|
On June 12 2012 02:40 rastaban wrote:You guys do understand I was referring to shooting people claiming miller in later stages of the game future and not ones claiming now (which i was for). I just point this out since FreelanceSatan's quote below references wanting to shoot the claiming millers. Show nested quote +
also why did chaos Rastaban threaten to shoot a claimed miller when like 90% of thread is indicating that they approve of the plan on some level??
What i was saying was
ok that makes much more sense if your not talking about millers claiming now and trying to disrupt the plan. I still think you should try to avoid dealing with absolutes such as "if a miller claims later shoot him"
we cant be 100% sure one way or the other so it would be best to take it on a case by case basis. But your right.. if a miller is claiming later into the game just to save his ass it should definitely be noted that it looks significantly worse than if he claimed now and we should act accordingly.
|
On June 12 2012 02:49 FreelanceSatan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 02:40 rastaban wrote:You guys do understand I was referring to shooting people claiming miller in later stages of the game future and not ones claiming now (which i was for). I just point this out since FreelanceSatan's quote below references wanting to shoot the claiming millers.
also why did chaos Rastaban threaten to shoot a claimed miller when like 90% of thread is indicating that they approve of the plan on some level??
What i was saying was ok that makes much more sense if your not talking about millers claiming now and trying to disrupt the plan. I still think you should try to avoid dealing with absolutes such as "if a miller claims later shoot him" we cant be 100% sure one way or the other so it would be best to take it on a case by case basis. But your right.. if a miller is claiming later into the game just to save his ass it should definitely be noted that it looks significantly worse than if he claimed now and we should act accordingly.
You are correct about dealing in absolutes, after reading chaoser's post I realized that it makes much more sense for us to designate who does the shooting anyway.
|
On June 12 2012 01:03 chaoser wrote:
@gonzaw I'm surprised you're asking millers to claim and then shoot day 1 when it's just as good to have millers claim day 1 and then you yourself volunteer to shoot day 1.
Since you yourself did not volunteer immediately to shoot on day 1, I was wondering if you'd like to start us off by shooting on day 1.
In this game, to find 3 out of the 4 mafia, I feel like it's pretty easy. We just force the person we think is the most suspicious to shoot the person THEY think is most suspicious. If they can shoot, they are not one of the three regular mafia. The only anti-town that gets out of this is the GF and the SK but they should be easy to narrow down when we combine this method with regular analysis.
If they can't shoot, then they are either mafia or blue.
In terms of blue roles, I actually don't think they matter that much this game and I'd totally be ok with any blue role that gets suspected and put on the spot to shoot to just claim. RB is nerfed this game to only be able to roleblock the same person on every other night so that means mafia can't just nilly willy claim blue and then when they don't die to mafia gunfire for a few days, get off scott free.
So basically it goes discussion--->decide who is "most suspicious"--->force them to shoot who THEY think is most suspicious--->if they can't shoot, they will be forced to claim--->we then decide if the claim is valid or not--->shoot if we don't think the claim is valid.
I don't want to volunteer to shoot myself because that would be selfish as fuck, and I know people would oppose that throwing the "But I don't know your alignment!" argument around.
Millers shooting is an "universal" plan that everybody can follow.
However, I agree with what you said, we can force the most suspicious player to shoot to prove he's not regular Goon.
Actually I thought about it once I read Bang Bang Mafia...but for some reason I forgot about it when this game started :/
I find one problem with having the most suspicious player shoot the guy he thinks is scum and not the 2nd most suspicious player:
If that player is the Godfather he will easily shoot a townie.
If we forced that player to shoot the 2nd most suspicious player, the GF would be forced to shoot him, and if that 2nd suspicious player was another scum, he'd be forced to shoot his scumbuddy (or not shoot and out BOTH of them as scum).
We also prevent the chaos of that player being the VT, but shooting our cop or medic and then spending the rest of the night/day wondering if he's GF or not.
@Toad: Well, every single game I've played had only 1 Miller in it. Okay, we can try to be careful if there are more than 1 Miller claim.
