|
On February 27 2012 06:42 DoYouHas wrote: For those of you having issues with the soft deadline. The purpose of a soft deadline is to take stock of people's prime suspicions so that we can work towards a majority in a reasonable amount of time instead of in the hour or 30mins leading up to the actual deadline. Don't feel like a soft deadline is locking in your vote on someone, that would be wasting quite a bit of time. Think of it as a tool that we can use to come to our majority in a reasoned way, instead of in a frantic, emotional way. I propose we make our soft deadline 8 hours before the actual deadline.
you missed one thing though, I'll edit my post to subtract all the things you covered.
|
Dyh has pretty much covered why four face looks suspicius, I'll just add one more thing. If you read through four faces post you can see he is actively trying to ruin other player's opinion of me.
+ Show Spoiler +Can we just assume that people will have sufficient time to defend themselves against a case. I mean it's not like it's set in stone when a player is going to be active. I might wake up at 3 am after a lucid dream epiphany and get on TL pronto to clear my intellectual bowels. So I personally vote no on that issue
(He attacks my idea without addressing me, the idea to tailor cases for when the accused is online is what I posted.)
+ Show Spoiler + if someone starts spamming protocol and tips about how you should play, with the excuse of this being a newbie game, it kinda bothers me and I might vote against such a person.
(the person he's talking about here is once again me me, I'm the only one who put out tips really and he is once again attacking me without confronting me)
+ Show Spoiler +I recommend keeping things concise (with the exception of day 1, because we have to get to know each other, so posting stuff about voyager and whatnot is welcome since it's an indication of ones personality and a hint to what you can expect to hear from that person in the future.. even though gumshoe makes the impression of being a couple arrows short of a quiver I think he sets the right tone to be followed but for this first day only
Back hand complimets me by calling me crazy while at the same time using the "we have to get to know each other" argument to back up his fluffy play.
+ Show Spoiler +I knew this was going to be fun. Had a LOL moment already; gumshoe says "Glad to have you on our side Alderaan ( : as for absolutes do you mind making decisions like that on a day to day basis?" and Alderan is like: "What do you mean?" Seriously wtf did you mean bro?
(Dosent as much try to create conflict between me and aleraan as much as hes trying to portray me as insane.)
[+ Show Spoiler +b]sniped by gumshoe but i still don't know what you mean and why you talk like the riddler [/b]
(Even after I adress his issues with my post(before he even posted his issue with it) he still feels the need to throw doubt onto my posting style.)
If you have the time, read the start of the last surprisingly normal mini mafia game, you'll see early on that steveling who is scum tries to make me look an idiot or like mafia(and succeeds in the idiot portraying department, and when the end game comes and i suggest the right move, no one listens to me because steveling has destroyed my reputation),
four face is doing the exact same thing, for no other reason than that he finds my posting style eccentric. No matter what you think of my posting style, unless it is clearly harming town there is no reason to discredit me as long as I am a potential townie, that is not pro town behaviour. Making townies doubt other townie's judgement is a scum move.
FOS: Four Face
|
On February 27 2012 06:49 DoYouHas wrote: Could you please not quote the whole wall of text in order to add a 1 line comment? It clutters the thread and is seriously annoying. Put it in spoilers or something.
I get one edit dont I?
|
On February 27 2012 07:18 ghost_403 wrote:Just got back and I've seen a few things that I'm not too happy about It seems that most of the discussion on this thread has been built around the idea of a soft deadline and a no-lynch day 1. Here are my thoughts on both of those. A soft deadline isn't really needed. At all. If your concern is that people change their votes at the last minute and mess up votes, there is a simple solution to that: we lynch people who change their votes at the last minute and mess up votes. I would rather lynch scum over people who mess up votes, but I'm down with policy lynching. Townies, don't change your vote at the last minute and mess up votes. I will vote to policy lynch you. A no lynch day 1 is a bad idea. Pretty much, no matter who you are, a no lynch plays against your win condition, unless you're the Batman. As there is not the Batman in this game, no lynching goes against your win condition. Look at it this way: no matter your alignment, you win when there is no one else in the game. Period. Another way to look at that is if you are still left during day 3 after 2 mislynches. There are 6 townies and 4 scum. The scum are either (1) forced to work together to stay alive, and are pretty easy to spot or (2) are going to sacrifice one of their own. Unless something goes horribly, horribly wrong, the worst case scenario for day 4 is 5 townies to 3 scum. No problem.
Responses to posts in thread: @chocolate If this wasn't a newbie game, I would lynch you for that post. @DoYouHas I think you're right on with that post. Not a big fan of the FOS thing, but whatever. I think it gives them room to run and hide. Instead, GO FOR THE KILL. @gumshoe See above. @fourface Start explaining yourself, or I'll start the bandwagon rolling. @phagga I stand by what I said. I would much rather lynch scum, but if I can't, I'll lynch lurkers. The town lost that game because they let Palmar double lynch every day. As far as those two specific cases, rgTheSchworz should have been modkilled, and I would have lynched Lanaia instead mderg if I had had the time that day. She had no case against him, and I would have pointed that out, regardless of my alliance in that game.
Um sorry do we disagree on something? I never proposed a no lynch, and I wasn't the one who started up the discussion on the deadline, I just gave it a thumbs up because I wanted to work on consensus. What exactly is their to see above?
|
On February 27 2012 07:13 phagga wrote:While I generally like the idea of an artificial vote deadline, I think 20 hours is over the top. The idea of a 48 hour day cycle is to assure that people of different time zones have the possibility to argue and come to an agreement. Setting the deadline to 20 hours before night pretty much contradicts the idea of the 48 hour day. I would agree to a deadline 8 hour before night falls, though. Policy lynching lurkers is stupid. You have to differentiate between people who avoid the thread on purpose (rather scummy) and people who are denied thread activity by real life. The first one is anti-town behavior, the second one isn't. Lynching the second kind of lurker is often weakening town, and should be avoided. In that context, only because someone is not playing pro-town does not make them anti-town. (Only because something is not black, it is no necessarily white). Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 02:32 ghost_403 wrote: @alderan I really don't see any time where it would be advantageous to the town to not lynch. The town should first be lynching scum. If we can't find scum, we should instead lynch people who are not useful to the town. Lurkers fit the second criteria perfectly. By lurking, you are providing cover for the scum to hide, which is in every case bad for the town.
