|
On December 12 2011 14:33 GreYMisT wrote:
/confirm
One thing of note this game is the difference in power that the mayor and the pardoner have in this game, because the mayor does not decide the day1 lynch, and the pardoner gets 2 votes. I am of the opinion that pardoner's powers should be used in extremely rare cases, and I mean really rare. All it does is serve to create WIFOM, and a repeat of the previous day. while it is obvious that we should try to elect people we think are town, I think the mayor should be someone who also has good scumhunting capabilites, while the pardoner needs to be REALLY town. Therefore i recommend people hold off their votes for now until we hear more from each of the canidates, aside from "look at all the games i was town in!"
Actually, upon thinking about this, i would like to alter something. Because the mayor has a hidden power, while the pardoner has an overt one, I would rather have the person i have the strongest town read on in the mayoral position than the pardoner one. this is because if the pardoner does use his power without good reason, he dies the next day. no questions asked.
One thing that strikes me about radfield this game is how he immediately tied himself to arctocod in his election post. saying that you should vote for me, but his guy is also a good choice, so he will probally get pardoner anyway, but still vote for me. while an argument could be made that he is trying to show all the new players who to vote for, something sets me off about this. He should theorectically know he is town, and therefore should be pulling out all the stops to get people to vote for him, not endorsing other candidates he doesn't even know the aliengment of. Because of this, i am uncomfortable voting him for mayor at this time.
|
On December 12 2011 14:53 Comprissent wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2011 14:51 GreYMisT wrote:On December 12 2011 14:33 GreYMisT wrote:
/confirm
One thing of note this game is the difference in power that the mayor and the pardoner have in this game, because the mayor does not decide the day1 lynch, and the pardoner gets 2 votes. I am of the opinion that pardoner's powers should be used in extremely rare cases, and I mean really rare. All it does is serve to create WIFOM, and a repeat of the previous day. while it is obvious that we should try to elect people we think are town, I think the mayor should be someone who also has good scumhunting capabilites, while the pardoner needs to be REALLY town. Therefore i recommend people hold off their votes for now until we hear more from each of the canidates, aside from "look at all the games i was town in!" Actually, upon thinking about this, i would like to alter something. Because the mayor has a hidden power, while the pardoner has an overt one, I would rather have the person i have the strongest town read on in the mayoral position than the pardoner one. this is because if the pardoner does use his power without good reason, he dies the next day. no questions asked. One thing that strikes me about radfield this game is how he immediately tied himself to arctocod in his election post. saying that you should vote for me, but his guy is also a good choice, so he will probally get pardoner anyway, but still vote for me. while an argument could be made that he is trying to show all the new players who to vote for, something sets me off about this. He should theorectically know he is town, and therefore should be pulling out all the stops to get people to vote for him, not endorsing other candidates he doesn't even know the aliengment of. Because of this, i am uncomfortable voting him for mayor at this time. If you are uneasy about him, then why don't you vote him for pardoner in order to keep better tabs on him? By your logic I would like to keep someone questionable in the pardoner office as it is easier to keep track of his/her actions
You don't have to be elected pardoner to be the focus of attention, and I would rather not give the scum the ability to pardon at all, than trust them to not use it.
@Griygas: it is true that we could figure out the mayor's hidden vote target. But in my experience it is very easy for scum to push a bad lynch. It would be easy for someone to justify using a double vote on a target "to make sure he gets lynched" than to justify someone pardoning.
|
On December 12 2011 15:09 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
@Greymist What do you think about what prplhz just said above your post?
Much of it I agree with. The main purpose that these roles serve is the protection due to the bodygaurd. While electing a scum mayor/pardoner would obviously not be an optimal move, they can indeed be lynched at any time. Therefore, aside from being town, there are pretty much 2 reasons why someone should be elected:
1. They are veterans who are good at this game and will most likely be targeted night one, and therefore want the gaurenteed protection.
2. they have a blue role they want protected.
Because we are not going to force the candidates to role-claim, people should be looking at #1 in combonation with your town read, when deciding who to vote for.
|
On December 12 2011 16:17 DEUS-ex-MAFIA wrote:
i dont like how the general attention is focussed on the election and not on the lynch...
@prplhz, i have to start somewhere right?!
talking about the election gives us more information on who to lynch
|
On December 12 2011 16:53 prplhz wrote:
@DEUS-ex-MAFIA Oh, I thought you said "GO to reread what they've done so far ;-)" like you'd found something and wanted people to seek it out too.