To be honest, having Millers shoot on D1 or following chaoser's plan is good either way. It certainly beats what they did on Bang Bang Mafia 1.
Anyways, this shouldn't even be a discussion, no matter what plan we take:
Millers claim at most on D1
So, let's hope this is taken care of, so let's try to get some analysis up in this bitch
|
I often have a hard time making people believe I am town. I have been on the receiving end of many townie mis lynches despite my best efforts to convey my pro town status(many people say my meta is always scummy regardless of alignment).. As so I would like to volunteer for the first shot as it would be nice if town could avoid all of that. (its generally a huge waste of towns resources and time considering the way my playstyle creates alot of drama and generally stops town from focusing on other possible scum suspects)
just saying. It might be a good idea to get me in the front of the "Tell this guy to shoot this guy line" and avoid the whole thing entirely if we can. I understand that this is probably my own fault for playing the way I do but i genuinely try as hard as I can to show my townieness when town and still often come up as scummy to everyone.
Just putting that out there.
|
No dude, you are the most pro-town motherfucker as town, and the most anti-town scummy motherfucker as scum.
Every time you've been lynched you flipped scum, I don't remember a single time you've been lynched as town.
So that's crap
If you start acting similar like that game I'll policy lynch you.
However you are acting normal now so that's not the case (see? It wasn't hard).
If you really want to volunteer, then you know that you should shoot the player town tells you to, right?
|
Granted I never really read any of your TL games >_>
|
Meh actually I'm lazy as fuck I'll analyze later.
|
The point of millers claiming isn't that it helps the town by giving them someone to shoot and plans and all this and that. Plans are always going to have holes in a closed setup. The point of millers claiming is that they have no reason not to.
A miller is just a VT with a special title. So what? Why wouldn't they claim? There's a possibility of a fakeclaim. So what? Everyone else in the game is going to claim VT, and that doesn't necessarily say anything about their alignment. There's a possibility it doesn't help with a possible tracker/doctor because of a possible framer. So what? That possibility is always going to exist no matter what the tracker/doctor looks at.
The upside is that it is a great thing to talk about D1, and a great topic for seeing how people react to whomever does claim, etc.
I would also point out that while there is a possibility of a fakeclaim I think it's very low. A GF fakeclaiming miller is unnecessarily risky for scum when the GF can just as well fakeclaim VT and not have to worry about assuming that a cop will doubt their sanity or not check them or something. Only way it makes sense for GF to fakeclaim is if there's a framer too. Other mafia would be stupid to claim a role that can shoot when they can't.
|
Reading the thread now, but as a note if a Miller is ever DT checked he can prove his alignment by shooting. The only mafia role that can day kill is the Godfather and he will not appear red to checks. So if they appear red to checks and can kill during the day you know they are a miller.
|
actually scratch that. Detective sanities make any sort of thing like that hinge on luck.
|
On June 12 2012 02:17 FreelanceSatan wrote:
ok I just woke up got my role and went over thread. Apparently you guys are trying to find a way to take advantage of millers and that sounds like a good topic to start discussion on but I dont exactly see how pressuring millers to claim is gonna confirm them or anything with a GF that can be miller and shoot in game it reduces authenticity of any miller claim.
I think you guys need to slow down with trying to put together odd ball plans that rely on so much unknown variables and just focus on the one thing town does best. scum hunting.
( also why did chaos threaten to shoot a claimed miller when like 90% of thread is indicating that they approve of the plan on some level??) that just doesnt feel right.
I would FOS chaos for that.
Anyway im not a miller however..
I will volunteer to take the first shot if you guys have a plan other than "shoot your biggest scum read so your confirmed townie" cause honestly how accurate are scum reads on day 1. (not very) and the last thing we need is townies offing townies during the day and scum offing townies during the night.
2 quick questions:
Is that an argument with 2 phrases that belongs together? I doubt it but I don't get why you're using "would" in the first place.
