|
On April 30 2012 23:57 chaoser wrote:
Ok, how do we hold him responsible? How do we know that his picks for exemption are pro-town and not pro-mafia? How long will it take us to figure out his picks are pro-mafia? Probably a very long time if he's mafia and his teammates just play very "townie like"; There are two mafia teams so it's very easy to scumhunt while being scum yourself. Putting someone into power to always decide Round 1 is ridiculous because of that. We don't know anything about mafia, what roles they might have, or how much KP they have. If palmar was part of a team, by the time we figure it out, it would be too late. Even more so since apparently he's asking people to claim to him.
This above part is very true and I'm bolding/quoting because I think it bears repeating.
Also syllo chill a bit...
|
On May 01 2012 00:40 Motbob is great wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2012 23:57 chaoser wrote:
Ok, how do we hold him responsible? How do we know that his picks for exemption are pro-town and not pro-mafia? How long will it take us to figure out his picks are pro-mafia? Probably a very long time if he's mafia and his teammates just play very "townie like"; There are two mafia teams so it's very easy to scumhunt while being scum yourself. Putting someone into power to always decide Round 1 is ridiculous because of that. We don't know anything about mafia, what roles they might have, or how much KP they have. If palmar was part of a team, by the time we figure it out, it would be too late. Even more so since apparently he's asking people to claim to him. This above part is very true and I'm bolding/quoting because I think it bears repeating. Also syllo chill a bit...
Chill? Do you have a problem with me thinking chaoser is scum for saying something that demonstrates he isn't approaching the issue from a townie point of view?
|
How is it a good point for him to say his team mates can play "very townie like"? How are we even supposed to find at all if that is true? Besides if they are playing "very townie like", wouldn't people just be voting to save them anyway in round B? Again, this is nonsense. Moreover, we are just talking about day 1 plans for now, making the opposition even more absurd.
|
Actually it was more in regards to your post against BC which I hadn't really read when I made my first post.
Anyway I'm actually really surprised you support this "palmar controls everything" plan. Your excuse is that we'll be able to tell if he's scum. However I'd like to take this time to point out Chaoser's quote which I bolded. Palmar can kill one or even two scum and still have his alignment be unknown. Basically, when I look at Palmar's plan I see something that's trying to draw the exact reaction you gave which is the "oh scum wouldn't put themselves out there." I find it interesting as well that you're able to make such an informed decision with Palmar only having made a few posts regarding his plan. Similarly, you're willing to condemn chaoser after only a few posts. You say chaoser isn't looking at things from a townie point of view, I don't think you're approaching things from a townie point of view. Do I think you're scum yet? Uh no, that'd be foolish to jump to a conclusion. So yeah, in retrospect my "chill" comment actually should have been more along the lines of "slow down and stop jumping to conclusions."
Refreshed the page before posting, the first bolded bit is only there so I have a completed sentence  . It's the part about two families which is important.
Ok now I'm really going, see ya'll in several hours.
|
If it's so simple to just "play very townie like", this whole game would be completely pointless, we can just pack up and stop playing mafia, because all scum just "plays very townie like" all the time and the game cannot be won.
And the point isn't whether or not "If Palmar is suspicious". Make up your damn mind. I have the track record to back up the notion that I should be listened to when I'm town. Not listening to me when I'm town is stupid. You either accuse me of being scum, or you listen the fuck to what I say.
There are only two sensible options
a) Think I'm town and roll with my plan, make everyone say yes, unless I pardon them.
b) Think I'm scum.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
I support pretty much everything Syllo has said so far.
I also thing Palmars plan in general is a good plan. I don't think it's a good idea to simply have him in charge. First because he can die, and second because it makes sense to have multiple good townhunters deciding who is immune.
Fact is I trust Palmars town reads almost as much as my own, same goes for Syllo. By having the three of us agree on a list of townies, we will get better reads on each other, as well as have a fairly accurate list. The chances of the three of us being scum together is absurdly small, which means even if we happened to ALL be mafia on separate teams, we would STILL be making accurate lists.
Also, for those saying Palmar is somehow not accountable, that's foolish. He's the most accountable person in the thread. I KNOW he is good at town hunting, so if he has a list with a bunch players I don't agree with I will immediately know something is wrong and vice-versa.
