EPTwow I shouldn't type so late at night. fail on my part haha.
Hammer Mini Mafia - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
wow I shouldn't type so late at night. fail on my part haha. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 27 2012 16:45 VisceraEyes wrote: I vote D1 we circle jerk and see what happens. Just saying "oh you know, there will be people who don't want to follow the plan" the way LSB did excuses that kind of behavior - the plan doesn't work unless we all agree to it. If we can't come to a consensus, then we're all going to just have to do whatever the fuck, and I already know where my votes are going in the event that happens. Thanks for repeating what I already said bro. 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. On January 27 2012 16:45 VisceraEyes wrote: Now, the lynch. ##Vote: Paperscraps This set off alarm bells. My main problem is that he doesn't sound like someone with a town read on Palmar. He sounds like someone who already knows Palmar's alignment is town. I'm going to be honest - I'm also starting to think Palmar is town, but it's not based on a belief that I think he's acting scummy to test reactions. It could be, but that's not why. I think Palmar is town based almost exclusively on the fact that scummy players like Paperscraps are defending the way he's playing. Did I say Palmar is town? nope Did I say he sounds like town? negative Does asking a player to give some real feedback make me scummy? nope Are you basing your read on a player based completely off another players thoughts/questions? Yes On January 27 2012 16:45 VisceraEyes wrote: In the first paragraph he outlines a needlessly convoluted plan with the main goal of "keeping the mafia on their toes" by "randomly choosing" who votes go to within smaller groups of townies. But in the second paragraph, he makes sure to agree with the circlejerk plan. Why? If you support the circle-voting plan then why are you coming up with more options? The day is half over bro, it's time to start thinkin about that LYNCH. Apparently giving people who are against the circle trading plan more options is a bad thing..... /sarcasm On January 27 2012 16:45 VisceraEyes wrote: But not your vote. Why? Whether we've come to a consensus on how to deal with the votes or not, we still have to lynch someone today. That starts with votes. Now, I agree that MeatlessTaco doesn't look great with his lack of reasoning for his votes and blatant sheeping, but lynch? Not to mention the fact that you're in favor of this circlejerk plan...but... So, me not voting, because I am weighing options between other people I suspect to be scum, makes me scummy? On January 27 2012 16:45 VisceraEyes wrote: It was MeatlessTaco's idea! He was the first to suggest it! If it's "the best option", then why are you the most interested in lynching the person who brought it up first? My guess? He doesn't even realize that MT brought it up first. He's just looking for the easiest target, and right now that's someone who suspects Palmar and voted risk.nuke for no reason. Just because he has a good idea doesn't make him pro-town. My FoS is on him because of the sheeping. On January 27 2012 16:45 VisceraEyes wrote: Paperscraps is scum Am I the only one going wtf? at this entire post. I guess I have to reiterate my stance, because some people seem to be dense. I am completely for the 1 circle trade system. My "suggestions" for other trading systems are just that, suggestions. I find it funny how Viscera has a stronger argument against Meatless, yet proceeds to vote me up on some pretty hilarious points. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 27 2012 17:55 VisceraEyes wrote: The point is that if they don't agree with the circle-trading plan, then it doesn't matter what "suggestions" you make, we don't have enough time to come to a unanimous decision. Or more accurately, we don't have time to discuss a lynch AND decide on the plan. But the more pressing concern is the lynch, because we only have one more day to decide that. And you don't vote. Are you afraid to be held accountable for your vote? Are you waiting for someone to tell you who to vote? You can always change your vote if you change your mind. What if YOUR vote spurs the scummy bandwagon that you catch the WHOLE SCUMTEAM on? It just stinks of reservation and stalling man, that's all I'm sayin. No need to get all "some people are dense" on me. Why do you keep bringing up this running out of time notion? We have a day and a half to decide still, unless my math is completely off. KST time is weird. That is plenty of time to discuss more without making rash decisions. Why can't we discuss a lynch AND decide on a plan at the same time? Do you think that little of the town? Most of us here probably play Starcraft, so multitasking shouldn't be that big a deal. "What if", "What if". What if statements do nothing to help. I just want to clarify that I am not taking the lynch lightly. Rash decisions and shotgun voting are a bad idea. Honestly we don't have much to go on yet for the D1 lynch. Why am I the one stalling when the majority of the town hasn't voted yet either? By your logic they should all be scum as well for "stalling". I am not waiting to vote. My mind is still changing. Just because I don't vote and unvote every other post doesn't make timid. I will vote when I am ready to vote, not before. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