The town should only be lynching scum. Lynching town lurkers hurts us more than it helps. You of all people in this game should know this after the werewolves game (remember mderg and rgTheSchworz?). But then again, perhaps you're scum in this game as well?
Phagga we are going to lynch day one, because the lynch is towns greatest tool for finding answers, we already have a lurker and a suspicious townie. Why would we not lynch?
|
On February 27 2012 07:24 ghost_403 wrote: @gumshoe I was refering to the comment for DoYouHas.
Ah well I apparently get one edit, so pretend I never put fos, oh btw though, why are you encouraging us to full out start a train on four face when you haven't even put a vote on him yet? You said that you want to wait for four face to answer for himself before you vote, well so do I, till then I will be suspicious of him, whats wrong with the gesture and why do you think we need to go for the kill right away? Your clearly not doing it...
FOS Ghost_403
|
On February 27 2012 07:35 phagga wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 07:23 gumshoe wrote:On February 27 2012 07:13 phagga wrote:While I generally like the idea of an artificial vote deadline, I think 20 hours is over the top. The idea of a 48 hour day cycle is to assure that people of different time zones have the possibility to argue and come to an agreement. Setting the deadline to 20 hours before night pretty much contradicts the idea of the 48 hour day. I would agree to a deadline 8 hour before night falls, though. Policy lynching lurkers is stupid. You have to differentiate between people who avoid the thread on purpose (rather scummy) and people who are denied thread activity by real life. The first one is anti-town behavior, the second one isn't. Lynching the second kind of lurker is often weakening town, and should be avoided. In that context, only because someone is not playing pro-town does not make them anti-town. (Only because something is not black, it is no necessarily white). On February 27 2012 02:32 ghost_403 wrote: @alderan I really don't see any time where it would be advantageous to the town to not lynch. The town should first be lynching scum. If we can't find scum, we should instead lynch people who are not useful to the town. Lurkers fit the second criteria perfectly. By lurking, you are providing cover for the scum to hide, which is in every case bad for the town.
The town should only be lynching scum. Lynching town lurkers hurts us more than it helps. You of all people in this game should know this after the werewolves game (remember mderg and rgTheSchworz?). But then again, perhaps you're scum in this game as well? Ok, you've made yourself clear. Phagga we are going to lynch day one, because the lynch is towns greatest tool for finding answers, we already have a lurker and a suspicious townie. Why would we not lynch? Where Did I say that we should not lynch? All I said is that we should try to lynch scum everyday. Don't lynch lurkers only because they lurk. If we have evidence that they actively avoid the thread (e.g. are in the TL Mafia IRC channel the whole day but don't post here), then yes, lynch them. Else, we need more reason to lynch them. I do not like a "no lynch on Day 1"-Policy. We should be lynching every day. It's like a tradition @ghost_403: town lost because they sheeped Palmar. But that's another story. Nevertheless, we lost 2 townies because a majority agreed that lynching lurkers was a good idea, when it clearly wasn't.
|
On February 27 2012 07:38 gumshoe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 07:35 phagga wrote:On February 27 2012 07:23 gumshoe wrote:On February 27 2012 07:13 phagga wrote:While I generally like the idea of an artificial vote deadline, I think 20 hours is over the top. The idea of a 48 hour day cycle is to assure that people of different time zones have the possibility to argue and come to an agreement. Setting the deadline to 20 hours before night pretty much contradicts the idea of the 48 hour day. I would agree to a deadline 8 hour before night falls, though. Policy lynching lurkers is stupid. You have to differentiate between people who avoid the thread on purpose (rather scummy) and people who are denied thread activity by real life. The first one is anti-town behavior, the second one isn't. Lynching the second kind of lurker is often weakening town, and should be avoided. In that context, only because someone is not playing pro-town does not make them anti-town. (Only because something is not black, it is no necessarily white). On February 27 2012 02:32 ghost_403 wrote: @alderan I really don't see any time where it would be advantageous to the town to not lynch. The town should first be lynching scum. If we can't find scum, we should instead lynch people who are not useful to the town. Lurkers fit the second criteria perfectly. By lurking, you are providing cover for the scum to hide, which is in every case bad for the town.
The town should only be lynching scum. Lynching town lurkers hurts us more than it helps. You of all people in this game should know this after the werewolves game (remember mderg and rgTheSchworz?). But then again, perhaps you're scum in this game as well? Ok, you've made yourself clear. Phagga we are going to lynch day one, because the lynch is towns greatest tool for finding answers, we already have a lurker and a suspicious townie. Why would we not lynch? Where Did I say that we should not lynch? All I said is that we should try to lynch scum everyday. Don't lynch lurkers only because they lurk. If we have evidence that they actively avoid the thread (e.g. are in the TL Mafia IRC channel the whole day but don't post here), then yes, lynch them. Else, we need more reason to lynch them. I do not like a "no lynch on Day 1"-Policy. We should be lynching every day. It's like a tradition @ghost_403: town lost because they sheeped Palmar. But that's another story. Nevertheless, we lost 2 townies because a majority agreed that lynching lurkers was a good idea, when it clearly wasn't.
Sorry meant to say you've made yourself clear, my bad.
|
On February 27 2012 07:42 ghost_403 wrote: @gumshoe My argument is more that I don't like the idea of "FOS" more than anything else. I think voting for someone that you think is scum is a lot more effective than saying "I think you're scum", but to each his own.