Anyway, I agree that elections should really be locked down as fast as possible, and on Radfield/Arctocod/ProfessorBadass. I don't particularly care too much who we elect among those though I'll strongly recommend Arctocod because that hydra is the best townie in the game, but I'll vote for any of these if it will keep anybody else out of office.
@GreYMisT I personally don't see anything wrong with Radfield endorsing Arctocod in his very own campaign post. Radfield knows that it will be a lot easier for town to win if both of them are elected and both of them are town so this make perfect sense to me, if Arctocod turns out not to be town then no real harm done. What I think is a bit weird is that nobody is endorsing ProfessorBadass since Curu is also pretty good at this game from what I've gathered. Wouldn't you agree with all this GreYMisT?
I agree with you that arctocod will most likely be my vote for mayor. Im leaning on electing prof. badass over rad atm, but ultimatly i am ok with either being elected into the pardoner position. the point i mentioned about radfield was just something that stood out to me initially, and sets me off on voting him for mayor. anyway, bedtime, final in a few hours. yay.
|
As I stated eariler, the purpose of this election needs to be protecting people likely to get shot on night 1
|
I will be voting for arctocod for the election, he has been the most active of all the candidates and I veiw him as most in danger of being shot night one
|
@Sheth, I'm Voting for actocod because at the present time, i am more comfortable with the idea of him as town. in addition to this, Radfield's posts have not said much about his aliegnment, whereas Arctocod is posting from more of a pro-town perspective at the moment IMO. he is also pretty likely to get shot if he is town.
|
On December 13 2011 05:00 GiygaS wrote:I have already stated that I would want an exception to the no pardon rule (before anyone else actually, I stated that the pardoner rule should only be used in aforementioned exceptions). I'm just thinking of a hypothetical situations that we suddenly get a really strong scum-read on somebody, and the majority of people in the thread want to lynch this new guy, but there are a lot of inactives who can't switch their vote because they are afk. Basically, we want to regulate these kind of exceptions so that we don't have no direction when these sitautions arise. This is what I want: When the Pardoner should Pardon: In a period of time of 30 minutes to 3 hours before the lynch, a pardoner can commence an unofficial voting session . All those active int he thread at this time will HAVE to vote either Yes or No to pardon the person in quesiton. This keeps the pardoner power in the hands of the town, and keeps things by and large under control. If anyone has any doubts ont his subject, bring them up, and we may want to change some of the restrictions on this. If there's a stituation that this rule did not think of, I would really feel bad  On the subject of rules for elected officials: I believe mayoral candidates should declare who their hidden vote is for. The benefits simply outweigh the negatives. Sure, the mafia gets a better idea of the voting situation, but it gives the mayor far more transparency, and gives us ability to monitor and regulate these powerful roles. On the subject of campaigns, I'm going to be voting for Radfield/Arctocod.and more specifically Arctocod. I feel he's being more transparent than Radfield, and has been raising some good points with good logic. I feel like Radfield has kind of said canned start of game sort of stuff so far, so i don't have any reason to think he's mafia, but I'm not convinced he's totally town either. Again, I'm leaning more int eh way that he's town because he brought up another very good palyer so quickly, who I would believe would be a threat to him if he was a mafia. On to the subject of who I want to vote: I'll be be putting my tentative lynch vote on Zeks. This will turn in to a real vote if I come back in 3 hours and no new info has really been unveilied/no info that's an easy analysis for a lynch. The points against him have been pointed out by Deus-Ex, he wanted to vote a hydra off for really no reason, other than what I can see that he's threatened by them (a mafia would be threatened!) He also dissappeared for a while, and when he returned, he just quickly answered a quesiton, and didn't either reference or defend his accusations.
The problem with your pardoner exception is first: if the majority of the town online wants to change the vote, they can. its a majority lynch. the majority would need to be inactive in order for this senario. But lets say the pardoner pardons anyway. imagine the state town would be in with the nightpost. No lynch occured, people return from being inactive, see that the pardoner used his powers. This chaos, coupled with the fact that no info was gained by lynching and the WIFOM created because the pardoner pardoned someone, would completely disable a town for a full day, and the same person would probally get lynched anyway, followed by the pardoner.
Do not pardon. period.
|
On December 13 2011 05:14 GiygaS wrote:
My only problem with that is: a lot of the time, the majority IS offline in the time period given. This with the fact that a pardoner doesn't actually nullify all votes that day making there be a no lynch, it's on one specific person, making the next highest person get lynched. Right? There would be no WIFOM because it would be a mojority decision, especially if there WAS a good reason that had been brought up, which was the hypothetical situation I brought up. This situation is going to come by VERY rarely, but we need to be prepared if something like this does happen, we can't just be: "Oh yeah, that now (mostly) confirmed blue got lynched becuase we initially thought he was mafia, then some info got brought up, but our pardoner was scared to use his power cause of some stupid policy. Oh well *shrug*"
how can it be a majority decision if the majority is offline?
|
I'm starting to get a bad feeling about Jistu.
