|
On November 03 2011 08:35 Crofty wrote:
Well hi there.
So, its been a couple of hours since the day started, and already two votes on Team Liquid, due to "Crofty is silent" and Crofty is an unknown factor.
Which, frankly, is fair enough. Since I am a newcomer to these forums, and since you haven't had the pleasure of playing mafia with me before, I am a decent enough safe first vote. This also would provoke me to respond by posting, and hopefully giving you some data to work with. Had the tables been turned, I would likely do the same thing, so I'll let this slide for now.
What would you like to know?
i would like to know how you like playing with gm so far is he being nice to u? what kind of stuff is he telling you in your qt?
|
On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes.
gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha
|
United States22154 Posts
On November 03 2011 08:39 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes. gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha
Oh, frag, I forgot its a 9 team game. Oops. In my mind the smallest game that exists has 11 players :-P
In that case I suppose I can live with leaving a player at L-1, but if anyone quickhammers I will rip them a new one.
|
On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis.
Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town.
|
On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town.
wow that was a total waste of my time lets talk about how we should play this game by not looking at our pm are you sure u are not in qt with gm/notchezinu/schrödinger. this would probably only be good for mafia bcuz they are the only ones who want to hide something and also power roles but i dont like the idea at all and it is also too late.
|
On November 03 2011 08:41 GMarshal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:39 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes. gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha Oh, frag, I forgot its a 9 team game. Oops. In my mind the smallest game that exists has 11 players :-P In that case I suppose I can live with leaving a player at L-1, but if anyone quickhammers I will rip them a new one.
...
I'm suspicious, but I'll let this slide for a sec because something bigger just appeared
On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town.
What in the eff
Pretending you don't know what your role is, is something that scum like to do. You're advocating people split their team up so your team makes less mistakes (townies should not be afraid of making mistakes, but scum should be).
Town don't strive to prevent all mistakes. Town strive to find scum. That's it. On the contrary, it's SCUM who strive to prevent mistakes. They don't want to be caught.
So...not only is your "plan" unworkable, the things you are suggesting we should do are what scum would do, not town.
##vote Team Edward
|
On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town.
That doesn´t make sense. This tactic only help scum, Town don´t risk looking scummy from just knowing their role, so only scum would do this.
Why are you thinking so much about a pro-scum tactic?
|
On November 03 2011 08:48 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:41 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:39 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes. gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha Oh, frag, I forgot its a 9 team game. Oops. In my mind the smallest game that exists has 11 players :-P In that case I suppose I can live with leaving a player at L-1, but if anyone quickhammers I will rip them a new one. ... I'm suspicious, but I'll let this slide for a sec because something bigger just appeared Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. What in the eff Pretending you don't know what your role is, is something that scum like to do. You're advocating people split their team up so your team makes less mistakes (townies should not be afraid of making mistakes, but scum should be). Town don't strive to prevent all mistakes. Town strive to find scum. That's it. On the contrary, it's SCUM who strive to prevent mistakes. They don't want to be caught. So...not only is your "plan" unworkable, the things you are suggesting we should do are what scum would do, not town. ##vote Team Edward
Ouch that came out wrong :p
Eventhough i still think this is the best way of playing team mafia, i'm not promoting it. Everyone read there msg, everyone knows there role so actually nobody can do what i've told. I was actually thinking this right when i subscribed for this game, thats why i asked if we made our teams ourself. I just didn't want to have someone else to profit from.
|
On November 03 2011 08:57 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:48 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:41 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:39 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes. gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha Oh, frag, I forgot its a 9 team game. Oops. In my mind the smallest game that exists has 11 players :-P In that case I suppose I can live with leaving a player at L-1, but if anyone quickhammers I will rip them a new one. ... I'm suspicious, but I'll let this slide for a sec because something bigger just appeared On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. What in the eff Pretending you don't know what your role is, is something that scum like to do. You're advocating people split their team up so your team makes less mistakes (townies should not be afraid of making mistakes, but scum should be). Town don't strive to prevent all mistakes. Town strive to find scum. That's it. On the contrary, it's SCUM who strive to prevent mistakes. They don't want to be caught. So...not only is your "plan" unworkable, the things you are suggesting we should do are what scum would do, not town. ##vote Team Edward Ouch that came out wrong :p Eventhough i still think this is the best way of playing team mafia, i'm not promoting it. Everyone read there msg, everyone knows there role so actually nobody can do what i've told. I was actually thinking this right when i subscribed for this game, thats why i asked if we made our teams ourself. I just didn't want to have someone else to profit from.