If I had to be 100 percent honest I really only called you out so that I could fos you( I am a fan of irony) but this wasn't a question of preference, I asked you why you though that I and DYH should vote for him when you yourself were not yet willing to. You basically told four face that you suspected him by backing up DYH, which is the same thing as fos, so whats the issue of preference here? We did the same thing with the exception that I didn't tell you to vote for someone before I was willing to vote for them myself .
|
On February 27 2012 07:49 Janaan wrote: So FourFace, pretty much all I got out of that post was that you don't like Mafia guides, and that you're readily admitting that you lied when you told me there wasn't a reason why you voted for JekyllAndHyde. That's not really a very good start to defending yourself in my opinion.
Dosent it remind you almost exactly of me ?
|
On February 27 2012 07:42 FourFace wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 27 2012 06:36 DoYouHas wrote:Alright, I have seen a few things already that I don't like and I'm ready to throw some suspicion around. FourFaceI don't like that his first post places unwarranted suspicion on the hydras. He could argue that he was just putting pressure on them, but this post Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 20:58 FourFace wrote:Either way i + Show Spoiler +http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=315559#2 ... to apply some pressure. But it's rather harmless shows he doesn't quite understand how to put pressure on someone properly yet. I also don't like his lack of opinion on the soft deadline (thanks for the phrase slOosh). He says he is waiting for a thorough pro/con discussion. But a few of us had already provided pros, so in order to be ambivalent to the idea he must have had some cons in mind, but chooses not to post them. Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 18:13 FourFace wrote: 1. I'm a total scrub at this game btw, playing my debut game with you hansom TL-ers. I like the theme, reminds me of Dexter's Lab when the bacteria took over his family and he had to get into the dodgeball suit and kick their asses.
2. I support the idea of lynching lurkers over lynching suspicious individuals although if someone starts spamming protocol and tips about how you should play, with the excuse of this being a newbie game, it kinda bothers me and I might vote against such a person. I recommend keeping things concise (with the exception of day 1, because we have to get to know each other, so posting stuff about voyager and whatnot is welcome since it's an indication of ones personality and a hint to what you can expect to hear from that person in the future.. even though gumshoe makes the impression of being a couple arrows short of a quiver I think he sets the right tone to be followed but for this first day only) Generally I'd like people to post pros and cons when they want to implement a policy, for others to get an idea about weather the motives behind it are benevolent, malicious or incompetent in nature. 3. No no lynch policy pro/con (that i can think of): We got 10 for town and 4 scum, starting probabilities for lynching are 10 to 4 for an innocent townie and 4 to 10 for scum. After each day 1 townie gets shot by mafia so if another townie gets lynched it's 8 to 4 chances to lynch a townie after second day's vote and 4 to 8 chances of lynching scum and so forth. If someone could make a tree diagram real quickly listing probabilities for lynching either town or scum up until day 6 or so and multiply the probabilities that would be appreciated (without doctor or vigilante interference first to get a general idea). Worst case scenario is lynching town every time for 2 consecutive days which means game over after day[3]. Best case would be lynching scum every time in which case town wins at the dawn of the fifth day with 6 town alive and 0 scum. So is it advisable to lynch the first day without any concrete evidence, i have no idea. Some math boy-genius figure it out, but all in all (considering detective, medics and player behavior) my gut tells me that the success-rate of a lynch is a curve which drops the first couple of days and reaches it's max at the LYLO point. We can either plan our build for that lategame where success-rate is high or we can gamble and lynch right away. Either way we need to know the math to get an idea of the setup and we don't have much time to figure out what is more important.. gathering information or action. If we don't lynch then tomorrow will likely be 9 town to 4 at which point the worst scenario would be game over after day[4] with 5 town to 4 scum at the LYLO point on day[3], which sounds way better for me (gaining a day), but again this is without vigilante/medic/strategy which I think would inflate towns chances even more. 1. Lowering our expectations of him. Not a big deal, it is a newbie game. 2. Wants to lynch lurkers over suspicious people... unless they are posting advice and protocol. That is what would make a person suspicious enough to FourFace that they need to be voted over a lurker. Seems a bit off to me. At best this statement is wishy-washy and means nothing. At worse it reveals FourFace to have a skewed point of view. 3. This whole section says 1 thing of value. In a worst case scenario, a no-lynch on day1 gives us 1 more day of play before game over. The rest is pointing out the obvious, needless speculation, and trying to get others to jump on board with discussion about the setup. I think that the majority of this first post, while big, says almost nothing. Very suspicious. (I'm taking the spoilers out of this next one) Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 20:58 FourFace wrote:Pro no lynch on first day: If we get to Day[2] with 2 townies missing .. how much info do you get from that? We need successful lynches for info to spring, Janaan. We are scientists, remember? We need a statistic edge and we'll build on it with what info comes along. Vote for who you think benefits the town the least but refrain from lynching on the first day. You can gather info from who gets shot and whether you get saved or not. Plus on Day[2] the DT made check, or possibly even gets roleblocked, or saved, or shot by friendly fire. And also if we lynch today we have no DT support because he hasn't made his check yet. I wouldn't know what to make out of the lynch info even if against all odds it turns out to be scum, as it could be one of their plans to sacrifice one of them by bandwagoning on his lynch and playing the "i would have tried to stop the lynch if i was scum" card all game long. Sort of like a 5 pool, sacrifice drones for early aggression. Con no lynch on first day: One of the methods mafia use to win is stall so we need decimate their numbers quickly, 40 percent chance is acceptable, and we get to sack those who aren't active enough for town to collaborate successfully. I doubt that someone who posts conclusively will be a candidate so it's either lurker or BS spammer, either way no big asset to town so why not start right away.Either way i http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=315559#2 ... to apply some pressure. But it's rather harmless Pro - Not vote for who you think is scum, vote for who you think benefits the town the least. Pro - FF seems to want to rely on blues to provide us with information. And speculation on who gets shot by scum tends to be WIFOM and useless. FF downplays the value of information gained by a lynch, up-plays the value of information gotten by a mafia hit. And goes back to blues for actually figuring the game out. This is a very wrong way of looking at the game. Con - First off, it isn't a 40% chance, it is closer to a 29% chance. 4/14, not 4/10. Secondly, FF has wandered into random lynch territory instead of staying on pro/con for nolynch. I don't like it one bit. Con - Just like in his pro-nolynch argument he is espousing voting for those who are least valuable to town, not scum. I italicized the statement in this section that I just hate and think betrays FF's attitude. Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 05:32 FourFace wrote: I knew this was going to be fun. Had a LOL moment already; gumshoe says "Glad to have you on our side Alderaan ( : as for absolutes do you mind making decisions like that on a day to day basis?" and Alderan is like: "What do you mean?" Seriously wtf did you mean bro?
