|
Hello everyone!
I feel like Marv and Snarfs made some good points (besides Snarfs' soft town claim). I feel that any rash plays are just going to hurt town and that we should use all of the time available to come to a neat and organized decision, which is most often the right one.
I think getting the two scummiest dudes to duel each other is a good idea but if they are both scum I think they would be reluctant to do so. Any plans revolving around this idea just generally invite a lot of WIFOM, which I would like to stay away from as well.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On February 25 2013 03:48 cDgCorazon wrote:
Hello everyone!
I feel like Marv and Snarfs made some good points (besides Snarfs' soft town claim). I feel that any rash plays are just going to hurt town and that we should use all of the time available to come to a neat and organized decision, which is most often the right one.
I think getting the two scummiest dudes to duel each other is a good idea but if they are both scum I think they would be reluctant to do so. Any plans revolving around this idea just generally invite a lot of WIFOM, which I would like to stay away from as well.
Please don't use the word WIFOM when you don't know how to apply it. Makes me shudder reading your last paragraph tbh.
If two scum are reluctant, then they're virtually mafia-claiming anyway. So that's not how it would go down at all.
|
On February 25 2013 03:27 yamato77 wrote:
If anyone duels me this game, expect to get destroyed.
If we all agree on someone to lynch, I'll duel them and make sure it goes through.
Do you not agree that the two worst looking players should duel then?
|
On February 25 2013 03:50 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 03:48 cDgCorazon wrote:
Hello everyone!
I feel like Marv and Snarfs made some good points (besides Snarfs' soft town claim). I feel that any rash plays are just going to hurt town and that we should use all of the time available to come to a neat and organized decision, which is most often the right one.
I think getting the two scummiest dudes to duel each other is a good idea but if they are both scum I think they would be reluctant to do so. Any plans revolving around this idea just generally invite a lot of WIFOM, which I would like to stay away from as well. Please don't use the word WIFOM when you don't know how to apply it. Makes me shudder reading your last paragraph tbh. If two scum are reluctant, then they're virtually mafia-claiming anyway. So that's not how it would go down at all.
Yeah but then we have to figure out whether their behavior and actions towards the other person is based off of them truly defending themselves or bussing their scumbuddy.
The alternative would be to not vote and have both of them killed, but I don't think we should take that much of a risk.
|
11589 Posts
You're going to have a hard enough time choosing one player you want dead, much less two.
|
Howdy town! Fresh off a break from mafia, and it's nice to roll town again =)
@ Marv
There was one other thing I had a vague idea about. Maybe if we can decide on a good target or two, we should get the two 'scummiest' dudes to duel each other. Seems like that might be a decent idea anyway.
I was thinking along these lines as well. A majority of discussion (time wise) revolves AFTER the duel is called. We don't want to get in situations where people with a super-townie reputation are calling duels themselves. Calling a duel like that would be more like a vigi shot than anything else.
The only potential problem would be enforcement. The only way we can get two "scummy" players up on the block is if one of them calls a duel, which is directly against their own interests (town or scum). This is where we need to enforce a policy lynch IMO - if town asks you to duel, and you do not, you get lynched next cycle.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
yeah I'll talk about it more after dinner. I don't like Corazon already.
|
On February 25 2013 04:10 yamato77 wrote:
You're going to have a hard enough time choosing one player you want dead, much less two.
This a problem? I've never had problems being super-paranoid early days.
|
On February 25 2013 05:03 marvellosity wrote:
yeah I'll talk about it more after dinner. I don't like Corazon already.
If you've ever seen any of my other games, you'll find that no one ever likes me...
|
Hola gents.
Fear the 10 paces, filthy scum.
|
11589 Posts
On February 25 2013 05:05 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 04:10 yamato77 wrote:
You're going to have a hard enough time choosing one player you want dead, much less two. This a problem? I've never had problems being super-paranoid early days.
I'm talking about consolidation and getting town to agree on the choices, not personal reads.
Picking two people that everyone agrees are scummy is many times more difficult than picking just one person and having a townie player duel them and get them lynched.
|
11589 Posts
Besides, if I'm pushing someone to get lynched, I have zero problem dueling them and proving they are mafia. If you're uncomfortable, as the accuser of a person, with confronting the person you're accusing in a duel, then we are going to have problems.
