|
ALLEYCAT BLUES51622 Posts
On November 25 2011 23:42 zeks wrote:
personally i think although the number of scum is high at 16 - we do have 80 players so the potential to bus is really limited to 1 candidate. And with past experience that scum almost always pushes one candidate of their own leads me to think one of the top vote getters is scum
terrible logic,voting period is very long so it generally becomes easier for everyone to scumread the voters,remember that not all of them are really good roleplayers, so if any of them let themselves slip it becomes easier to just stop beleiving in the scum candidate and vote for other candidates.
|
lol zeks. Look what bad logic does!
|
I think Zeks should be applauded, he just proved to me that most people will be using logic this game, and know how to identify bad logic
|
wow okay i got destroyed. =|
|
Palmar- I wasn't cheating. The question I asked has been asked in numerous previous games. Kav even had me lynched in a similar scenario.
WBG - YM always plays like that. So no I didn't see it as a scum tell.
On the DT plan - As with any plan put forth in a game (particularly one of this size) the problem is getting all of our DTs to follow it. You know that is never going to happen. If you think it is you're naive. Putting out a list of players for DTs to check just gives the scum team an opportunity for one of them to impersonate a DT. I have no issue with attempting to rapidly verify the validity of DT checks I just don't see it working the way you guys are hoping it will. Ya I'm a pessimist.
I'm most likely either going to vote Palmar or BC. Haven't decided yet.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES51622 Posts
whats really interesting is wbg's intentions on chasing me.
|
BlindRawr, you need to start posting some real commentary on what has been discussed; like the cases on prplhz and youngminii; and how for example, you think supersoft's play has been proceeding. Your filter shows unproductive posts, and you can't just catch up on them.
WRT the BC/wbg plan, I support it but feel that our target player pool is too large; given the difficulty of getting all of them lynched/vig shotted. I am extremely concerned that we will not have enough vig shots later on in the game if we happen to hit townies, and that our mayor may have to use an immediate double lynch in his powers. However, if the reward is that we can get DTs to actually do some proper checks of null-tells without worrying about whether those checks are correct or fucked up, it would be a calculated risk that we should take.
In my opinion, we should trim the target scummy list to 8 from 10, because it will make it easier to focus down and create better cases on 8 people than try to go for 10 and have less-than-ironclad explanations for them.
|
On November 26 2011 00:12 Jackal58 wrote:
Palmar- I wasn't cheating. The question I asked has been asked in numerous previous games. Kav even had me lynched in a similar scenario.
WBG - YM always plays like that. So no I didn't see it as a scum tell.
Well I see it as abusing. I am fine with releasing who sent me my PM, but I think it's using out of game/irrelevant information to achieve lynches (similar to using the format of role pms, etc).
Hosts: Am I allowed to release information on who sent me my role PM?
|
|
|
xsksc has been replaced by LSB!
Penke has been replaced by annul!
Welcome to the game!
Reminder that Day 1 ends at 03:00 GMT (+00:00) Saturday, November 26.
|
On November 26 2011 00:12 Jackal58 wrote:
Palmar- I wasn't cheating. The question I asked has been asked in numerous previous games. Kav even had me lynched in a similar scenario.
WBG - YM always plays like that. So no I didn't see it as a scum tell.
On the DT plan - As with any plan put forth in a game (particularly one of this size) the problem is getting all of our DTs to follow it. You know that is never going to happen. If you think it is you're naive. Putting out a list of players for DTs to check just gives the scum team an opportunity for one of them to impersonate a DT. I have no issue with attempting to rapidly verify the validity of DT checks I just don't see it working the way you guys are hoping it will. Ya I'm a pessimist.
I'm most likely either going to vote Palmar or BC. Haven't decided yet.
You probably don't understand this plan. The plan doesn't contain claiming. The DTs do their job silently and breadcrumb the results; and if they die, voilá we got the informations.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
Reminds me:
##Vote: Palmar
Already posted my reasons earlier
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Remember folks, the strongest power of the mayor this game is not the lynch or their experience at guiding the town, it is the four double lynches. I want to here from everyone if they agree that double lynches should be used early in the game. The last thing we need is for a mayor to decide to start double lynching day four or five, we realize he is scum by then, and we have lost four bonus lynches. I haven't read the young case due to only having a couple minutes to skim, but I'm always weary of a player who is 100% confident on a day one scum read and cannot see any alternatives. I'll try to comment on the dt plan if I have time sometime today or during the night cycle.