Anyway I am disapoint about Steveling not reading this thread from start to finish. If he would have realized what a hydra is (i didn't know either until i did read .. THE WHOLE .. thread from START 2 FINISH and my eyes are still functioning properly) (DO THIS NOW if you haven't already GOOGG we'll be waiting THANK YOU!)
Also certain circumstances made it so that I already have an idea of a case bait set up. The trap is up and running as we speak. At this point I can only say that there's an elephant in the room and whether people see it or not, mention it or not will give a mass check on all
@Janaan why JekyllAndHyde and not some other lurker? I don't know, lynch me
I asked you all to have a purpose in mind when you posted things. So what is the purpose of this post? From what I can see the purpose of this post is to foment conflict between gumshoe and Alderan, to undercut/place suspicion on Steveling, and to hint at a secret strategy. Also, wtf is with this statement, "I don't know, lynch me". As to that secret strategy, I sure hope an integral part of it is letting us know that a trap is out there. Because if it isn't then all you have done is made people more afraid to post for fear of stepping into your trap. So if your trap doesn't depend on letting us know that it exists, you are acting very scummy. ##FOS: FourFace OMG, There's a case against me.. read quickly ..think of something .. What the hell is FOS and why is the maficascum.net abbreviation thingy having poblems loading AARHHH! Well looks like I'm going to have to come clean .. I'm crazy. Yes you heard me. I'm a total loon, a nutcase. Where others follow a coherent thought process I jump like a cangoroo in between dimensions. I don't have a split personality, I have 4. They all speak different languages but since this is in english we have to rely on the english guy translating everything we say into english and he often times fucks it up. You want to lynch me .. fine. Put an end to my misery. I'm not even going to begin to take your arguments apart because quite frankly I read the the guidelines and told to myselves it would be fun to do exactly the opposite of what it says here. Did you ever think of the possibility that once a bunch of guides are released that try to lecture you about how to spot suspicious behavior in a game you have to calculate for the fact that people are going to behave differently because of those guides. What's next, writing a guide about how to play in games where players have read the guides? I'm going to go ahead and tell you this because I believe it's true: There is no mafia specific behavior on Day[1]. It's impossible to figure out what's going on. You have people like me who are crazy and get a fix out of the attention that cooky play brings, who knows what the others are here for. As for my clandestine trap.. yeah let's just put it out there so everyone can avoid it .. ok let's go: I was going to watch who votes for poor JekyllAndHyde hydra. After I randomly selected him out of the 3 or 4 inactives I started reading the whole thread and even did some background check on Cephiro but that's not essential at this point. The elephant is the fact that Cephiro says in his first post when he signed up: Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 15:40 Cephiro wrote: /in (Hoping this will not start until the 29th) The reason for him not posting anything has been hinted upon before the game started. Why would anyone who read the whole thread and realize there are 2 votes against him not mention this? Anyway my trap is still up because you can't possibly know what I'm talking about aless we're on the same frequency of insanity which is highly unlikely. Yeah I messed up the percentage.. I was thinking in terms of scum to town ratio not scum to total amount of players. No I don't really care about that "soft deadline" whatever policy because I'm utterly incapable of understanding it, which to me means that it's insignificant. So DOC, what's my diagnosic. Is it contagious, do I need to be quarantined? Pills, yes ook, ahmm no problem, I'll take em`, wouldn't be the first time I get these i figure I'll sleep for at least 16 hours and wake up with a limp tongue. So yeah .. have a nice day.
Four face this is not the way to address a case, calm down, and quote the case against you so that you can address it point by point in a rational manner, also I put out a small case against you as well so have a look at that to.
|
On February 27 2012 07:52 ghost_403 wrote: @gumshoe Fair enough. Also, lol.
Thats it? Fair enough? And then you try to switch the topic? Your not being very transparent right now ghost.
|
On February 27 2012 08:02 ghost_403 wrote: @gumshoe I'm not actually sure why we're still talking about this.
For me, personally, I don't use the FOS. If someone is acting scummy, I call them out on it. If I don't have a better lynch target, I vote for them. If your way of calling out people for being scummy is to use the FOS, by all means go for it.
And I was laughing at the irony comment. I do appreciate good irony.
theres another gem you mightve missed ( : (your not bieng very transparent ghost)
fair enough, I will drop the issue for the time being.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On February 27 2012 10:50 JekyllAndHyde wrote:EBWOP: Fuck, forgot to sign in with the correct account >_> Here's the post again: Didn't realise I joined this, thought Ceph would do it in the next game, lol Anyways, I (gonzaw) shall be refered to as Hyde from now on (just to stay in character). First of all, as much discussion as the no-lynch/lynch thing brings, it totally fucking sucks for finding scum. Scum are less likely to say they want a NL, knowing EVERYBODY at TL HATES NLs. However, that's WIFOM, and pretty bad one at that since it's useless info basicly. If you want my opinion then I always prefer lynches, unless I think the lynchee is town, in which case I prefer a NL, that's it. About the soft-deadline: It may work for organizing town and avoiding last-minute switches, however it can draw away discussion and make us waste time, specially those 8-12 hours afterwards. I'd just encourage townies NOT to last-switch votes, NO MATTER WHAT. If it means having a NL, then you keep your vote on the player it is, since last-minute bandwagons are the worst thing that can happen to us. Second of all: What the fuck is wrong with fourface? His posts are a pain in the ass to read, like seriously. Reminds me of gumshoe on SNMM7. However, I don't see how the hell he can be scum. He's putting himself in the spotlight just by being so crazy and outspoken, specially with that crappy "trap" he made. This makes me suspicious of the other ones basicly "falling for it" and "thinking" FF is scum, specially these: Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 09:37 Chocolate wrote: wtf is going on fourface.. that's NOT how you should defend yourself at all. I could barely even tell what the point of that post was. From now on try to be concise with your posts,, i.e. don't post a bunch of useless fluff to make your post longer, because that is scummy.