The first thing that I noticed was this post in response to my initial thought about radfield's electorial post:
On December 12 2011 15:40 Jitsu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2011 14:51 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that strikes me about radfield this game is how he immediately tied himself to arctocod in his election post. saying that you should vote for me, but his guy is also a good choice, so he will probally get pardoner anyway, but still vote for me. while an argument could be made that he is trying to show all the new players who to vote for, something sets me off about this. He should theorectically know he is town, and therefore should be pulling out all the stops to get people to vote for him, not endorsing other candidates he doesn't even know the aliengment of. Because of this, i am uncomfortable voting him for mayor at this time. I agree with this. Radfield tied himself quickly to another player. I have no scumread on him right now (nothing he has done really screams "mafia" to me) but I think we should hold on voting and bandwagoning this early, regardless. How would it look if Arcotocod flipped mafia after Radfield tied himself too him? Again, not claiming I have scum-vision. Just making a point that "itchy-trigger-finger" voting might be a bad thing.
While it isnt suspicious to agree with someone, notice the way in which he did it. He states that we should hold off voting right now, and then for some reason says "How would it look if Arcotocod flipped mafia after Radfield tied himself too him?" I cant think of a town reason someone would post this, but forcing people vote later in the day, so delay information and give themselves time to come up with votes is a mafia agenda. Also the sentence I quoted seems to be trying to do what radfield said scum would try, which is to make it so arctocod and radfield dont end up in office together. there is no town perspective for posting that.
On December 13 2011 01:09 Jitsu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 00:57 Radfield wrote:On December 13 2011 00:52 Jitsu wrote:On December 12 2011 22:58 Radfield wrote:
I think LAL is pretty terrible. It does two things wrong: One, it gives mafia a legitamate topic to discuss early game, when in fact we want them discussing elections and lynches. Two, it gives mafia a reason to push townies who may lie, even when the circumstances are not particularly damning to the townie. Every lie needs to be treated on a case by case basis. Townies lie ALL THE TIME, whether LAL exists or not, so it does not make sense to implement the policy. Not to mention, voting based on policy after Day 1(or even day 1) is terrible for town. We vote on content, not policy.
I don't understand your reasoning on this. Seeing as how you are a veteran, I will bow to your decision however and drop the issue. I'd much rather you understand what I'm saying. Which part doesn't make sense? And just because I'm a veteran doesn't mean I'm right. I bet there are plenty of vets who disagree with my statement on LAL (and they might be right!). I'll be gone for about the next 9 hours. Might be able to pop on around dinner time though. Sure. Hopefully we can clear this up quickly. In my opinion, lying does nothing to benefit the town, save rare circumstances in which a blue town role needs to keep their identity hidden. If we can bring issues to the fore-front with honesty and integrity, we would be able to root scum out quicker than if everyone was throwing off-hand lies. I can understand you're feeling on the case-by-case basis; I think it's pretty self-evident that most things in mafia need to be treated on a case-by-case basis; In this way, Policy is a bad word to use since it shows an unwavering thought process regardless of potential outcomes. Seeing as how we are almost down a day already, and I agree with your statement about giving the mafia a way to tie up valuable time spent discussing this topic, I thought it better to drop the whole thing and defer to you're rational as a vet, and let sleeping dogs lie, as it were. The whole point of bringing policy questions up in the first place was to try to get discussion to try to start some analysis. Maybe it's not a stereotypical move by players on the first night - we can chalk that up to my inexperience if you want, I think it was just my personal way of getting discussion started. Does that clear things up a bit, Radfield?
The above post was the next to catch my eye. after reading this post, basically the only thing he is saying really is "i wanted to start discussion" but notice the way he defers to radfields judgment upon being questioned, and then when questioned about that backtracks on himself. In my experience town players know what they believe, and dont have to worry about pleasing others.
Overall his posts between and after those have seemed very artifical, cold, and thought out to me. he seems very worried about not offending anyone, and never outright accusing. a town player won't do this. But mafia would.
|
On December 13 2011 09:09 Eiii wrote:
I'm going to be voting Radfield for mayor/pardoner. He would be good to have in either role, and now that he's posted some more I'm pretty confident that he's legit. If anyone hasn't looked at the election voting thread yet, it's literally all rad/arc, so it looks like our candidates are decided unless anyone has some major objections.