So why "would" you fos chaoser for that instead of just fosing him? Sounds a little like "I would .... if not for ..." to me and that sounds a little like an excuse when there's no reason to make an excuse. You're a smurf so surely you know how to play. Why are you so insecure and tell us that you would FOS him instead of fosing him in the first place? That really sounds a little weak.
If the argument is "I would fos him if I were a miller" I want to know why you see a reason to fos him as a miller but don't see a reason to fos him as a VT lol
|
On June 12 2012 03:22 talismania wrote:
The point of millers claiming isn't that it helps the town by giving them someone to shoot and plans and all this and that. Plans are always going to have holes in a closed setup. The point of millers claiming is that they have no reason not to.
A miller is just a VT with a special title. So what? Why wouldn't they claim? There's a possibility of a fakeclaim. So what? Everyone else in the game is going to claim VT, and that doesn't necessarily say anything about their alignment. There's a possibility it doesn't help with a possible tracker/doctor because of a possible framer. So what? That possibility is always going to exist no matter what the tracker/doctor looks at.
The upside is that it is a great thing to talk about D1, and a great topic for seeing how people react to whomever does claim, etc.
I would also point out that while there is a possibility of a fakeclaim I think it's very low. A GF fakeclaiming miller is unnecessarily risky for scum when the GF can just as well fakeclaim VT and not have to worry about assuming that a cop will doubt their sanity or not check them or something. Only way it makes sense for GF to fakeclaim is if there's a framer too. Other mafia would be stupid to claim a role that can shoot when they can't.
Well a miller claim either is a true miller or a mafia. There's no way a VT would claim miller, there's no way a blue would claim miller.
So firstly mafia gets the information and it's easier to bluesnipe like that, especially if we have multiple millers because they can take them out. Yeah it's a little wifom because I just said blues will never claim miller which makes it a reasonable claim to "hide" but it would be a shitton of confusion. Just picture a blue claiming miller who is confronted with a green check on d3 on him. That wouldn't be helping at all to put it that way :p
Additionally it's going to be a topic either way. If you play decent and just try to do no shenanigans you should not have problems. But let's take a miller who claimes on the n0 deadline (n0 -> d1) and assume that guy survives a couple of days.
Again, that's going to be a topic and it's easy for mafia to get people not trust that guy simply because it would be a reasonable fakeclaim.
If I was certain that we have 1 miller tops I'd probably agree on a claim n0-d1 in a heartbeak but I'm not really so sure about that assumption as I've actually seen more games with 2 or 3 millers than games with only 1 miller if I remember correctly.
With 2 or 3 guys a "let's lynch into one of the millers, there's bound to be one mafia in there" later on, especially if they survive quite long is inevitable imo while no claim would be either no problem at all because we never got into that situation post day 3 with a DT that "luckily" happened to check a miller or if we have bad luck it happens and we're only going to lose a cycle if the guy is looking bad on top of being a miller.
|
I find one problem with having the most suspicious player shoot the guy he thinks is scum and not the 2nd most suspicious player:
If that player is the Godfather he will easily shoot a townie.
This is not that big a problem since they would have to justify their shot. Once again, by forcing them to make their own shot ,they have respectability and we can call them out of it. If it's town dictated, we'd have to all agree on not only someone that's the most suspicious but also on a second most suspicious person. If they flip town, then we can't later go back and see, oh, this might be GF-motivated kill. I'd rather have a GF shoot a townie and then have to justify it than a GF shoot a town pushed townie and then he doesn't have to justify it.
|
I'm fine with designating WHO shoots, I'm not so much fine with designating the target. I feel like it will add accountability to whomever is pulling the trigger if we don't designate a target and we can get a better read because of it.
Generally speaking, any game that has more than 1 miller that I've seen has been big games, like the large normals here. That's in general. That being said, I'm ABSOLUTELY NOT ruling out the possibility of there being more than 1 as I have no idea what to expect out of this setup.