I'm going to vote for you for the time being because that was really weird. If you sufficiently explain yourself and start to make sense I will unvote you.
@ghost you thought I was scummy because I voted on a lurker? I don't see anything wrong with that at all, please explain why you dislike it. Wtf is this? You vote for him just because he made a weird post? You think he's scum because of it? + Show Spoiler +On February 27 2012 06:36 DoYouHas wrote:Alright, I have seen a few things already that I don't like and I'm ready to throw some suspicion around. FourFaceI don't like that his first post places unwarranted suspicion on the hydras. He could argue that he was just putting pressure on them, but this post Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 20:58 FourFace wrote:Either way i + Show Spoiler +http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=315559#2 ... to apply some pressure. But it's rather harmless shows he doesn't quite understand how to put pressure on someone properly yet. I also don't like his lack of opinion on the soft deadline (thanks for the phrase slOosh). He says he is waiting for a thorough pro/con discussion. But a few of us had already provided pros, so in order to be ambivalent to the idea he must have had some cons in mind, but chooses not to post them. Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 18:13 FourFace wrote: 1. I'm a total scrub at this game btw, playing my debut game with you hansom TL-ers. I like the theme, reminds me of Dexter's Lab when the bacteria took over his family and he had to get into the dodgeball suit and kick their asses.
2. I support the idea of lynching lurkers over lynching suspicious individuals although if someone starts spamming protocol and tips about how you should play, with the excuse of this being a newbie game, it kinda bothers me and I might vote against such a person. I recommend keeping things concise (with the exception of day 1, because we have to get to know each other, so posting stuff about voyager and whatnot is welcome since it's an indication of ones personality and a hint to what you can expect to hear from that person in the future.. even though gumshoe makes the impression of being a couple arrows short of a quiver I think he sets the right tone to be followed but for this first day only) Generally I'd like people to post pros and cons when they want to implement a policy, for others to get an idea about weather the motives behind it are benevolent, malicious or incompetent in nature. 3. No no lynch policy pro/con (that i can think of): We got 10 for town and 4 scum, starting probabilities for lynching are 10 to 4 for an innocent townie and 4 to 10 for scum. After each day 1 townie gets shot by mafia so if another townie gets lynched it's 8 to 4 chances to lynch a townie after second day's vote and 4 to 8 chances of lynching scum and so forth. If someone could make a tree diagram real quickly listing probabilities for lynching either town or scum up until day 6 or so and multiply the probabilities that would be appreciated (without doctor or vigilante interference first to get a general idea). Worst case scenario is lynching town every time for 2 consecutive days which means game over after day[3]. Best case would be lynching scum every time in which case town wins at the dawn of the fifth day with 6 town alive and 0 scum. So is it advisable to lynch the first day without any concrete evidence, i have no idea. Some math boy-genius figure it out, but all in all (considering detective, medics and player behavior) my gut tells me that the success-rate of a lynch is a curve which drops the first couple of days and reaches it's max at the LYLO point. We can either plan our build for that lategame where success-rate is high or we can gamble and lynch right away. Either way we need to know the math to get an idea of the setup and we don't have much time to figure out what is more important.. gathering information or action. If we don't lynch then tomorrow will likely be 9 town to 4 at which point the worst scenario would be game over after day[4] with 5 town to 4 scum at the LYLO point on day[3], which sounds way better for me (gaining a day), but again this is without vigilante/medic/strategy which I think would inflate towns chances even more. 1. Lowering our expectations of him. Not a big deal, it is a newbie game. 2. Wants to lynch lurkers over suspicious people... unless they are posting advice and protocol. That is what would make a person suspicious enough to FourFace that they need to be voted over a lurker. Seems a bit off to me. At best this statement is wishy-washy and means nothing. At worse it reveals FourFace to have a skewed point of view. 3. This whole section says 1 thing of value. In a worst case scenario, a no-lynch on day1 gives us 1 more day of play before game over. The rest is pointing out the obvious, needless speculation, and trying to get others to jump on board with discussion about the setup. I think that the majority of this first post, while big, says almost nothing. Very suspicious. (I'm taking the spoilers out of this next one) Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 20:58 FourFace wrote:Pro no lynch on first day: If we get to Day[2] with 2 townies missing .. how much info do you get from that? We need successful lynches for info to spring, Janaan. We are scientists, remember? We need a statistic edge and we'll build on it with what info comes along. Vote for who you think benefits the town the least but refrain from lynching on the first day. You can gather info from who gets shot and whether you get saved or not. Plus on Day[2] the DT made check, or possibly even gets roleblocked, or saved, or shot by friendly fire. And also if we lynch today we have no DT support because he hasn't made his check yet. I wouldn't know what to make out of the lynch info even if against all odds it turns out to be scum, as it could be one of their plans to sacrifice one of them by bandwagoning on his lynch and playing the "i would have tried to stop the lynch if i was scum" card all game long. Sort of like a 5 pool, sacrifice drones for early aggression. Con no lynch on first day: One of the methods mafia use to win is stall so we need decimate their numbers quickly, 40 percent chance is acceptable, and we get to sack those who aren't active enough for town to collaborate successfully. I doubt that someone who posts conclusively will be a candidate so it's either lurker or BS spammer, either way no big asset to town so why not start right away.Either way i http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=315559#2 ... to apply some pressure. But it's rather harmless Pro - Not vote for who you think is scum, vote for who you think benefits the town the least. Pro - FF seems to want to rely on blues to provide us with information. And speculation on who gets shot by scum tends to be WIFOM and useless. FF downplays the value of information gained by a lynch, up-plays the value of information gotten by a mafia hit. And goes back to blues for actually figuring the game out. This is a very wrong way of looking at the game. Con - First off, it isn't a 40% chance, it is closer to a 29% chance. 4/14, not 4/10. Secondly, FF has wandered into random lynch territory instead of staying on pro/con for nolynch. I don't like it one bit. Con - Just like in his pro-nolynch argument he is espousing voting for those who are least valuable to town, not scum. I italicized the statement in this section that I just hate and think betrays FF's attitude. Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 05:32 FourFace wrote: I knew this was going to be fun. Had a LOL moment already; gumshoe says "Glad to have you on our side Alderaan ( : as for absolutes do you mind making decisions like that on a day to day basis?" and Alderan is like: "What do you mean?" Seriously wtf did you mean bro?