This way people are directly responsible for their accusations. If you're going to call someone mafia, you should go against him and prove it. Picking two scummy looking players just makes it that much easier for mafia to fake scum hunting. If you hit mafia with the lynch using my method, you have a ton of information to lynch his buddies with.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On February 25 2013 06:00 yamato77 wrote:
Besides, if I'm pushing someone to get lynched, I have zero problem dueling them and proving they are mafia. If you're uncomfortable, as the accuser of a person, with confronting the person you're accusing in a duel, then we are going to have problems.
This way people are directly responsible for their accusations. If you're going to call someone mafia, you should go against him and prove it. Picking two scummy looking players just makes it that much easier for mafia to fake scum hunting. If you hit mafia with the lynch using my method, you have a ton of information to lynch his buddies with.
you're being rather egotistical.
This game isn't about one player proving one other player is mafia, there are 15 of us. It's a collective decision. It makes far more sense to have the 2 scummiest people dueling it out, so town can choose. It goes back to my anecdote from Fruity earlier. Someone, or a bunch of people, can think someone is mafia, but it's possible that in fact the guy is not mafia, and may help prove so with his defence, or with his own cases and play.
If you have the two scummiest in the lynch, then this leaves room for error and play. It's much more unlikely that the two scummiest will both absolve themselves, rather than just one.
|
11589 Posts
I guess it's possible you can find two people you want to lynch, but it's going to be difficult to get people to follow through with this plan, to agree with the people you want to duel. I just see a lot of problems with getting this to go through like you think it will.
For the record, if the deadline is coming up and people are arguing incessantly about these two choices, I'm going to just pick one and lynch him. I'm your insurance, I suppose, because my method isn't a best-case scenario idea of the lynch like getting town to consolidate on two choices.
|
@ Yamato
On February 25 2013 05:55 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 05:05 Hapahauli wrote:On February 25 2013 04:10 yamato77 wrote:
You're going to have a hard enough time choosing one player you want dead, much less two. This a problem? I've never had problems being super-paranoid early days. I'm talking about consolidation and getting town to agree on the choices, not personal reads. Picking two people that everyone agrees are scummy is many times more difficult than picking just one person and having a townie player duel them and get them lynched.
Conflict and controversy tends to lead to additional discussion. It's "unanimous" lynches that lead to problems and inactive towns. We have 48-hours of discussion AFTER the duel is chosen for a reason. We can't have a policy that pre-determines our lynch actions in a 24-hour duel-choice period.
|
I feel like you're treating this too much like the wild-west and not enough like a mafia game Yamato. The Duel mechanic can absolutely fuck us over if used rashly.
|
On February 25 2013 06:31 yamato77 wrote:
...
For the record, if the deadline is coming up and people are arguing incessantly about these two choices, I'm going to just pick one and lynch him. I'm your insurance, I suppose, because my method isn't a best-case scenario idea of the lynch like getting town to consolidate on two choices.
We're in the night-cycle right now no? We have ~50 hours left until we need to chose a duel.
|
11589 Posts
What you're proposing is a policy, and one that is insanely difficult to enforce.
I understand how having one town looking player duel one mafia looking player might stagnate discussion after the duel. I do think I will be able to extract enough information from the selection period to make a good lynch decision on my own, however, should town fail to implement you guy's plan effectively.
|
11589 Posts
On February 25 2013 06:33 Hapahauli wrote:
I feel like you're treating this too much like the wild-west and not enough like a mafia game Yamato. The Duel mechanic can absolutely fuck us over if used rashly.
I trust my own ability to read the game. I'm not going to be dueling people on a whim, I'll be doing it if I feel that town is needlessly arguing themselves out of lynch choices and things aren't clear, like I think will inevitably happen when you're trying to pick TWO lynches, as opposed to one like a normal game. Half the time, town has a difficult enough time consolidating on one person. Two people is going to be many times more confusing. I want clarity of decision making, and what I am is insurance of that.
|
On February 25 2013 06:39 yamato77 wrote:
What you're proposing is a policy, and one that is insanely difficult to enforce.
I understand how having one town looking player duel one mafia looking player might stagnate discussion after the duel. I do think I will be able to extract enough information from the selection period to make a good lynch decision on my own, however, should town fail to implement you guy's plan effectively.
Hence the policy I proposed earlier.
@ Marv
On February 25 2013 05:03 marvellosity wrote:
yeah I'll talk about it more after dinner. I don't like Corazon already.
Can you expand on Cora?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