Are there any candidates who are running on a Palmar or Sandroba lynch?
I've been condemned to shopping and a ballet tonight, so I'm not sure I would be able to be around for the lynch, so I probably wouldn't be the best choice. I'm still surprised at the lack of alternative candidates. We don't want to elect the most active player, we want to elect the players that are most likely town. Are we currently satisfied with the 2 we have now?
|
Bookmarked.
About half the people in the game haven't posted other than /in.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
Hosts, can we get an updated count on the votes so far?
|
On November 26 2011 00:25 Hassybaby wrote:
Reminds me:
##Vote: Palmar
Already posted my reasons earlier
I only see this in your earlier posts.
On November 25 2011 00:54 Hassybaby wrote:
youngminii's campaign feels a lot more like a smear than one based on logical reasons. I don't see a clear outline of why he should be mayor, but reason of why Palmar shouldn't. For that reason, I just don't trust him
Palmar's campaign definitely points out his veteran status :D, and I don't mind that. He's also been following through a fair few points that he's made. He's been vocal, he's been answering questions and accusations. However, I'm going to vote;
Bloodycobbler because I think he's shown almost the same levels of activeness and assistant that Palmar has, but his plan seems more transparent. Whether it works or not, it will be clear either way imo.
One question to Palmar though; you mentioned that you would be using traditional scumhunting methods. With a game this newbie-heavy, surely you know that there is a good change a fair few do not know what that totally entails. Don't you think that's an issue?
On November 25 2011 00:54 Hassybaby wrote:
I haven't voted yet because I feel that the two "factions" have some valid points. However, as it is right now, I am leaning towards Palmar. While both sides may have reasonable points of interest, I currently feel that the modified DT plan is solid and logical, and its clearly stated how it could or could not affect the game. On top of this, I agree with Palmar's scumread on youngminii. His attempt at discredit had no real value, and his logic is contradicting himself. To me it feels like he's scum, or just a very unreliable townie. Either way, I feel he needs to go.
what happened?
|
On November 26 2011 00:24 supersoft wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2011 00:12 Jackal58 wrote:
Palmar- I wasn't cheating. The question I asked has been asked in numerous previous games. Kav even had me lynched in a similar scenario.
WBG - YM always plays like that. So no I didn't see it as a scum tell.
On the DT plan - As with any plan put forth in a game (particularly one of this size) the problem is getting all of our DTs to follow it. You know that is never going to happen. If you think it is you're naive. Putting out a list of players for DTs to check just gives the scum team an opportunity for one of them to impersonate a DT. I have no issue with attempting to rapidly verify the validity of DT checks I just don't see it working the way you guys are hoping it will. Ya I'm a pessimist.
I'm most likely either going to vote Palmar or BC. Haven't decided yet. You probably don't understand this plan. The plan doesn't contain claiming. The DTs do their job silently and breadcrumb the results; and if they die, voilá we got the informations.
I understand the plan completely. I also believe a list on day 1 or night 1 will allow scum to abuse it. I also believe attempting to get a group of people to blindly coordinate and cooperate in a mafia game is a pipe dream. I'm not saying it's not worth trying. I'm saying the law of unintended consequences is going to take over.