I'm for miller claiming whenever - we can decide after the claim whether it makes sense and whether we believe it or not.
|
On June 12 2012 03:58 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 03:22 talismania wrote:
The point of millers claiming isn't that it helps the town by giving them someone to shoot and plans and all this and that. Plans are always going to have holes in a closed setup. The point of millers claiming is that they have no reason not to.
A miller is just a VT with a special title. So what? Why wouldn't they claim? There's a possibility of a fakeclaim. So what? Everyone else in the game is going to claim VT, and that doesn't necessarily say anything about their alignment. There's a possibility it doesn't help with a possible tracker/doctor because of a possible framer. So what? That possibility is always going to exist no matter what the tracker/doctor looks at.
The upside is that it is a great thing to talk about D1, and a great topic for seeing how people react to whomever does claim, etc.
I would also point out that while there is a possibility of a fakeclaim I think it's very low. A GF fakeclaiming miller is unnecessarily risky for scum when the GF can just as well fakeclaim VT and not have to worry about assuming that a cop will doubt their sanity or not check them or something. Only way it makes sense for GF to fakeclaim is if there's a framer too. Other mafia would be stupid to claim a role that can shoot when they can't. Well a miller claim either is a true miller or a mafia. There's no way a VT would claim miller, there's no way a blue would claim miller. So firstly mafia gets the information and it's easier to bluesnipe like that, especially if we have multiple millers because they can take them out. Yeah it's a little wifom because I just said blues will never claim miller which makes it a reasonable claim to "hide" but it would be a shitton of confusion. Just picture a blue claiming miller who is confronted with a green check on d3 on him. That wouldn't be helping at all to put it that way :p Additionally it's going to be a topic either way. If you play decent and just try to do no shenanigans you should not have problems. But let's take a miller who claimes on the n0 deadline (n0 -> d1) and assume that guy survives a couple of days. Again, that's going to be a topic and it's easy for mafia to get people not trust that guy simply because it would be a reasonable fakeclaim. If I was certain that we have 1 miller tops I'd probably agree on a claim n0-d1 in a heartbeak but I'm not really so sure about that assumption as I've actually seen more games with 2 or 3 millers than games with only 1 miller if I remember correctly. With 2 or 3 guys a "let's lynch into one of the millers, there's bound to be one mafia in there" later on, especially if they survive quite long is inevitable imo while no claim would be either no problem at all because we never got into that situation post day 3 with a DT that "luckily" happened to check a miller or if we have bad luck it happens and we're only going to lose a cycle if the guy is looking bad on top of being a miller.
That bluesniping point is legitimate. I hadn't thought of that. hmm. There's legitimate tradeoffs either way then.
|
On June 12 2012 03:38 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 02:17 FreelanceSatan wrote:
ok I just woke up got my role and went over thread. Apparently you guys are trying to find a way to take advantage of millers and that sounds like a good topic to start discussion on but I dont exactly see how pressuring millers to claim is gonna confirm them or anything with a GF that can be miller and shoot in game it reduces authenticity of any miller claim.
I think you guys need to slow down with trying to put together odd ball plans that rely on so much unknown variables and just focus on the one thing town does best. scum hunting.
( also why did chaos threaten to shoot a claimed miller when like 90% of thread is indicating that they approve of the plan on some level??) that just doesnt feel right.
I would FOS chaos for that.
Anyway im not a miller however..
I will volunteer to take the first shot if you guys have a plan other than "shoot your biggest scum read so your confirmed townie" cause honestly how accurate are scum reads on day 1. (not very) and the last thing we need is townies offing townies during the day and scum offing townies during the night. 2 quick questions:Is that an argument with 2 phrases that belongs together? I doubt it but I don't get why you're using "would" in the first place. So why "would" you fos chaoser for that instead of just fosing him? Sounds a little like "I would .... if not for ..." to me and that sounds a little like an excuse when there's no reason to make an excuse. You're a smurf so surely you know how to play. Why are you so insecure and tell us that you would FOS him instead of fosing him in the first place? That really sounds a little weak. If the argument is "I would fos him if I were a miller" I want to know why you see a reason to fos him as a miller but don't see a reason to fos him as a VT lol
I wrote the "would " because I could not find the post where "choaser" said that. Turns out I couldnt find it cause it wasnt chaoser. That was why I didnt post "im putting a FOS on Chaoser" because I couldnt find it to back it up. and now we know why. because I had misread the names and gotten confused.
|
Alright, finished reading.