You are contradicting yourself. You have little faith in us, think we are bad, and think we should die, yet want us to go with the system in which requires the most brain power. Either we are competent or not. You can't have it both ways. It is a big risk to give votes to who we "think" is the most pro-town person on N1, because we can't be sure of any of our reads. Being 100% sure of anything is impossible for a townie. So it comes down to Less Risk(circle trading) versus More Information(free trading). After Night 1 I am all for doing something else. We will have more information, due to the possibility of power roles. Power roles will be able to be 100% percent sure on things and lead town to lynches and pro-town reads. After Night 1 your plan is sound. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
*Being 100% sure of anything is impossible for a townie during N1. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
By your guys logic, players such as Node, Jackal58 and jaybrundage shouldn't get any votes due to them being less active than others, which implies less town. Here is where I get caught up. Who has to the most to gain from being active and pro-town? Mafia does. I am not saying that the lurkers can't be mafia, but it is unlikely. Mafia want to get voting majority in whatever way possible they can right? Between the active players we are split on what to do N1, which is far worse than going with one plan or another. Solidarity goes a long way in mafia. Also what is the point of the free trade plan + justifications if we are just going to make people balance the votes back out the next night to those with 1 vote. The people with 1 vote should be weaker townies and mafia. What is the point of not trading to them N1 if we are just going to give them votes back N2. Now onto the business. On January 27 2012 22:57 Palmar wrote: The difference between finding mafia to lynch and finding townie to pass your vote to is night and day. Remember, if you just randomize it, you still have 70% chance of hitting a townie. Add in even a tiny bit of thinking and that percentage goes up. When you're trying to lynch scum it's the opposite, and you will be influenced by outside factors (it's harder to get wagons started on scum). However, this is your decision and your decision alone, so you have complete control over the outcome. There is no such thing as safe play in mafia. It's not safe to do the circle of trust because we don't know what abilities the mafia has, and we cannot possibly gain an advantage through that method. With no advantage we don't know how the game is balanced. "I just chose at random" This justification completely negates what your plan is trying to do, which is to get scumtells from peoples justification on their trades. Another contradiction By your logic and probability, townies should trade their votes at random N1, ~70% chance to trade to another townie. So, which one is it Palmar? Free trade + justifications or randomized trading. On January 27 2012 19:57 Palmar wrote: whatever, I don't have the energy to argue with dumb. I will not be following whatever plan you guys cook up. I will be following my own plan. This is so anti-town. Solidarity is crucial, not dissidence. You are forcing the town to do one of two things, follow you or lynch you. Seems like a scummy power play to me. ##Vote: Palmar | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 28 2012 05:13 Jackal58 wrote: Scum can gain voting power by killing the people they trade votes with. And don't vote for the cowboy. Palmar is town. Any reasons to why you think Palmar is town? The way the game is evolving right now, Palmar seems to be gaining a lot of town support, thus more likely to get votes on N1 if we do the free trade system. Am I the only one wary of this? There is no possible way to know whether or not he is town or mafia on D1. This is a game of wits and Palmar is a smart fellow, just saying. On January 28 2012 05:05 Palmar wrote: You're not helping anyone with that. You're just being dumb. Seeing as you're probably town you're working directly against your win condition. I didn't suggest anyone randomized, I was just pointing out what a great starting point we had even if we simply randomed. Don't try to see things that aren't there. Palmar, why the lack of open-mindedness? The benefit of circle trading N1 is much safer than free trading to people based of some perception we got during D1. I don't disagree with a free trade + justification plan after N1, but N1 circle trading seems the best options, until we get some solid reads during D2. I'll leave my vote on you until you give some valid benefits to free trade over circle trading N1. Does anyone think no lynching is an option D1? The mafia have a set KP, thus we only lose 1 townie and D2 we have a ton more information to work with. Odds are we will lynch a townie today. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 28 2012 09:36 layabout wrote: + Show Spoiler [Paperscraps last post] + On January 28 2012 09:24 Paperscraps wrote: Any reasons to why you think Palmar is town? The way the game is evolving right now, Palmar seems to be gaining a lot of town support, thus more likely to get votes on N1 if we do the free trade system. Am I the only one wary of this? There is no possible way to know whether or not he is town or mafia on D1. This is a game of wits and Palmar is a smart fellow, just saying. Palmar, why the lack of open-mindedness? The benefit of circle trading N1 is much safer than free trading to people based of some perception we got during D1. I don't disagree with a free trade + justification plan after N1, but N1 circle trading seems the best options, until we get some solid reads during D2. I'll leave my vote on you until you give some valid benefits to free trade over circle trading N1. Does anyone think no lynching is an option D1? The mafia have a set KP, thus we only lose 1 townie and D2 we have a ton more information to work with. Odds are we will lynch a townie today. I am fine with lynching this guy. What's this i am gonna leave my vote on you crap? He is also hinting at a no-lynch on the basis that we will likely hit a townie, which is just plain bad If you think I am guilty, why not vote me up then? I am leaving my vote on Palmar, because he is being unreasonable. Hopefully he will post something more constructive, instead of just calling people "dumb". I on the other hand am open to suggestions and willing to change if people post logical arguments. 