Anyway I am disapoint about Steveling not reading this thread from start to finish. If he would have realized what a hydra is (i didn't know either until i did read .. THE WHOLE .. thread from START 2 FINISH and my eyes are still functioning properly) (DO THIS NOW if you haven't already GOOGG we'll be waiting THANK YOU!)
Also certain circumstances made it so that I already have an idea of a case bait set up. The trap is up and running as we speak. At this point I can only say that there's an elephant in the room and whether people see it or not, mention it or not will give a mass check on all
@Janaan why JekyllAndHyde and not some other lurker? I don't know, lynch me
I asked you all to have a purpose in mind when you posted things. So what is the purpose of this post? From what I can see the purpose of this post is to foment conflict between gumshoe and Alderan, to undercut/place suspicion on Steveling, and to hint at a secret strategy. Also, wtf is with this statement, "I don't know, lynch me". As to that secret strategy, I sure hope an integral part of it is letting us know that a trap is out there. Because if it isn't then all you have done is made people more afraid to post for fear of stepping into your trap. So if your trap doesn't depend on letting us know that it exists, you are acting very scummy. ##FOS: FourFace Okay, so why does that make FF scum? That makes him a HORRIBLE townie, perhaps, but how the fuck does the no-lynch talk about "wanting to lynch the person least benefits town" makes him scum? You know better than that DYH, why are you going after the "easy" target? Or are you just "making a purposefully bad case to draw out reactions" like sloosh did last game? Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 07:49 Janaan wrote: So FourFace, pretty much all I got out of that post was that you don't like Mafia guides, and that you're readily admitting that you lied when you told me there wasn't a reason why you voted for JekyllAndHyde. That's not really a very good start to defending yourself in my opinion. You say that DYH and gumshoe made "good observations", that you were waiting for FF to defend himself, and now you say that wasn't a very good start to defending himself. ....so? What do you think about it? Did that convince you he was scum or not? Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 07:50 ghost_403 wrote: FourFace, I have no idea what game you're playing here. Your rants about insanity are baffling to me even on repeat readings. The only thing worse than scum in a game are townies that waste other peoples time while they are looking for scum. Instead, we have to identify and ignore your madness, which is insanely counter productive. As far as your trap, still don't know what you're going for there. Once the game starts, people have a responsibility to actually be playing. If they can't make it, they tell the GM and he replaces them; not a big deal.
My head still hurts. So, do you think he's scum, or a "townie that wastes other people's time while they are looking for scum"? @gumshoe: What exactly makes you think his play mirrors Steve's from last game? Steve didn't talk crazy and didn't propose a "trap" as far as I remember. I just advice all of you to just ignore what he says until he starts taking this game seriously. I get the feeling he's town, and I wouldn't want an "easy misslynch" on D1. So FF, for fucks sake stop trolling. Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 15:40 slOosh wrote: Hi all. This will be my third newbie game. Current thoughts so far:
I really like the idea of the soft deadline to avoid last minute switching, but I would only implement it day 1. From personal experience (my 2nd game T.T), trying to enforce a soft deadline where everyone votes can be very detrimental to town as it has the possibility of stifling discussion / people rushing to make poorly built cases as Janaan mentioned.
As for this idea of lynching lurkers, how would it interact with the deadline? Say we are at soft deadline and there are several lurkers. We vote one, and they happen to respond by producing good content and such. Then we would have to choose the next lurker, but that would bring us closer to the true deadline and thereby defeat the whole purpose. There isn't really a feasible way to choose lurkers with a comfortable cushion of time before the deadline.
I'd rather we just start keeping each other accountable and make sure everyone is contributing right away. I know that in the ObsQT from prior games people have pegged mafia day 1, and I think we should aim for that goal, pressuring inactives so that we don't have to worry about last minute lurker switches. Okay sloosh. You were pretty active last game, why did you go lurking all of a sudden? Also, I'm starting uni tomorrow so I won't be very active. Let's hope my counterpart can counteract that. /Hyde
Mr hyde, last game steve and a few other players systematicaly attempted to destroy my reputation, there goal was to discredit a potentially useful townie, I saw a similar trend in four faces play,
But four faces fantastic response has totally taken him off my radar, why? Because I doubt his team would let him post something so ridicules, (if anyone dares say the m word I will in fact rip their face off) which means four face behaved recklessly, so either a) hes scum and he will eventually be his own down fall because of his reckless play, or b) he is a noob, and he panicked which is far more likely.
Also none of us should be concerned with four face anymore because he him self has said that he is insane, he may as well be obsing this game now, it's gonna take a lot for us to start warming up to him again. The issue of four face solves itself in this regard.
When we lynch, we lynch lurkers, confirmed scum, or threats
Four face is none of these things as of yet.
Best way to sum up this whole situation?
SOME MOTHER FUCKAS ALWAYS TRYING TO ICESKATE UPHILL
K now lets stop talking about four face of we can help it.
@steveling: Of course you got a towny feel from me last game you knew I was town (ooooooo I get it, clever girl )
Alderaan: I concur, good find on chocolate and ghost.