Any plan that involves millers and role checking is quite stupid. There are so many things that can interfere with proper results that it hinges on nothing. Anyone advocating some sort of role centric plan needs to shut up. It won't work, we don't even know if all the roles in the OP are the only roles in the game, but even from what we can tell it is still a crap shoot and it could only get worse.
I agree with what Chaoser said. If we think someone is scummy, we make them shoot who they think are scummy. If they can't shoot and can't explain themselves then we just kill them. Problem solved. On the off chance the DT figures out his sanity and claims to have found someone a Miller claim CANNOT absolve them. A DT will only get a red check back on non GF roles if his sanity is known. The non GF roles cannot shoot, so they would need to shoot to prove they are a Miller.
That claim can literally never work.
There is only one actual benefit of a Miller claiming in this set up. Hypothetically its day 5, we need to kill a mafia and the DT claims knowing his sanity and has a red check on someone. Assuming that person has NEVER shot during the day then he can now shoot to prove that he is not scum but a Miller. There is no way scum can emulate that play to the point where it would help a Miller to claim earlier on. The only thing that this helps is preventing a cop who knows there alignment to claiming publicly in that one very niche scenario.
In that scenario the N1 Miller claim would save the cop from going public. That is the only benefit. So does that single benefit justify having someone claim Miller? I can't see why someone would ever get shit for claiming Miller. The only mafia benefit to claiming Miller would be to avoid a RC but the only one who can do that is the GF who would get outed by a DT check and would prefer to get DT checked anyway.
The same thing applies to SK's.
Anyone faking Miller would eventually just get outed by some means and its not worth it. So I guess there is only that one benefit, but there is no real drawback besides people wasting time speculating on why someone claimed Miller.
But hey, since I outlined all the reasons above and there are no true drawbacks, might as well claim that I'm a Miller.
|
and the two sentences you highlighted are not mutual.
I was saying "anyway im not miller However.." and then posted the part below it as in "However I will volunteer to shoot" even tho im not miller and you guys are planning on making millers shoot.
|
Also I noticed I may not have really convey my stance on gonzaws plan yet in a solid way so I will say now that I am also fully in support of the millers claiming and forcing them to shoot for more information. I would also like to state that we have to be very careful about thinking that shooting is a way of "confirming" the millers because it may give us info but it will in no way confirm them if the Godfather is alive.
|
On June 12 2012 04:20 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
Alright, finished reading.
Any plan that involves millers and role checking is quite stupid. There are so many things that can interfere with proper results that it hinges on nothing. Anyone advocating some sort of role centric plan needs to shut up. It won't work, we don't even know if all the roles in the OP are the only roles in the game, but even from what we can tell it is still a crap shoot and it could only get worse.
I agree with what Chaoser said. If we think someone is scummy, we make them shoot who they think are scummy. If they can't shoot and can't explain themselves then we just kill them. Problem solved. On the off chance the DT figures out his sanity and claims to have found someone a Miller claim CANNOT absolve them. A DT will only get a red check back on non GF roles if his sanity is known. The non GF roles cannot shoot, so they would need to shoot to prove they are a Miller.
That claim can literally never work.
[...]
I thought so as well until I realized there can be framers in this game 
The op has no framers in it but they're possible because it's apparently a closed-setup with example roles. Especially if we follow the miller plan from gonzaw that is bound to fail because if we assign the guy who shoots based on being a miller and the fact that it should return red (as you pointet out no mafia will return red AND are able to shoot) we're painting a big, red cross above the millers head for a framer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