but u are promoting it you wrote it in the thread why do you post something if u are not promoting it do u feel like you have to put something in thread so u just put something you thought of before game in there and then you have a post?
|
On November 03 2011 08:48 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. That doesn´t make sense. This tactic only help scum, Town don´t risk looking scummy from just knowing their role, so only scum would do this. Why are you thinking so much about a pro-scum tactic?
This actually does not hinder town in any way. Since only the not-knowing person is actually posting and the other one paraphrasing, town does not lose a townie. You still have to do analysis with your teammate about all the other teams (without talking about own team), so you got all the pieces.
If townie: your team actually plays as regular townie, so no harm
If blue: your team plays as regular townie, so no extra eyes on you
If scum: you play as town the first 2 days, you lose a lot of suspicion because of this.
|
On November 03 2011 09:01 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:57 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:48 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:41 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:39 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes. gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha Oh, frag, I forgot its a 9 team game. Oops. In my mind the smallest game that exists has 11 players :-P In that case I suppose I can live with leaving a player at L-1, but if anyone quickhammers I will rip them a new one. ... I'm suspicious, but I'll let this slide for a sec because something bigger just appeared On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. What in the eff Pretending you don't know what your role is, is something that scum like to do. You're advocating people split their team up so your team makes less mistakes (townies should not be afraid of making mistakes, but scum should be). Town don't strive to prevent all mistakes. Town strive to find scum. That's it. On the contrary, it's SCUM who strive to prevent mistakes. They don't want to be caught. So...not only is your "plan" unworkable, the things you are suggesting we should do are what scum would do, not town. ##vote Team Edward Ouch that came out wrong :p Eventhough i still think this is the best way of playing team mafia, i'm not promoting it. Everyone read there msg, everyone knows there role so actually nobody can do what i've told. I was actually thinking this right when i subscribed for this game, thats why i asked if we made our teams ourself. I just didn't want to have someone else to profit from. but u are promoting it you wrote it in the thread why do you post something if u are not promoting it do u feel like you have to put something in thread so u just put something you thought of before game in there and then you have a post?
actually i thought it would be received by cheers because of my insight in this team-game set up.. This is genuine the best way to play this kind of mafia.
|
On November 03 2011 08:21 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:12 redFF wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
We will defiantly have to rely on FOSing a lot more early on in the day, rather than pressure voting like a lot of us normaly do.
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. for the first part, i totally disagree. it's not like a pressure vote will turn into a 6 hour quicklynch, and if it does, then that's not always a bad thing. I prefer this method of voting tbh, don't look at it as a negative, but as a positive! Change is fun and exciting! for the second part yes and yes. LOL Red saying yes to both. Remember PYP:I, red? Where consistently a bunch of us kept saying you were scummy as hell, but ON was reasonable? It seems rather funny that you would be willing to only use one half of the two player unit as a basis for finding scum. Had we done that in PYP:I town would've had ample reason to shoot you in the face night 1. In answer to GreyMist's question, IMO we should consider the behavior of both players, particularly in cases where one player is known to be hard to read. If that person is paired with a relatively easy read, (damn I wish Mig was in this game hahaha) then I think we should lean more toward the person who is easier to read, for obvious reasons. The two player unit is very good for town. It provides us more information than we would normally have, as there is more behavior and there are more posts to analyze. Or at least, I hope this is how it turns out. If town starts succumbing to inactivity (as is the norm lately) I'll be rather pissed.
whatever bro, i was really busy in pypi and barely ever posted. you don't have to be a dick especially when you agree with me. of course we consider the behavior of both players but if one guy is obv scum you dont just go other guy looks town derp.
