EPTHammer Mini Mafia - Page 12
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
| ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Veto I think I would prefer a system where you can send your votes wherever you please. Obviously you will have to tell us what you do. Why is this a better idea then everyone gets the same amount of votes? Mafia can't lurk. Cause lurkers will likely end up on 1 vote and be useless. Mafia will be forced to provide reasoning and...BAH I gtg. See you later. | ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22633 Posts
| ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22633 Posts
On January 26 2012 18:45 wherebugsgo wrote: The only way I'm going to die this game is if I get shot by scum. Why would you shoot yourself? | ||
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
On January 26 2012 21:37 MeatlessTaco wrote: Is there going to be a thread to vote in linked in the OP or is it just assumed we won't lynch anyone Day 1? Use ##Vote NAME in thread and it will count your vote in zbot. | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On January 27 2012 00:44 risk.nuke wrote: prplhz, I don't like the idea to give away 2 votes each day. Do you realise that if we mislynch day 1 and day 2, day 3 there will be. 37 votes in the game. And if mafia aren't under/over eachother in the list they can aqquire 20 votes. Leaving the town with 17. Yes it will be obvious who the scum is. But without some sort of powerrole intervention we can't do anything about it. Veto I think I would prefer a system where you can send your votes wherever you please. Obviously you will have to tell us what you do. Why is this a better idea then everyone gets the same amount of votes? Mafia can't lurk. Cause lurkers will likely end up on 1 vote and be useless. Mafia will be forced to provide reasoning and...BAH I gtg. See you later. Agreed with the first part. The thing is tho, with free voting, maybe it would be better to implement it once we have people who we can trust and people we can't? I think it would be a better idea to circulate voting power through people who actively contribute, etc. etc. signs of a good townie. If he gives it back to people who give it to him this allows more VP to be held in the game since he can dispose of it before he dies. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
On January 26 2012 21:21 jaybrundage wrote: I think this is a bad idea. Trading away votes like that makes it so that the scum can easily manipulate the vote and when one of there teammates can swing the lynch by putting a crap ton of there votes on a one guy. Think about it this way if all the mafia put there votes on one person then we can have about eight votes on one guy. If they all pool there votes and then that's not including any townies that might happen to put there votes on the mafia votebag. This one person has huge potential to sway the lynch and ensure that the mafia can lead the lynch to a townie with out all piling there votes and revealing themselves. The Sentinal Method gives us the ability to have each townie be accountable for his votes. Also importantly for us to know the power behind each vote. And to make sure to give us no surprises. If we are allowed to trade haphazardly then the scum can use there vote bag to hammer the vote if we get close to lynching a townie. @Palmar Putting everyone's votes on you is a terrible idea. I'm not even sure why you are mentioning it. What exactly are you saying in the italicised paragraph? + Show Spoiler [Rules] + Votetrading: 1. Every player starts the game with 3 Voting Power, VP, or Votes. During the nightphase a player must give away at least ONE of their votes to ONE other player, who gets the use of those votes in the future. A player can not give away all of their votes.PM the hosts to give away your votes. 2. If a player has more than 5 votes, then he must attempt to give away enough to put him at 5 or less votes. 3. Any votes you have when you die to a lynch are lost. 4. If the one you gave votes to died during the night, then the trade fail and you keep your votes. If you die during the night, then any final attempt to trade away your votes is still resolved. Any other votes you carry at the time of death are lost. 5. The VP of each living player, and each player who died during the night, is revealed in the Daypost. How they got their VP is not revealed. Presumably point 2 means that a player cannot have more than 5 votes. Or did the bit beneath the red text in your role PM explain how you could get more votes? If we follow the plan this should never happen anyway since we should each town player should be voting for the player below them on the list, in order for mafia to do what you suggest some of them would be unable to vote for the players below them, town could see this and get to lynch scum. I intended to suggest the vote trading but i seem to have been beaten to it. So instead i will add some of my thoughts: If there was no plan and players decided who to trade privately then.. Since the mafia know each other, they could vote-trade with each other. This means that the mafia could avoid giving votes to town completely and so can always have at least 12 votes (3 starting votes each, 4 players) and up to 20 votes (max 5 votes each 20 players). The only way for Mafia to lose votes (as far as we know) would be when one of them is lynched. The mafia could very quickly gain a large proportion of the votes and this would mean that they could protect themselves from the lynch very easily, if townies were to votes carelessly. The no-flip mechanic makes it easier for scum to push miss-lynches since town will not see the flip, it also means that mafia has much less of a reason to bus. Voting in this game becomes less risky (you cannot be as easily held accountable for killing town) and so Mafia can take better advantage of their voting power, which could very quickly become quite significant. + Show Spoiler + Consider the likely event in which a town player is lynched day1: there will be 42 votes left and 12 controlled by mafia, if players were to vote independently but mafia were to trade with each other then they would not lose any of these votes but would very likely gain from 2-6 votes from town players who would not know they were giving votes to scum. Lets assume mafia gain 4 votes, and they land a night kill Day2 begins and scum now have 16 votes out of 39-41 votes and 16/20 or 16/21 to lynch. (worst case scenario would be each scum ends up with 5 votes and 20 are needed to lynch) Because of this i feel that the vote-trading mechanic favours the mafia greatly and that we need to come up with a strategy to prevent the mafia from exploiting it. The "vote circle" should force mafia to give votes to town and is better than people deciding their votes privately. Blah blah blah wall of text: Game mechanics (that we know of) seem to favour mafia so we should act in a way to minimise this or turn the mechanics to our advantage. The best way to do this (in my opinion) is for you to give your votes to the player below you. Additionally Mafia will have a huge information advantage and the ???