| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 00:06 kushm4sta wrote: metaread on momentoss: he is this dumb as town I know that from liquid city. also he will afk for long periods of time so we have that to look forward to. Refrain from flamebait. Ok? Ok. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 10 2012 14:27 EchelonTee wrote: 1. It gives "credibility" to people who are knocked out early, while not forcing them to do anything significant. A good good good example of this problem was in Liar Game 1. Basically half of the people were immune to the lynch depending on a Yes or No vote; while town tried to make the immune people accountable for their actions, because they have no fear of the lynch they really have no pressure on them to do anything at all. A hilarious example is sandroba himself; despite being widely called scum since D1, because he was immune to lynch through flukes, he stayed alive for days manipulating people here and there. If we force everyone to vote on everything, the knocked out people can make random reasons for their votes and look active. However, if we don't force everyone to vote on everything, knocked out people will have to talk about things on their own prerogative, exposing their true intentions. ET I mostly like the points you made, but I get hung up on this one. Yes, the people who are safe as of Round 1 are immune to lynch for 72 more hours. However, On October 10 2012 11:00 kitaman27 wrote: You are not required to vote. If we don't force everyone to vote on everything, nobody is actually forced to vote. Nobody should be checking out for 72 hours once they're safe in Round 1, but the voting rules wouldn't require anyone to make reasoned choices later on that we could hold them accountable to. Moreover, while 1-vote-per-matchup removes some of what town can learn by how everyone votes (by limiting their options), people can also throw around blocks of votes with very little reasoning. 5 single votes with poor reasoning doesn't help us, but neither does a block of 5 votes on a single person with poor reasoning. Another point is that I can see the similarities between this and liar game, but the lynching mechanic here is ... almost unknown? Whereas in Liar Game people were going to be safe every day by chance, we don't know what future lynches will look like. It removes some of the ability to plot long-term, like in Liar Game how answers and votes were planned in advance, because we don't know what the lynching scheme is long-term. As long as mafia doesn't know either, I actually think not knowing future lynches favors town just because it negates some of mafia's ability coordinate actions in a way they KNOW will be beneficial to them. More reason, in my mind, for them to have some sort of lynch-affecting role or mechanic. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
Why do you want austinmcc to advance over a guy who hasn't posted even once? I don't even care what austinmcc said so far, OrignalName isn't even around and that gets my vote among those two right now. How about da0ud/Djodref? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 11 2012 00:06 kushm4sta wrote: metaread on momentoss: he is this dumb as town I know that from liquid city. I think I've been suspicious of townMementoss in every game I've played with him, something he does always gives me a mafia read on him. However, he's not dumb as town. I don't care if you're sober or high or on PCP while playing this game. I found it tremendously difficult in LC to wade through all your posting to find the bits that I thought were well-reasoned or interesting or could give me an actual read on you. I'm all for silliness in these games, but if it's just constant in every post then it's going to hamstring your effectiveness as town because people either won't pay attention to you or won't bother to pick out the good points you make from among the bad. | ||
|
kushm4sta
United States8878 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
Only the last of my posts in the voting thread is counted? If I were being stupid, I could post 20 times with different votes, but only the last one would count? Difficulty for the mods aside, if you say you're going to do something, then do it. Things to consider for this lynch mechanic: There will be two players that have 1 extra vote and two players that have 2 extra votes (assuming 1 vote per matchup). They will have greater power over who their next opponent will be due to the fact that they cannot vote on their own matchup. Its Day 1, Round 1 with very little to go off of. ##VOTES
| ||
|
kushm4sta
United States8878 Posts
I prioritize voting bad people over good people just because I think we are more likely to catch a bad scum than a good scum today, also lynching a good town is way worse than lynching bad town. I am also prioritizing voting for afks instead of actives. hopeless1der x1 originalname x1 da0ud x1 | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
I guess it must have been a master plan from the Alien Invaders who put themselves all as the lowest seeded people. I would put focus on eliminating players number 10, 11 and 12 this round if possible. You said your post was not to be taken seriously. But I don't know if you mean the entire post or not. Was this particular portion of your post unserious?On October 10 2012 19:31 Djodref wrote: I'd like to hear you, not anyone else, spell out more specifically why you find discussing the lynch mechanics to be inherently scummy. If mafia are going to look like they are participating while discussing the rules, that implies that townies will be discussing the rules, otherwise there's nothing to "participate" in, everyone who discusses rules has claimed scum. How do you separate hiro as scum from town just on the basis of his discussion of the rules?I totally second Thrawn's last post. I