|
On November 03 2011 09:04 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:48 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. That doesn´t make sense. This tactic only help scum, Town don´t risk looking scummy from just knowing their role, so only scum would do this. Why are you thinking so much about a pro-scum tactic? This actually does not hinder town in any way. Since only the not-knowing person is actually posting and the other one paraphrasing, town does not lose a townie. You still have to do analysis with your teammate about all the other teams (without talking about own team), so you got all the pieces. If townie: your team actually plays as regular townie, so no harm If blue: your team plays as regular townie, so no extra eyes on you If scum: you play as town the first 2 days, you lose a lot of suspicion because of this.
and then you accidentally lead the bandwagon on your godfather....
|
On November 03 2011 09:06 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 09:01 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:57 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:48 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:41 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:39 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes. gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha Oh, frag, I forgot its a 9 team game. Oops. In my mind the smallest game that exists has 11 players :-P In that case I suppose I can live with leaving a player at L-1, but if anyone quickhammers I will rip them a new one. ... I'm suspicious, but I'll let this slide for a sec because something bigger just appeared On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. What in the eff Pretending you don't know what your role is, is something that scum like to do. You're advocating people split their team up so your team makes less mistakes (townies should not be afraid of making mistakes, but scum should be). Town don't strive to prevent all mistakes. Town strive to find scum. That's it. On the contrary, it's SCUM who strive to prevent mistakes. They don't want to be caught. So...not only is your "plan" unworkable, the things you are suggesting we should do are what scum would do, not town. ##vote Team Edward Ouch that came out wrong :p Eventhough i still think this is the best way of playing team mafia, i'm not promoting it. Everyone read there msg, everyone knows there role so actually nobody can do what i've told. I was actually thinking this right when i subscribed for this game, thats why i asked if we made our teams ourself. I just didn't want to have someone else to profit from. but u are promoting it you wrote it in the thread why do you post something if u are not promoting it do u feel like you have to put something in thread so u just put something you thought of before game in there and then you have a post? actually i thought it would be received by cheers because of my insight in this team-game set up.. This is genuine the best way to play this kind of mafia.
ah
6/10
|
On November 03 2011 09:04 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:48 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. That doesn´t make sense. This tactic only help scum, Town don´t risk looking scummy from just knowing their role, so only scum would do this. Why are you thinking so much about a pro-scum tactic? This actually does not hinder town in any way. Since only the not-knowing person is actually posting and the other one paraphrasing, town does not lose a townie. You still have to do analysis with your teammate about all the other teams (without talking about own team), so you got all the pieces. If townie: your team actually plays as regular townie, so no harm If blue: your team plays as regular townie, so no extra eyes on you If scum: you play as town the first 2 days, you lose a lot of suspicion because of this.
At the beginning of the game town is at a disadvantage because we have less information than the scum have initially. Therefore it is in our best interest to play in a way that brings clarity rather than deceit.
Think about this, if you do not know the role of your team, you basically have 2 choices. There is a higher probability you are a member of the town, so you can simply play like a VT until you learn otherwise, or you can lurk and play like a 3rd party. with this in mind, Lets look again how people would behave if they took your advice.
VT team: Probally no difference in behavior
Blue team: one person might be slightly lurkish, other guy like a VT. Nothing really to gain from this except maybe mafia will find the blue easeir
Mafia team: they arnt going to follow your plan anyway, as the other mafia team member will just contact his teammate and let him know he is mafia with him
So congrats, by following your plan we have created a world in which mafia gain an advantage. Yay! Oh wait....
|
On November 03 2011 09:08 redFF wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:21 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:12 redFF wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
We will defiantly have to rely on FOSing a lot more early on in the day, rather than pressure voting like a lot of us normaly do.
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. for the first part, i totally disagree. it's not like a pressure vote will turn into a 6 hour quicklynch, and if it does, then that's not always a bad thing. I prefer this method of voting tbh, don't look at it as a negative, but as a positive! Change is fun and exciting! for the second part yes and yes. LOL Red saying yes to both. Remember PYP:I, red? Where consistently a bunch of us kept saying you were scummy as hell, but ON was reasonable? It seems rather funny that you would be willing to only use one half of the two player unit as a basis for finding scum. Had we done that in PYP:I town would've had ample reason to shoot you in the face night 1. In answer to GreyMist's question, IMO we should consider the behavior of both players, particularly in cases where one player is known to be hard to read. If that person is paired with a relatively easy read, (damn I wish Mig was in this game hahaha) then I think we should lean more toward the person who is easier to read, for obvious reasons. The two player unit is very good for town. It provides us more information than we would normally have, as there is more behavior and there are more posts to analyze. Or at least, I hope this is how it turns out. If town starts succumbing to inactivity (as is the norm lately) I'll be rather pissed. whatever bro, i was really busy in pypi and barely ever posted. you don't have to be a dick especially when you agree with me. of course we consider the behavior of both players but if one guy is obv scum you dont just go other guy looks town derp.