Hello LSB and Annul.
|
On November 25 2011 19:27 wherebugsgo wrote:My Addendum to BC's Plan: Optimally, we get like 4-6 more scumreads so that we can get a good list of around 8-10 people we want dead. Indeed, they don't all have to be checked n1. Some can be checked n1, some can be checked n2. Essentially, the way I imagine it working is like this: Step 1: We assign each player on the list of potential scum a number. Let's imagine that our list is this: 1. youngminii 2. prplhz 3. Erandorr 4. Blind_Rawr So, what we do is this: any DT who accepts the plan who is in the top 1/4 of players will check youngminii. This would be any DT in this list: + Show Spoiler +1.) Erandorr
2.) Tyrran
3.) kitaman27
4.) sandroba
5.) bonifaceviii
6.) Kurumi
7.) BLinD-RawR
8.) tnkted
9.) GreYMisT
10.) Serejai
11.) Toadesstern
12.) tube
13.) redFF
14.) Vain
15.) eezyBash
16.) Mattchew
17.) Jackal58
18.) Belial-
19.) Palmar
20.) MrZentor Step 2: Coordinate the DTs on n1 and n2 Any DT who is in the second quarter will check #2, prplhz. So, that means, any DT in this list: + Show Spoiler +21.) Risen
22.) Nokarot
23,) risk.nuke
24.) minus_human
25.) IMABUNNEH
26.) wherebugsgo
27.) dukethegold
28.) iLoveKT
29.) mcht
30.) ohN
31.) The1stNewbie
32.) t3tsubo
33.) cosine
34.) xtfftc
35.) DeadlyPsycho
36.) hyshes
37.) Chanyman
38.) Drazerk
39.) Penke
40.) ey215 And so on. Statistically it is equally likely for our DTs to be in any one of these lists. Once we split it 8-10 ways with 8-10 different players, we actually have it even better. On n1, have all the DTs in the top quarter/fifth flip a coin and pick either player #1 or player #2. Have all the players in the second quarter/fifth flip a coin and pick either #3 or #4, and so on. On n2, have all the DTs pick the other player. This type of random DT check mechanism makes it incredibly hard for scum to manipulate. All the DTs will be guaranteed two checks, with many of them having both checks flip on day 3. We can even lynch into the list to ensure that at least one player flips by day 3. Step 3: Coordinate the vigilantes on n2. We do the same exact thing with the vigges on n2. The vigilantes can't shoot till n2. That's fine. We have them shoot with the same mechanism, into the list of players. Some DTs will hopefully have two flipped targets. Some will have only one, but that's still good. Millers will flip as miller. Scum will flip scum. Most misleading mechanics will be dealt with. Framing will only work for the targets that live, and with this plan most of them should die. Vigilantes who shoot into the list and their target does not die MUST CLAIM THE SHOT IMMEDIATELY. This means that their target was protected, and in this plan the only people who are protected are scum, since it would be moronic for a town doctor to be protecting into a public list of scumreads.
See, this is the kind of detail I wanted out of a plan. BloodyC0bbler's version of this was "I'm gonna post a list. 1) DTs choose one randomly 2) rolecops choose one randomly 3) profit!"
The reason I agreed about BloodyC0bbler looking scummy is because there was absolutely no detail in his plan to ensure that reads could be compared. It was what appeared to be a plan, but in application would have played directly into scum hands by it being absolute bloody chaos.
I'd still be in favour of lynching BC over it, but wbg has actually made a scumplan into a workable strategy.
##Unvote: Erandorr
##Vote: wherebugsgo
|
United States3910 Posts
The issue i see is im worried about framers/gfs fucking with everyone's sanities. I still think todays lynch should be someone who ran for mayor, because of those people we will have 2/3 scum. The amount of non-posters on sandroba's mayoral campaign is weird, but i also think his opposition to the dt plan is valid.
we need analysis. we've got what, 2 coherent cases so far? sandroba you say you think bc is scum. tell us why.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
@supersoft The second part where you've highlighted my indecision is where I stated my reasons, but at the time they were points where I was leaning towards Palmar. I'm an economics major IRL, so I like a plan. I like to see the pros and cons, the opportunities, the potential threats. That way, I know where I stand if it goes through, or as close as possible. I feel that way with the DT plan, and the fact that sandroba has only been able to give:
@Hassybaby This game has too many counter measures to DTs, so no plan is good. DTs real strengh will come later when we have a bunch of checks breadcrumb and flips to tell the sanities apart. The method is to have all DTs breadcrumb their checks regardless and determine their sanity later. Contrary to what BC is saying this does not fuck with town.
And syllogism has only give criticism as opposed to a counter-plan. That's what convinced me
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