think giving ourselves rules for voting is going to give mafia an opportunity to blend in and/or to take advantages of these rules. I guess it should be ok if we just vote for the people we find scummy. Moreover, the more time we discuss about the rules we should use, the less time we have for scumhunting. It's also a golden opportunity for the mafia to look like they are participating while discussing the rules. According to this, Hiropro and Daoud have made scummy posts so far because it looks like they want to focus the discussion of the lynch rules. Also Daoud first post came off as weird in my eyes. It looks like he's going to prepare an excuse like "I didn't understand today's lynch principle" for later. @Daoud What was your motivation for your first post ? You guys are both in a first-round matchup against each other. This is currently the bracket I'm most interested in. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 00:13 austinmcc wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 10 2012 14:27 EchelonTee wrote: 1. It gives "credibility" to people who are knocked out early, while not forcing them to do anything significant. A good good good example of this problem was in Liar Game 1. Basically half of the people were immune to the lynch depending on a Yes or No vote; while town tried to make the immune people accountable for their actions, because they have no fear of the lynch they really have no pressure on them to do anything at all. A hilarious example is sandroba himself; despite being widely called scum since D1, because he was immune to lynch through flukes, he stayed alive for days manipulating people here and there. If we force everyone to vote on everything, the knocked out people can make random reasons for their votes and look active. However, if we don't force everyone to vote on everything, knocked out people will have to talk about things on their own prerogative, exposing their true intentions. ET I mostly like the points you made, but I get hung up on this one. Yes, the people who are safe as of Round 1 are immune to lynch for 72 more hours. However, On October 10 2012 11:00 kitaman27 wrote: You are not required to vote. If we don't force everyone to vote on everything, nobody is actually forced to vote. Nobody should be checking out for 72 hours once they're safe in Round 1, but the voting rules wouldn't require anyone to make reasoned choices later on that we could hold them accountable to. Moreover, while 1-vote-per-matchup removes some of what town can learn by how everyone votes (by limiting their options), people can also throw around blocks of votes with very little reasoning. 5 single votes with poor reasoning doesn't help us, but neither does a block of 5 votes on a single person with poor reasoning. Another point is that I can see the similarities between this and liar game, but the lynching mechanic here is ... almost unknown? Whereas in Liar Game people were going to be safe every day by chance, we don't know what future lynches will look like. It removes some of the ability to plot long-term, like in Liar Game how answers and votes were planned in advance, because we don't know what the lynching scheme is long-term. As long as mafia doesn't know either, I actually think not knowing future lynches favors town just because it negates some of mafia's ability coordinate actions in a way they KNOW will be beneficial to them. More reason, in my mind, for them to have some sort of lynch-affecting role or mechanic. If we don't "force" people to vote, but rather have the normal stipulation that you best be scumhunting, then we are treating the game as a normal mini. People who active lurk without contributing are bad, people who scum hunt are good. I've found that with themed games that aren't too crazy, the more you try and make the setup normal, the better it is for town; at the end of the day we hold people accountable for their actions without giving them an easy framework to look fine. Someone puts 5 votes on someone for shitty reason to save them? Don't let that slide. Someone puts 0 votes on people while posting little snide tidbits here and there? Don't let that slide. Don't have issue with your 2nd paragraph, though I would say that my analogy was focused primarily on the fact that a plan made an unknown mechanic (who going to be immune?) into a manipulable tool for mafia. I don't want that. On October 11 2012 00:13 prplhz wrote: Hey EchelonTee Why do you want austinmcc to advance over a guy who hasn't posted even once? I don't even care what austinmcc said so far, OrignalName isn't even around and that gets my vote among those two right now. How about da0ud/Djodref? Active lurking. I feel worse about a person who has posted 1-2 low content tidbits than someone who has posted literally nothing. I don't have a strong opinion either way about that matchup; austin was more on my radar, but now that he's talking more I don't really care. I think both da0ud and Djodref look bad. In fact, it's almost comical because both of their first posts look quite similar. If you forced me to take a stand I would lean Djodref more scummy because my instincts tell me that da0ud is a noob-bait. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Hopeless1der x1 Djodref x1 | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
I would like to say that I don't like people who are saying they are voting this one and this one but are not using the voting thread. I don't have a clear view on their motivations. So I'm going to show them the way I would like them to follow. On October 10 2012 19:48 kushm4sta wrote: voting momentoss because he's afk and I know his reads are bad voting original because austin has contributed way more already and he's known as a good player voting dauod because of his weird joke that made no sense... alien invaders what? bad reasons? yes subject to change? definintely This is an example of what I'm not going to do. On a side note, I don't like lurkers as well. ##Vote Memento ×1 original ×1 @hopeless would you mind explaining your gut feeling? Also I've just noticed that Kush ans ET have used the voting thread | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