4/15 chance to hit mafia, 11/15 chance to hit townie. You are willing to lynch me right now and that would be very bad for town. Why the sudden change from purple and viscera to me? Why is a no-lynch so frowned upon? I understand that we can only kill mafia by lynching, but D1 odds are against us. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
| ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 28 2012 10:24 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: LSB gave a full plan, it convinced me/answered all my questions at any rate, and involves free trade N1 and stabilization N2. Easier to find and detect mafia than just circle trading and working from there. Also, bugs why the vote? First off I don't agree fully with LSB's plan. On January 16 2012 07:16 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: 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. ^ This is the built-in stabilization mechanic ^ I just came to a realization. LSB's stabilization works against the free trade plan. The whole idea of free trade is trading to whomever you want, to get meaningful justifications and scum-tells. If we force players with more than 5 votes to give votes to players with 1 vote, then it defeats the purpose of plan. N1 we get meaningful justifications and N2 players just claim that they traded to some player x because he had 1 vote and was told to do so. Do you see how this is counter-productive the overall goal of free trade? There can't be any in between. All or nothing imo. I am for a full fledged free trade plan, but still believe that circle-trading N1 has more merit. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
D1 we are 3-3-3-3-3-3-3 Then D2 we could be 1-5-3-1-3-3-5 or more probably 1-7-1-1-1-3-7 (due to town usually have a generally unison perception of pro-townies) Alright so the people above with 1 vote should be weaker townies and suspected mafia. Why would we want to give votes back to them again? I know the players with 7 have to trade 2 votes no matter what, but why wouldn't the 7's trade with each other being, both pro-town to keep the advantage with town? Am I not seeing things clearly? Also I didn't take into account the fact that one of those players will die, screwing up the votes. Possibly leaving potential 1's with 3 votes still if they traded to a 7 that was killed. I just need more clarification on why balancing is a good thing in a free trade plan, when we could just use circle trading, which insures a much greater balance. The two plans obviously have different goals and contradict each other. I am not going to talk about plans anymore though. My position at this point is: If we don't have unanimous agreement on circle trading N1, then we will obviously all just free trade and post justifications tomorrow. Either way the whole town is working together which is far more important than the plan itself. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 28 2012 11:58 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: That's just anti-mafia, at first I don't think we'd want anyone, townie or not, to have 7 VP, even if it means losing influence. Just less risky that way, it's more to examine voting patterns. Who knows, maybe you're right. I am confused, do you want a plan based around balance or a plan based around gut instinct/perception? | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 28 2012 12:37 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: That's just anti-mafia, at first I don't think we'd want anyone, townie or not, to have 7 VP, even if it means losing influence. Just less risky that way, it's more to examine voting patterns. Who knows, maybe you're right. On January 28 2012 12:37 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Balance would leak to mafia though, they'd just kill off the people that are before them so they can pool their votes. I'd rather do perception so that townies can take advantage of VP. 1.First you are saying that no one should have more VP than others. You are saying that players with high VP should trade it away because having high VP is risky and not worth the information gained from justifications. (Implying balance is good) 2.Then you are saying that balance would lead to mafia to pool their votes. (Implying balance is bad) In case 1 you doubt peoples perceptions. In case 2 you support peoples perceptions. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 28 2012 13:24 LSB wrote: This is one of the worst example of logic I've ever read. If I was day vig I'd kill you for trying to make a case out of this. Please explain to me where my logic fails. No need to get all crazy. The more we poke holes in each others ideas, the more we can flesh out a decent plan. Also I haven't been ignoring your responses. I was trying to emphasize a flaw in the free trade + balance system, which was that a balance mechanism hinders its goal. If you are scared of one player having too many votes, then why not support a circle trade system? That was the point I was trying to make. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