-flips make voting analysis much harder, this means that discussion during the day is more valuable during this game than it would e in other games. We will need use this time to the best of our abilities and we should not hammer under any circumstances. | ||
|
Jackal58
United States4264 Posts
On January 27 2012 01:06 Palmar wrote: I have no issues with a planned vote-trading system, I'm just not going to follow it. So tell me Mr. Lone Ranger how exactly do you intend to send your vote? | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
The 3 decent ideas so a far are: 1. Circle trade 1 vote to the person below you. 2. Circle trade all but 1 vote to the person below you. 3. Everyone posts in this thread who they will trade their vote(s) to during the night. All of these ideas have pros and cons, but the worst thing for town right now is not to be in agreement be the end of the day. If we are split or have wild cards like Palmar, then we don't have the complete transparency we need for these systems to be effective. Personally I think number 1 is the best, most town-favored option. I am always open to more discussion and more ideas. | ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22633 Posts
On January 27 2012 02:10 Jackal58 wrote: So tell me Mr. Lone Ranger how exactly do you intend to send your vote? I'm gonna send it to whoever I think is town. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
On January 27 2012 02:20 Paperscraps wrote: One thing that needs to happen before this day ends, is unanimous agreement on a trading system. The 3 decent ideas so a far are: 1. Circle trade 1 vote to the person below you. 2. Circle trade all but 1 vote to the person below you. 3. Everyone posts in this thread who they will trade their vote(s) to during the night. All of these ideas have pros and cons, but the worst thing for town right now is not to be in agreement be the end of the day. If we are split or have wild cards like Palmar, then we don't have the complete transparency we need for these systems to be effective. Personally I think number 1 is the best, most town-favored option. I am always open to more discussion and more ideas. don't number 1 and 2 imply number 3? I think that players should definitely announce who they are giving their votes to. If a town player is killed during the night then.. If everyone trades 1 vote then a townie will die with 2 votes and we lose two vote from the game. If everyone trades 2 votes then a townie will die with 1 vote and we lose 1 vote from the game. The thing for me that is important is whether or not town benefit from there being more votes in the game. I personally feel that more votes is good for town. If the overwhelming majority agree and players do not go along with the plan then we lynch them. How long do you think circle trading votes will be viable? There could come a point in the game in which Mafia could not circle votes and gain control of the lynch, while this should out them it does mean that they could quite easily get 2 free kills towards the end and then win. That being said i think that circle trading day1 and 2 is sensible | ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22633 Posts
It's so scummy you're probably town. | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
I don't know if you misunderstood the mechanic or I misunderstood your post. It IS possible to have more then 5 votes during the daytime. If everyone give their votes to palmar he could potentially have 31 votes day 2. Come night 2 he would have to give away atleast 24 votes to one person. I think that paperscraps have a point that we need to agree on a method to control the votes. 1) and 2) are only viable for a short amount of time (as lay pointed out) but can be good in the start to keep votes spread out. 3) is the best way to continuosly keep track of where people put their votes. | ||
VisceraEyes
United States21170 Posts
On January 27 2012 02:55 Palmar wrote: your plan is terrible paperscraps. It's so scummy you're probably town. Why is Paper's plan so scummy dude? If we all circle-jerk the votes, then we can see without a doubt whether or not the scums have vote-manipulation powers and ideally how they work. What makes Paper scummy for suggesting a system under which we'll be able to glean information regarding the setup? | ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22633 Posts
On January 27 2012 03:22 VisceraEyes wrote: Why is Paper's plan so scummy dude? If we all circle-jerk the votes, then we can see without a doubt whether or not the scums have vote-manipulation powers and ideally how they work. What makes Paper scummy for suggesting a system under which we'll be able to glean information regarding the setup? It's ok, you're scum too. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
But isn't paperscraps probably town? | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21170 Posts
All right, I've heard enough. ##Vote: Palmar I mean, I get not wanting to "waste time" and "clutter the thread" but I feel like Palmar is avoiding answering simple questions about his mindset and calling anyone who questions him scum. Very scummy. VERY scummy. Palmar gets my vote. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
that's silly | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21170 Posts
| ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22633 Posts
But you already know that don't you? | ||
| ||