I'm not going to lie, I generally don't really have any clue what's going on day 1, and this game is no exception. I like prpl and Deus' posting. People have called out zeks a few times, and if you filter his posts it's clearly not without reason-- he went from not wanting a rad/arc office to, twelve hours later, voting for both of them. When questioned about it, he sidesteps the issue entirely. Trying to lay low like that after silently making such a big swing in his stance isn't something I'm comfortable seeing, so I'm throwing my lynch vote on him now. I want to see this guy under more pressure!
What do you think about my post on Jitsu?
|
On December 13 2011 10:47 nyczbrandon wrote:
Whose everyone going to vote for lynch? times gonna be up in about an hour
we should still ahve 24 hours right?
|
On December 13 2011 12:18 MrZentor wrote:Show nested quote +
On December 13 2011 12:00 MrZentor wrote:
Hola! After reading this, I decided to post again.
Show nested quote +
Because apparently one post isn't enough, here's my second one.
Anyways, I think we should lynch zeks. He wants to kill the hydra, because it will be "dangerous for the town", but having the hydra only helps town. He is either extremely stupid or he is mafia. Either way, it's best to kill him.
I already stated my view on who should be elected and voted for said person.
I'd much rather keep zeks around 'cause at least he's posting and I don't at all think that the case on him is strong enough yet that we can safely call him scum. Instead we could lynch one of those guys who only have two posts, they're impossible to read anyway. What do you think about that plan?
We should lynch some lurkers to keep them active, but I don't think that will get us any mafia, because the mafia will end up shifting the vote to a non mafia lurker. I am just saying that given the current information, it would be best to lynch him. This could easily change with any new information or posts.
so you recognize that lynching lurkers won't kill mafia, but you still want to do it anyway? the hell?
|
On December 13 2011 12:39 Nisani201 wrote:
We could also lynch a lurker (such as TotallyNotTwoPeople). Again, I want more information.
Nisani, what do you think about Jitsu? you have not commented on my case about him.
|
On December 13 2011 12:00 MrZentor wrote:Hola! After reading this, I decided to post again. Show nested quote +1. MarserBlood
2. nyczbrandon
8. Refallen
9. Cwave
11. MrZentor
15. evantrees
17. DropBear
23. Nisani201
24. cascades
25. ProfessorBadass (Curu + Erandorr hydra) Because apparently one post isn't enough, here's my second one. :p Anyways, I think we should lynch zeks. He wants to kill the hydra, because it will be "dangerous for the town", but having the hydra only helps town. He is either extremely stupid or he is mafia. Either way, it's best to kill him. I already stated my view on who should be elected and voted for said person.
Building off Eii's accusations, here you say that either zeks is stupid or mafia, then you nonchalantly say that we should lynch him because he is the all we have at the moment in the next post. To me this doesnt look like an accusation or pressure, to me this looks like someone jumping on an easy wagon.
|
To clarify, I am now voting for MrZentor.
|
On December 13 2011 13:26 Eiii wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 13:23 GreYMisT wrote:On December 13 2011 12:00 MrZentor wrote:Hola! After reading this, I decided to post again. 1. MarserBlood
2. nyczbrandon
8. Refallen
9. Cwave
11. MrZentor
15. evantrees
17. DropBear
23. Nisani201
24. cascades
25. ProfessorBadass (Curu + Erandorr hydra) Because apparently one post isn't enough, here's my second one. :p Anyways, I think we should lynch zeks. He wants to kill the hydra, because it will be "dangerous for the town", but having the hydra only helps town. He is either extremely stupid or he is mafia. Either way, it's best to kill him. I already stated my view on who should be elected and voted for said person. Building off Eii's accusations, here you say that either zeks is stupid or mafia, then you nonchalantly say that we should lynch him because he is the all we have at the moment in the next post. To me this doesnt look like an accusation or pressure, to me this looks like someone jumping on an easy wagon. he says as he hops on my easy bandwagon
haha, i pointed out a logical falicy in what he was saying before you voted for him.
|
On December 13 2011 15:43 DEUS-ex-MAFIA wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 12:32 GreYMisT wrote:On December 13 2011 12:18 MrZentor wrote:
On December 13 2011 12:00 MrZentor wrote:
Hola! After reading this, I decided to post again.
Show nested quote +
Because apparently one post isn't enough, here's my second one.
Anyways, I think we should lynch zeks. He wants to kill the hydra, because it will be "dangerous for the town", but having the hydra only helps town. He is either extremely stupid or he is mafia. Either way, it's best to kill him.