##Vote: Prplhz Two reasons for my change here. 1. My read on Palmar is neutral, by voting him up earlier I was hoping to get him to be more constructive and reasonable. This doesn't look likely now. I don't know all the meta everyone else knows about Palmar, but I think this can be a good thing. I can be more objective about my reads on him in the future. 2. Prplhz voted up wherebugsgo and then just left. No reason at all. On January 28 2012 01:06 prplhz wrote: I need to go shopping now but I'll write something when I get back. ##Vote: wherebugsgo If you say you are going to do something, then follow through. Accountability! | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
Sentinel is inconsistent is his posts, having conflicting views and what not. I would say that Sentinel is more scummy than the majority of the players here, but nothing too outrageous. Prplhz has provided no justification at all for his vote. This makes Prplhz scummier than Sentinel imo. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 29 2012 05:16 jaybrundage wrote: Ok so we obviously are not going to follow the circle vote plan. So that leaves us with the Pick your Vote and justify it the next day plan. Thats fine. I do see some of Palmar's points more choices mafia have to make. I still think that the mafia might have a really good scum player who may appear town. But that just a risk we are going to have to take. Also i would prefer to give 1 vote rather then 2 just because there's less risk involved but giving away what number of votes is up to the players discretion. About who to lynch yet im honestly not sure yet I dont support the Sentinel lynch tho. I think his first plan of circle trading was fine and pro town. Gonna go read thru some filters I agree. Although we were somewhat forced into the free trade + justification plan, it is better we all do plan together than a bunch of different plans. Enough people haven't voted yet, so the hammer can fall on either Sentinel or Prplhz, both of which I am ok with. I am leaving for work now and won't be back until after the lynch. My vote stays on Prplhz for my reasons above. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 29 2012 05:34 prplhz wrote: Hey Paperscraps, move your vote it's stupid. Being busy for a while doesn't make me more scum, I am always active as either alignment unless I'm actually busy. If you want to force analysis out of people then why did you support the trade-circle? You voted for me because I didn't provide analysis. Look up there. Now remove your vote. This is a no-flip game, you don't lynch people for no reason. DAT timing. You posted 2 minutes before I left for work. Your argument against wherebugsgo was sound. I just want to let you know I would have changed my vote to wherebugsgo. I don't think my vote on you was stupid before you posted. On January 29 2012 09:52 LSB wrote: Please give away two of your votes. This is for two reasons 1) Giving away two of your votes eliminates looses if you get nightkilled. Even if you don't think you are a high target, mafia could always bluesnipe. 2) People with 1 vote only are extreamly crucial during re-balancing. During Night 1, people with 1 vote are the ones who would receive votes from people with 3+ votes in order to ensure that the vote distribution stays roughly equal. So if you are left with only 1 vote Day 2, there is a high likelyhood that you would have 3+ votes Day 2. How many votes people give away should be factored by two things: 1. More votes if you think your read is very pro-town and less votes if you think your read is town,but still have some reservations about the read. (This is more applicable to late game) 2. If you think you will die during the night, trading the most votes possible is best. | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 28 2012 09:09 chaoser wrote: Hi. Let me eat dinner/work out first and I will try to catch up. @Chaoser Where you at bro? | ||
|
Paperscraps
United States639 Posts
On January 30 2012 00:09 layabout wrote: He disappeared and nobody spoke out against his defence. Couldn't you say that this make it seem like he was a townie? It was not like we had caught him out and he was obvious scum that we lynched. There was limited discussion and it ended with him being lynched. If you think that he was scum then it seems reasonable to assume that his teammates did not bus him (because that would have been stupid). Are you going to proceed under the assumption that there are 3 scum left or 4? Are you going to be open to both possibilities? I'll play devil's advocate here, since you like that WIFOM. Lets assume WBG was mafia for a minute. Why would mafia speak out in defense for him? It would only draw suspicion onto them. WBG didn't even defend himself. As risk.nuke mentioned above people do weird stuff when under the gun, which is great because this is when scum make mistakes. Any self-respecting townie would at least try to defend themselves, role claim, anything other than lurk! or at least I would hope a townie would. On January 30 2012 00:09 layabout wrote: If you think that he was scum then it seems reasonable to assume that his teammates did not bus him (because that would have been stupid). Also bussing is valid tactic for mafia. That is a scummy thing to say. It is not reasonable to assume anything of the mafia's plan, when they have a QT to discuss something delicate like a bus, before hand. In a no flip game town has to assume the worst until PRs can give us something concrete, thus we will of course keep an open mind that 4 mafia could still remain. | ||
| ||