Sloosh: In regards to ghost, yeah, you'll see early on that I pressured him a bit, currently he's also my highest candidate of suspicion because before anything, he pushed other players to vote without voting himself... definitely worth tunnelling.
|
On February 27 2012 13:27 Steveling wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 12:22 Alderan wrote: Steve, how often did we sit around IRC last game and joke about the thread in the hour running up to the vote? Spoiler: It was every time.
Scum are going to stay absent at the end of the day unless they need to affect the vote. Chocolate has conveniently positioned himself out of that responsibility but left the opportunity open that he might be there. Just priming his defense in case he needs it. Quoted for truth.
Steveling you haven't been terribly useful this game, so let me put you to use!
What do you think of ghost, chocolate and four face?
Also that comment on how four face didn't strike you as towny as me, what did you mean by that?
|
On February 27 2012 13:32 FourFace wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 11:37 DoYouHas wrote: I'm so glad you are in this game Hyde :D,
You are absolutely right. There is a reason my case ended with a FOS instead of a vote. I had 3 things in mind when I made my case.
1. FF's early posting was either bad townie or scummy. I wanted to draw FF out and get a response from him in hopes of figuring out if he leans town or scum. My case wasn't conclusive on him as scum, but it was strong enough to warrant a response.
2. I wanted to move past the point of talking about policy and start getting into the real discussion. The best way of doing this is to give the town a solid piece of analysis to start playing with.
3. I wanted to gauge the responses of others to my case. (You kind of blew this for me when you posted, but that's ok.)
After his response I am leaning town for FF. Why? Because of the timestamps.
FF posted his fairly long response to me 66 minutes after I posted my case against him. If you look at his pre-game posts, FF was brand new and fairly oblivious to previous games (mentioning that he did not know the abbreviations and such). That tells me that it is VERY unlikely that he is playing off gumshoe's meta from last game for 2 reasons. I find it hard to believe that FF could have read my case, gone to a scumQT, asked for help, received it in the form of "play off gumshoe's meta", written up his post, and have it checked by that scumQT, and posted it in 66 minutes. It's possible, but super unlikely. That leaves me with the option that he read SNMM7 after this game started and decided on his own to play off gumshoe's meta, also super unlikely. So, to me, the craziness of his response is geniune. Which makes me lean town for him. For now. 3. No, that's not quite it. You are way to meticulous about the whole thing, I didn't ask for any help and gumshoe was one of the people I didn't read in on, but the rest is pretty true so if the 'he's playing off gumshoe's meta' part is helping you have the right impression of me just go with that 1 & 2: I really appreciate that we are starting to point fingers. I give you a pat on the back for the effort of breaking the trivial chit-chat
sigh four face what do you think of your accusers? And try not bash them in a way that could hurt their persona if they are actually town.
|
On February 27 2012 13:36 Steveling wrote: Godamit gum, I'm terribly lazy after last game, T_T. I'll post after my sleep, xD.
night night
|
On February 27 2012 13:37 slOosh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 13:24 gumshoe wrote: Sloosh: In regards to ghost, yeah, you'll see early on that I pressured him a bit, currently he's also my highest candidate of suspicion because before anything, he pushed other players to vote without voting himself... definitely worth tunnelling.
That's the one thing I'm trying to avoid >.<; Anyways, with regard to the Choco case, I've been looking over his filter and trying to think objectively into it: it's really hard to gauge his alignment as there isn't that much content. I'm really interested in this though. Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 09:37 Chocolate wrote: @ghost you thought I was scummy because I voted on a lurker? I don't see anything wrong with that at all, please explain why you dislike it. I think seeing them interact with each other can give us more substantial information (and it puts pressure on them if they are both mafia as they are paranoid at their interaction being put in the spotlight)
Yup, I think choco or ghost are shaping up to be good lynch options, kinda wanna here more out of steve... but the dude be ducking me,
well with that I'm off to sleep night night yall, happy hunting.
|
On February 28 2012 07:48 Alderan wrote: Gumshoe, where you at?
Chocolate or Ghost?
give me one sec
|
As of yet having read the cases I feel that some convincing doubts have been brought on to both the parties of ghost and chocolate, I do not think they are both scum (just because I would be sad to see scum play so blatantly awful) but it is likely that one of them is because scum love noob trains. I am equally suspicious of both of them, so I ask myself which lynch yields more information? The answer ties in directly with one of my current other suspicions
Right now I am suspicious of Sloosh of all people, sloosh, I do not appreciate your safe slow style, if your town, it makes you look an easy hit blue and your just not as constructive as you were last game, janaan and alderaan and DYH have completely stepped their game up despite the lack of evidence and have not just contributed but have helped the thread evolve and take shape, you on the other hand have been content for the most to just sit back and not take a guiding role in all of this. I am especially suspicious of you because your fate is tied up with ghosts.
+ Show Spoiler +filter On February 27 2012 10:50 JekyllAndHyde wrote:
Show nested quote +
My current suspicions are on: ghost_403
I'm really not sure if this is unintentional anti-town play or soft pushing mafia agenda. On February 27 2012 02:32 ghost_403 wrote: @alderan I really don't see any time where it would be advantageous to the town to not lynch. The town should first be lynching scum. If we can't find scum, we should instead lynch people who are not useful to the town. Lurkers fit the second criteria perfectly. By lurking, you are providing cover for the scum to hide, which is in every case bad for the town.
He seems to advocate, in the event we can't agree on a good mafia suspect, lurker lynches. Lurker lynches are good, but only to flush mafia out of hiding, as he says so himself. Right now this is a null post to me as I can see both town or mafia thinking this. However:
On February 27 2012 04:43 ghost_403 wrote: @Janaan Nope. I would love to start lynching into the other non-posters and fluffy posters as well, but alas, I have only one vote. Although, I would expect more posting from a hydra. It seems between the two of them that at least one could post on here "Don't lynch me".
His stance is consistent but questionable. He wants to lynch, not pressure to get people to post and produce content and thus flush out mafia. It's almost like he will policy lynch a lurker. Still null, but worth looking into.