For now everyone should be voting Yes though.
|
oh that's you meapak, I was wondering who was furiously trying to break the world record in dumb.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
I take it Meapak won't be receiving a pardon....
Also, lets keep a civil tone here Palmar.
|
I'm always civil, just honest.
|
On April 30 2012 16:46 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2012 13:43 VisceraEyes wrote:
Not I. :d
Well then, let's get started.
As always, I cynically feel like any plan we hope to enact is doomed to fail so let's just vote how we want to vote for round A. We have a number advantage over scum, so voting randomly (according to how we feel) will put town at the advantage imo.
I haven't decided how to use my votes for Phase B yet. I'm still pondering the matter. Hi, can you elaborate on this? Surely you don't mean to imply you are going to vote based on something other than information you have gained from reading the thread, and possibly your PMs? Everyone should be able to justify their round B votes on something other than just vague notions of how useful that player generally is when town aligned. Also, I propose we will vote which player(s) to lynch as normal. Those player(s) should then not receive any votes in round B; we could have everyone claim their votes in round B to at least have something to analyze in case they still do. Actually I suppose the downside of having everyone claim their votes in public is that mafia will is possible then less likely to vote for each other as they can tell whether their players are in danger of being voted off or not. Ideally we would choose a person who is most likely to be town (that would be me) and just have everyone PM him their votes instead.
I mean for phase A) we should just send in our answer and not worry about whether we're in the majority or minority and use the information in the thread to vote for Phase B. I didn't mean to imply that we should vote arbitrarily for the lynch, that would be ridiculous. :S
|
VE I'm not sure if I believe you as the post isn't internally very consistent if that was your meaning. If that was your intent, what conclusion did you reach now that you have "pondered" the issue?
|
Well feel free to disbelieve me then syllo - at this point you're advocating a mass-claim plan which can lick my balls, so frankly I don't care if you believe me or not.
|
Why would we randomly vote yes/no, that's just stupid, why would we randomly cut down the pool of lynchees rather than analytically cut it down.
|
Because there's no way to ensure the compliance of everybody, and when everybody doesn't participate the plan falls apart.
|
For instance, myself and Meapak have both already voted and do not intend to change our choices. How you gonna factor that in? Especially if we don't tell you what we voted?
|
that's why I'm leaving a margin of error. Most likely I'll ask 5-6 players to vote "No" and 12-13 players to vote "Yes". Then we lynch into those 12-13 players without having to waste votes on our most obvious townies. If some people decide to vote "No" without me asking them to, it's time to figure out if they're:
![[image loading]](http://media.salon.com/2011/10/The-Lone-Ranger1-460x307.jpg)
or
![[image loading]](http://www.nordinho.net/vbull/attachments/new-adventure-games/2918d1118396306-mafia-boss-mafiaboss.jpg)
|
Cool! Well good luck sir! Because your plan doesn't demand my compliance I can safely wish you good luck in your endeavor! ^^
|
On April 30 2012 14:32 Foolishness wrote:
We want as few people as possible in the majority. It needs to be as close to even as possible. If we have 10 or 11 people in the majority we can control the lynch. This is because we have more votes than there are people up for lynch.
This is solid. We also have to agree on someone having the last word in round A, otherwise we can't implement what foolishness said. I'll support palmar if he agrees on pardoning max number of players.
The theory behind this is the least players that are up to being lynched, the least influential mafia votes are on keeping mafia alive. If everybody is up for lynch it is pretty impossible to get whoever we deem scum lynched.
|
@palmar Why not 8? Don't you agree with what I've said above?
|
United States2095 Posts
Hi guys.
I'm in this game too.
Is this a haiku?
No. So I see two things happening. Palmar came up with a bow before me ye mortals and expects it to work. Syllogism his first leutenant and Radfield his skippy monkey friend are trying to help.
Then we have Motbob (Meapak), Chaoser, BC and a few others shouting their disdain for this plan.
I think Palmar's plan is the way to go in ROUND 1. It gives us some information and I think everyone here is smart enough to stop listening to Palmar when he acts retarded. Notice I said when, not if, cuz I mean its Palmar. (<3) I'll vote Yes forya bud!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