Except I'm telling you straight up it's more complicated than that, and you should understand it simply because you and ON were that two headed monstrosity of confusion last game.
All game long I remember talking to people (including Mig, Foolish, Kav) who kept saying, damn Jacuzzisplatt is scummy as hell. It was primarily because of you. I saw what they were seeing, but I didn't believe you two were scum because ON posted very reasonably and I talked to him for quite a bit on IRC.
You, on the other hand, couldn't have been scummier.
I think basing our reads on both players is necessary, but with the caveat that if we have conflicting reads on the two halves we need to take the one that's easier to read into account.
Ex. if an incredibly easy-to-read player A looks scummy while his partner B (who is much harder to read) looks town then we should give more weight to the scum half.
|
On November 03 2011 09:04 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:48 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. That doesn´t make sense. This tactic only help scum, Town don´t risk looking scummy from just knowing their role, so only scum would do this. Why are you thinking so much about a pro-scum tactic? This actually does not hinder town in any way. Since only the not-knowing person is actually posting and the other one paraphrasing, town does not lose a townie. You still have to do analysis with your teammate about all the other teams (without talking about own team), so you got all the pieces. If townie: your team actually plays as regular townie, so no harm If blue: your team plays as regular townie, so no extra eyes on you If scum: you play as town the first 2 days, you lose a lot of suspicion because of this.
lol wat yes it hinders town since you only have half the material to base reads on half of everything in thread is going to be ppl who do not know who they and all analysis of people who do not know who they are will be invalid too, maybe slightly more people will scumhunt but less content to scumhunt from. this is only good for scum who can just sit back, they can maybe do it but nobody else should. maybe power roles if mafia has more kp than town but other than that no.
|
On November 03 2011 09:12 GreYMisT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 09:04 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:48 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. That doesn´t make sense. This tactic only help scum, Town don´t risk looking scummy from just knowing their role, so only scum would do this. Why are you thinking so much about a pro-scum tactic? This actually does not hinder town in any way. Since only the not-knowing person is actually posting and the other one paraphrasing, town does not lose a townie. You still have to do analysis with your teammate about all the other teams (without talking about own team), so you got all the pieces. If townie: your team actually plays as regular townie, so no harm If blue: your team plays as regular townie, so no extra eyes on you If scum: you play as town the first 2 days, you lose a lot of suspicion because of this. At the beginning of the game town is at a disadvantage because we have less information than the scum have initially. Therefore it is in our best interest to play in a way that brings clarity rather than deceit. Think about this, if you do not know the role of your team, you basically have 2 choices. There is a higher probability you are a member of the town, so you can simply play like a VT until you learn otherwise, or you can lurk and play like a 3rd party. with this in mind, Lets look again how people would behave if they took your advice. VT team: Probally no difference in behavior Blue team: one person might be slightly lurkish, other guy like a VT. Nothing really to gain from this except maybe mafia will find the blue easeir Mafia team: they arnt going to follow your plan anyway, as the other mafia team member will just contact his teammate and let him know he is mafia with him So congrats, by following your plan we have created a world in which mafia gain an advantage. Yay! Oh wait....
No, the one who does not know should play as a regular townie.. nothing else. The one who knows should be active, but mainly paraphrasing. The key lies in the quality of the paraphrasing.
And if you're scum, the one who knows should inform the other scums.
You'll see the next team game, half of you will be doing it.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On November 03 2011 08:21 wherebugsgo wrote:
If town starts succumbing to inactivity (as is the norm lately) I'll be rather pissed.
*wink wink*
*nudge nudge*
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Also, we've all read our role pms. New discussion topic please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