I already stated my view on who should be elected and voted for said person.
I'd much rather keep zeks around 'cause at least he's posting and I don't at all think that the case on him is strong enough yet that we can safely call him scum. Instead we could lynch one of those guys who only have two posts, they're impossible to read anyway. What do you think about that plan?
We should lynch some lurkers to keep them active, but I don't think that will get us any mafia, because the mafia will end up shifting the vote to a non mafia lurker. I am just saying that given the current information, it would be best to lynch him. This could easily change with any new information or posts. so you recognize that lynching lurkers won't kill mafia, but you still want to do it anyway? the hell? you misunderstood him. he wants to lynch zeks. this post looks of zentor looks better than his previous one. i think this sounds more like his own thoughts... and if these are his own thoughts, i am willing to believe that the zeks vote might have been his own idea... but i need to talk to you zentor 
The concerns i had with his post was he said "we should lynch lurkers, but we won't find mafia there."
|
On December 14 2011 02:09 Comprissent wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2011 19:59 Jitsu wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Ahhh, just woke up. After seeing the events of the night, I thought i'd give my feeling on who might be someone to pay attention to. I felt worried Comprissent a few of his posts ago, and he recently really got it sparked in my mind that he might be scum. This being said, it now makes more sense in my head to NOT vote for two extremely active players who are running for office, rather leaving one out of an office. If they are both scum, and experienced, town is in trouble. Leaving a lesser experienced person in office may be helpful, where if both offices turn out to be scum, we have a better chance of catching one.
This was a valid point. You said we shouldn't have had two people in office at once. Cool. In the next post, you even defend your stance that we shouldn't have those two experienced players in office, by saying have someone questionable in office as Pardoner. Ok, so assuming we stick to this play on No pardoning, no exceptions, the only advantage either of the offices gives is immunity on night 1 from getting hit. This just helps us keep the vets alive, am i right?
Radfield seems the most organized and willing to work with town, even if I don't like his infrequent posting. I would also like Arc, as having two players is very nice to keep safe (as having double the chance for a slipup if he is scum) Than you 100% switch your stance to wanting both Arc and Radfield in office. Hmmmm, ok...I could see it, but you're calling *me* wishy-washy? Fine, fine.. If Zeks is scum he would have probably made up his mind right away who he wants in office. This makes him seem town as he is trying to feel out the candidates. Also, more have stepped up in this '12 hour' window you've talked about, so I can't blame anyone for changing their minds You stated if Zeks was scum, he would have voted right away who he wanted to vote for in office. It makes him seem town because he wants to try to feel out the candidates. I think that was exactly the same play I made early, trying to get a feeling for the mayoral candidates. According to that line, I should be pro-town. For the lynching scenario:
1. Lynch a lurker, guarantee losing a towny
2. Lynch someone active, either hit scum or lose an active towny.
So far i think only greymist has the only analysis that is actually backed by logic
Spackle, your analysis on Dropbear is 100% theory, and I would not like to lynch based off that
MrZentor's reasoning behind going for Zeks explains nothing either, what does 'having the hydra only helps town' mean?
This being said, I'd tentatively vote for Jistu. Worst case scenario, we lose a towny either way. But with the amount of active posters, i think it's worth the shot to try for hitting a red. but than you go ahead and say that the Anti-Jitsu analysis was backed by logic - logic that is counter-acting your own logic. Also, by my count, the following people (up to Comprissent's) to tentatively vote for me are GreyMist, Radfield, Nisani, and Comprissent, in that order. You also say that the lynching scenario is either Lynch a lurker, and guarantee losing a town (I don't see how you can guarantee to lose a town) or lynch an active player, with a chance of either way. How about we look at some post analysis instead of just picking out of a hat? Comprissent is pretty wavy in my eye. Like to see some thoughts from others. From what i've gathered from vets/reading other games, lynching a lurker is a guaranteed town hit, which I don't want. Yes, I would like more analysis to go on. What i said was greymist is the only one to use logic in his analysis, that being said you're the only one with any analysis on (at the point of that post). I don't think you've been scummy, I am just trying to put my vote somewhere early to help move discussion. I should also pay attention to the accusers in these scenarios, and others have agreed that MrZentor's analyses have made no sense and he does not seem to follow what is going on in this thread. He hasn't posted in several pages, so I want to see more from him.
I'm glad you feel my analysis is backed by logic and all that, but why vote for someone who you don't think is scum?
I unfortunately had to sleep so I have not reread in great detail, but at the moment I think zentor or Jitsu are our best bets
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