On February 27 2012 07:18 ghost_403 wrote: Just got back and I've seen a few things that I'm not too happy about
It seems that most of the discussion on this thread has been built around the idea of a soft deadline and a no-lynch day 1. Here are my thoughts on both of those.
A soft deadline isn't really needed. At all. If your concern is that people change their votes at the last minute and mess up votes, there is a simple solution to that: we lynch people who change their votes at the last minute and mess up votes. I would rather lynch scum over people who mess up votes, but I'm down with policy lynching. Townies, don't change your vote at the last minute and mess up votes. I will vote to policy lynch you.
A no lynch day 1 is a bad idea. Pretty much, no matter who you are, a no lynch plays against your win condition, unless you're the Batman. As there is not the Batman in this game, no lynching goes against your win condition. Look at it this way: no matter your alignment, you win when there is no one else in the game. Period.
Another way to look at that is if you are still left during day 3 after 2 mislynches. There are 6 townies and 4 scum. The scum are either (1) forced to work together to stay alive, and are pretty easy to spot or (2) are going to sacrifice one of their own. Unless something goes horribly, horribly wrong, the worst case scenario for day 4 is 5 townies to 3 scum. No problem.
Responses to posts in thread:
@chocolate If this wasn't a newbie game, I would lynch you for that post.
@DoYouHas I think you're right on with that post. Not a big fan of the FOS thing, but whatever. I think it gives them room to run and hide. Instead, GO FOR THE KILL.
@gumshoe See above.
@fourface Start explaining yourself, or I'll start the bandwagon rolling.
@phagga I stand by what I said. I would much rather lynch scum, but if I can't, I'll lynch lurkers. The town lost that game because they let Palmar double lynch every day. As far as those two specific cases, rgTheSchworz should have been modkilled, and I would have lynched Lanaia instead mderg if I had had the time that day. She had no case against him, and I would have pointed that out, regardless of my alliance in that game.
There is a heavy fixation with lynching. It's no longer a means flush out lurking mafia from hiding. He threatens at least 3 active posters with the lynch. He emphasizes over and over that we have to lynch no matter the circumstances. Even if we don't have a good case, he is willing to lynch lurkers, unhelpful townies, and seemingly anything.
I'm trying to see what motives a townie might have for needing to get lynches so badly, and I can't think of anything.
##FOS: ghost_403.
(I'm ending it with FOS rather than a vote since I really want other people's input as I think that is the best way I don't go tunnel mode).
Here he is the first person to attack ghost, he does so in a rather soft manner, taking a much less aggressive tone than weve seen out of him in the past.
You then were the also first person to defend him
+ Show Spoiler +On February 28 2012 02:52 ghost_403 wrote:
For me this clears some of my initial suspicions and pushes ghost into null read. He provides decent reasoning once pressured - my current read is that he is perhaps overzealous with his stance on lynching, treating it like a 100% policy, and not adopting a helpful attitude for town. ghost, I hope to continue seeing quality posts like these without having to FOS / make cases against you.
As for his actual stance: While I strongly disagree with the idea of "lynching for information", I do agree that a no lynch should be a last resort than an easy way out. Otherwise it can give mafia an avenue of being non commital, which is the essence of lurking anyways.
Right now that leaves me with Chocolate, as he hasn't yet responded. I don't think his case is worth voting for yet, but it defeats the whole purpose of the soft deadline if all we do is FOS and vote last minute.
(Thus my preliminary, not necessarily final, vote will be on) ##Vote: Chocolate
He drops his suspicion of ghost for decent but not great reasons, last game steve eventually dropped his suspicion of me when no one else thought I was scum anymore, ghost could be just dropping his suspiciun of four face cause he saw how much heat he was getting for it. Sloosh then switches to chocolate who sloosh hasn't even really provided a case for, in fact the only reason sloosh really mentioned chocolate before was because he perceived that chocolate was interacting with ghost. Furthermore he doesn't even continue considering ghost as a suspect, he says he's null, last game we all had at least two suspects in the red, why does sloosh feel the need to drop ghost off his radar?
No I am not saying that sloosh is acting scummy, but he's definitely not acting like sloosh, he got mvp his first game because of his aggressive style and the style isn't bad so long as he listens to other people. DYH is a perfect example of someone whose correctly toned down his play because he was too aggressive, Sloosh just strikes me as timid, which as I said, isn't sloosh, its really very possible that Sloosh is playing off his crushing defeat last game to trick us into thinking that hes just indecisive and careful as opposed to scummy.
That said I do not feel that Sloosh has hurt town as of yet, so I suggest we lynch ghost and if ghost flips red, maybe we should take another look at Sloosh.
That is why I feel ghost is our best bet, because depending on his alignment we can get an idea if sloosh's new style is really a new style or if its scum tactics.
On a side note heres another suspect: Steveling, steveling has posted in only the most fluffy of ways, then suggests he wants to leave the game, look at some of his early posts before the game started.
+ Show Spoiler +Oh, I almost didn't make it. That's madness. + Show Spoiler +My first post in this game gonna be "Hi im scum" regardless of my allingment, xPPPP. ♥
These are not the posts of someone who doesn't want to play a game of mafia, these are the posts of someone whose excited to try something new, and then he clams up, doesn't talk much, doesn't comment on anyone when asked... You know what I think? I think steve was looking forward to playing town this game, I definitely think he was somewhat stressed out last game as mafia, mafia is stressful.
The most likely reason in my opinion for Steve's deflation was that he ended up with the same role, now I am not going to propose we lynch him on a hunch, but I would like to keep this thought out there in case he does get a replacement, so that we dont have to start from square one with a new player, steve is stressed out for a reason and roling scum twice is as good any reason to start sweating.
As I said, I think we should vote for ghost because it seems to me as if sloosh's fate is wrapped up with ghosts, sloosh was the first player to fully accuse ghost, he was also the first player to defend him, we lynch chocolate what does that tell us? That chocolate turns green or red when it expires, we lynch ghost? I think well learn sloosh's true colours.
FOS: Sloosh FOS: Steveling
##Vote: ghost_403
|
|
|
|