It's good to be suspicious of such things when people are being unclear. I think it is quite clear who I am suspicious of. | ||
|
kushm4sta
United States8878 Posts
| ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
what I find scummy is their insistance on the lynch mechanics. Their last posts end with open questions to discuss this subject even more. It's not enough for me to cast vote on them but I have hoped it could help us to drop this discussion for once and just start scumhunting. I believe that imposing ourself some rules is going to be detrimental for us and I don't want to argue about this. I'm not sure if I have addressed your concern so do not hesitate to ask me to precise some points. Good night ! | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
He seems to have caught up, checked voting thread, noticed Hopeless1der's comment. Didn't answer my question, didn't acknowledge it. His first post doesn't hold water with me, the rules discussion = scum bit doesn't hold up at all, and that's really the only thing he's said of substance. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Djodref, even if imposing rules on ourselves is detrimental, how do you separate those people talking about the lynch mechanics from other players talking about the lynch mechanics? Is it purely that they left open-ended questions? | ||
|
Mementoss
Canada2595 Posts
On October 10 2012 23:40 EchelonTee wrote: I'm not changing my 2 votes from 1der unless something absolutely crazy happens (which it won't); I'm only not putting my votes down now for formatting reasons, nothing more. I do admit it looks strange, if you want to call me scum for that then whatever; the following things I'm going to mention is complete bullcrap in comparison. Asking for a scum/town ratio is not stupid, tyvm. It's common even in closed setups for the specific ratio to be known; I've only played in one game where this isn't the case. Heh, living up to my town meta yet again I suppose. (always get accused when I'm town D1, never get accused when I'm scum). While cute that you would accuse me for appearing to "know more about the setup", there is almost no way that the ratio of votes is actually 9x, as you yourself pointed out. No number is even close to that (either 1:11 or 2:10 doesn't work with normal voting mechanics). Therefore, you are making the assumption that I have to be either blue or red without even considering that maybe, just maybe I put down that 9x number randomly? Unless you really think that I am such a poor player that I would either 1. reveal my roles knowledge of votes, or 2. blatantly reveal mafia's knowledge of votes. Excuse the language, but that is completely fracking stupid; that 9x number is completely numerically impossible, and the fact that you are using the random number I threw out as reason to be suspicious is absolutely terrible. And you can't even vote for me this round! You are literally misdirecting town on a terrible lead with the reasoning that "shucks this is as good a reason to vote R1 as anything". No, it's a terrible reason, multiplied by the fact that you are wasting our limited 24 hour time on a person you can't vote on. Care to talk about the people we actually need to vote on? IDGAF if you want to tunnel me as long as you also talk about the stuff that actually matters, which you have failed to do. If you think pointing out one thing and placing 1 vote (that didn't even count btw) is tunneling, well, I dont even know what to say. I don't know why everyone is getting so pissy about it. First read it came across scummy and read to me 9 townies, then afterwards I even said the 9x thing. It's not like I tried to force this vote on anyone, with attitude like this your sure to shut out discussion. This is the biggest over reaction I ever seen. | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
ok, I couldn’t express what I was thinking when I used the word motivation. I just really want people to be consistent with their vote here and their vote on the thread. I think it would help us to see who is commiting or not to what they proclaim in the thread. At least it would greatly help me, hence my votes ^^ | ||
|
Mementoss
Canada2595 Posts
On October 10 2012 19:48 kushm4sta wrote: voting momentoss because he's afk and I know his reads are bad voting original because austin has contributed way more already and he's known as a good player voting dauod because of his weird joke that made no sense... alien invaders what? bad reasons? yes subject to change? definintely On October 11 2012 00:06 kushm4sta wrote: metaread on momentoss: he is this dumb as town I know that from liquid city. also he will afk for long periods of time so we have that to look forward to. Im not going to get into a shit throwing fight with you. But please stop pretending you know anything about my meta or my activity level as town. You can click my profile if you want to actually look at my meta rather than making shit up. Kk. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On October 11 2012 00:25 Hopeless1der wrote: Only the last of my posts in the voting thread is counted? If I were being stupid, I could post 20 times with different votes, but only the last one would count? Difficulty for the mods aside, if you say you're going to do something, then do it. That would be technically correct, but we might send my specially trained Furby hit squad after you. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
HomeStory Cup
BSL: ProLeague
SOOP
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
