExplanation for why this is the best plan: SupportHow does this plan compare to WaW 1? How could it have affected the results of that game? Other TidbitsAnything else you want to say. ##Vote: (Your Name)'s PlanAnd people will vote on your plan. The goal for these plans will be to have 12/29 players vote for them. This is relatively close to a majority, and is achievable for anyone. If we're getting close to the end of day and no plan is close to achieving it, you'll have to consider moving your vote to a different one. If no plan results in 12/29 votes, we don't follow through with it. If we do, every player is required to follow it, and if you do not, you are lynched. A plan must follow the format as outlined above in order to be eligible for voting. Now stop derping and get stuff done. Im pretty sure theres only like 3 hours to game start. Anyway we are using the sandroba plan with majority vote unless someone (other than Palmar) objects strenuously. GMrobas's Plan for Not Letting the Conspirator WinNuke PolicyOne nuke is shot per day, if a majority of players (50%) agrees to it. no other nukes are fired for any reason PunishmentPolicy lynched, no excuses allowed, you fire, you die. Whydouble lynch, increased information, decent use of kp, no need to fire if its not necessary/an appropriate target cannot be deiced upon SupportIts not a clusterfuck Other TidbitsHi coag. ##Vote: GMroba's plan First of all thanks Caller for such a great mechanic for us to argue over... I fully agree with this we should just use the nukes as the majority see's it ( although I would personally have it a bit higher % or scum may be able to vote swing it if we have undecided townies around ) this way we don't fall into the conspirator's hand with all the nukes going off. As I do not have any nukes I will put my trust in those that do and hope they do not screw it up.
On July 06 2011 02:29 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2011 02:17 syllogism wrote:
Even if there are only 2 or 3 boreritish commanders, it still looks better than the alternatives. Destroying 3 nukes is pretty nice, but mafia likely can't use nukes until mid to late-game and it's quite possible for them to die without using all their nukes. Moreover, nukes can be shot down I sort of agree Provided if everyone sticks to our plan we should not see any nukes fired for a long time making option 2/3 pretty pointless, I would rather have 2-3 Confirmed veterans running around ( Also presuming they maintain their abilities ) than the mafia not being able to use 3 nukes they wasn't able to use anyway. Also Caller you are a true baller for giving us these campaign options. ##:Operation Dunkirk
On July 06 2011 03:31 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2011 03:24 Caller wrote:On July 06 2011 02:24 GMarshal wrote:On July 06 2011 02:22 syllogism wrote:
Extra lives work against nukes as well, no? No. A nuke wipes you from the face of the earth. Night kills are like invasions, and extra lives are additional troops/fortifications. Nukes don't give a damn if you have a mechanized division instead of cavalry, its still going to kill you. false.
extra lives count against missiles launched.
it will be expended if the missile is a real nuke OR a dud. Caller you are a man of great knowledge and I thank you for pointing us on the right path. With this in mind the only real reason we would now chose options 2/3 is if the radiation levels get to high but we are able to keep under control pretty easily provided we stick to GM's plan.
|
On July 06 2011 17:54 syllogism wrote:
I'm not going to lynch someone I think is town, especially if the nuke didn't actually get launched
So, first you call me out for not wanting to commit to a plan that I see flawed, but then as soon as the time comes to act on it, you pull out yourself?
What's the point of the entire argument and creating policies if we're not going to follow them?
We settled on a policy, I grudgingly did so and now people want me lynched for not instantly praising the policy, that might actually work in the conspirator's favor. Yes, I don't want to use a vote-nuke tomorrow either. We can do it later in the game, but Sandroba's eagerness to use nukes rubs me the wrong way.
But we settled on it, if we don't lynch Mataza we've basically declared the policy worthless. The brilliant part of this is that you might even know Mataza is town, and thus when this is over, you reluctantly lynch him, but gain fuckton of town credit for "trying to stop a lynch on an innocent".
I'm not going to buy this.
We're lynching Mataza, and if he flips town, I'm not giving you any town credit for trying to stop it. As far as I'm concerned you're scum. I find your willingness to break policies very anti-town, it's actually worse than arguing against them, because you're basically tearing them apart at your own wish.
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
Caller does not need other people to point out his amazing brilliance!
But yes it's part of my role.
|
United States22154 Posts
Mataza nuked. Mataza dies.
Alignment is irrelevant, this is a policy lynch, in fact, if the nuke phase isn't over I request permission to counternuke so that our lynch can actually generate information.
|
United States4714 Posts
I want to find out whether matza's nuke has actually been fired or not. If it hasn't I would lynch him just to keep it from firing. If it has then I want to lynch palmar, and then kill matza tomorrow.
I agree with pretty much everything sandroba said, palmar's play has been ridiculously scummy. His reasoning against sandroba's pro town plan was horrible and filled with spam. He wrote up a plan which basically just said shoot scum and don't play stupid. It was pure useless spam made to look pro town.
So I am going to vote for palmar for now unless I find out that matza's nuke has not been launched. And either way I want both players dead by the end of tomorrow.
|
On July 06 2011 18:26 GMarshal wrote:
Mataza nuked. Mataza dies.
Alignment is irrelevant, this is a policy lynch, in fact, if the nuke phase isn't over I request permission to counternuke so that our lynch can actually generate information.
I see no reason to counter-nuke him.
Actually, this hardly makes any sense. Sure, lynching town is somewhat bad, but it must be done, I actually think there is a chance he's scum, so I'd be fine either way.
But raising the radiation level for no reason, landing extra nukes on day one, only to take out someone who we're not even sure is scum...
Nope, as far as I'm concerned we should not counter-nuke him. Remember my policies, the ones I pushed and have put me under suspicion?
One of the things I said was "We nuke scum".
Unless we somehow have a really strong case against Mataza out of thin air, I'm not okay with nuking him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
