On March 02 2016 14:07 Chezinu wrote: I think Trump is playing the brown. Does anyone know his alignment? I wonder if he has a blue role and is just protecting himself by making himself unreadable.
Guys, I reaally think Trump is a blue role. Carson just semi-crumbed that he rolechecked him.
“There’s the Donald Trump that you see on television and who gets out in front of big audiences, and there’s the Donald Trump behind the scenes,” Mr. Carson said. “They’re not the same person.”
On March 02 2016 14:07 Chezinu wrote: I think Trump is playing the brown. Does anyone know his alignment? I wonder if he has a blue role and is just protecting himself by making himself unreadable.
Guys, I reaally think Trump is a blue role. Carson just semi-crumbed that he rolechecked him.
“There’s the Donald Trump that you see on television and who gets out in front of big audiences, and there’s the Donald Trump behind the scenes,” Mr. Carson said. “They’re not the same person.”
On March 10 2016 02:54 James2 wrote: If one side is doing well in the subgames, they'll have an advantage in the combined game, yes.
But in every game the team that does well early game will have an advantage later in the game.
Town teams go into the game already having won, though. In which case you'd have a large group of people who are all town. So what could happen is they can make a list of all the people are are possibly scum, lynch down that list, and never lose majority town even the last people on their list are scum.
You're assuming that the town will win in the districts. Scum could win in the districts too.
On March 11 2016 03:27 raynpelikoneet wrote: So you will have a mafia game that lasts like a year... + what kush said, a year long game where basically town has already won.
no thanks for me.
I've no idea where you got a year. It should last a bit longer than a normal game, but no where near that long.
On March 11 2016 03:18 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:
On March 10 2016 02:54 James2 wrote: If one side is doing well in the subgames, they'll have an advantage in the combined game, yes.
But in every game the team that does well early game will have an advantage later in the game.
Town teams go into the game already having won, though. In which case you'd have a large group of people who are all town. So what could happen is they can make a list of all the people are are possibly scum, lynch down that list, and never lose majority town even the last people on their list are scum.
You're assuming that the town will win in the districts. Scum could win in the districts too.
On March 11 2016 03:27 raynpelikoneet wrote: So you will have a mafia game that lasts like a year... + what kush said, a year long game where basically town has already won.
no thanks for me.
I've no idea where you got a year. It should last a bit longer than a normal game, but no where near that long.
On March 11 2016 03:27 raynpelikoneet wrote: So you will have a mafia game that lasts like a year... + what kush said, a year long game where basically town has already won.
no thanks for me.
I've no idea where you got a year. It should last a bit longer than a normal game, but no where near that long.
So you are looking at 3x3 games. Let's assume you do a normal minimum required setup with 13 players on each and let's say you do a balanced game which would be around 10vs3 on every game.
Let's also assume town power roles are completely retarded at the first two "phases" of the game and do not find out anything or block any kp, every night has 2kp (on the first two phases). You are looking at two cycles at the first phase of the game.
When you enter the second phase you will have 27 players alive (first thing that can happen below 30) which of 9 are mafia. You have to drop the player value to equal or less than 15 (3x15=45) to get to the final game. Well, for that to happen, in the worst case scenario with 3 dead people every cycle you will have 4 cycles.
Now you will have a game of 45 people. assuming you have around 10 mafia or anti-town alive you are looking at least 10 cycles for the game to end.
So, in total, you are looking at a game that lasts at least at least 16 weeks. That is if the town never blocks scum and SK-shots and never lynches an SK. I'm not really sure what is your opinion of how long a normal game lasts but Day 16 or four months doesn't to me sound like "a bit longer than normal game".. And again, being more realistic you are looking somewhere around 5-6 months at least. And that is just with absolutely minimum number of players.
With the absolutely minimum number of players you also have a problem that the game is ridiculously town-sided, unless you have super idiotic people whom of like all of claim on D1 or D2. You would have to do something like ~20+ people at the starting games for it to be any sort of balanced. Wanna guess how long that takes to solve in comparison to 5-6 months? When the game is balanced early on (smaller games) it creates a situation where town just most likely stomps the latter games. They don't even have to play well, just not be complete idiots. If you buff mafia to have easier time later on it creates a situation where the game becomes actually imbalanced later on since the mafia stomps early games and town just loses because of it. Basically the game is impossible to balance.
Unless you can ofc show me some proof of it, when it was hosted and played and how did it go. So yes, i agree, a year was maybe exaggerated for a game that is possible. A game that would be balanced would most likely take a year.
If someone is gonna run this game here on TL, for the players, feel free to contact me so i can tell you how you absolutely win the game if you roll town.
On March 11 2016 03:27 raynpelikoneet wrote: So you will have a mafia game that lasts like a year... + what kush said, a year long game where basically town has already won.
no thanks for me.
I've no idea where you got a year. It should last a bit longer than a normal game, but no where near that long.
So you are looking at 3x3 games. Let's assume you do a normal minimum required setup with 13 players on each and let's say you do a balanced game which would be around 10vs3 on every game.
Let's also assume town power roles are completely retarded at the first two "phases" of the game and do not find out anything or block any kp, every night has 2kp (on the first two phases). You are looking at two cycles at the first phase of the game.
When you enter the second phase you will have 27 players alive (first thing that can happen below 30) which of 9 are mafia. You have to drop the player value to equal or less than 15 (3x15=45) to get to the final game. Well, for that to happen, in the worst case scenario with 3 dead people every cycle you will have 4 cycles.
Now you will have a game of 45 people. assuming you have around 10 mafia or anti-town alive you are looking at least 10 cycles for the game to end.
So, in total, you are looking at a game that lasts at least at least 16 weeks. That is if the town never blocks scum and SK-shots and never lynches an SK. I'm not really sure what is your opinion of how long a normal game lasts but Day 16 or four months doesn't to me sound like "a bit longer than normal game".. And again, being more realistic you are looking somewhere around 5-6 months at least. And that is just with absolutely minimum number of players.
With the absolutely minimum number of players you also have a problem that the game is ridiculously town-sided, unless you have super idiotic people whom of like all of claim on D1 or D2. You would have to do something like ~20+ people at the starting games for it to be any sort of balanced. Wanna guess how long that takes to solve in comparison to 5-6 months? When the game is balanced early on (smaller games) it creates a situation where town just most likely stomps the latter games. They don't even have to play well, just not be complete idiots. If you buff mafia to have easier time later on it creates a situation where the game becomes actually imbalanced later on since the mafia stomps early games and town just loses because of it. Basically the game is impossible to balance.
Unless you can ofc show me some proof of it, when it was hosted and played and how did it go. So yes, i agree, a year was maybe exaggerated for a game that is possible. A game that would be balanced would most likely take a year.
If someone is gonna run this game here on TL, for the players, feel free to contact me so i can tell you how you absolutely win the game if you roll town.
Um It is not 16 weeks if 1 cycle = 3 days of RL (48 hour Day/24 hour night). 2 cycles = 6 Days 4 cycles = 12 Days (total 18) 10 Cycles = 30 Days (total 48 Days)
So best case 1 month and 1 week. Vs Normal Game Best case (No Blue protection or X action, Still Lynches all 5 mafia, D1-D5, and wins) 5 cycles = 15 days
48/15 roughly ='s 3 times longer game than Normal, on fastest case possible.
On March 12 2016 07:41 Shapelog wrote: So best case 1 month and 1 week. Vs Normal Game Best case (No Blue protection or X action, Still Lynches all 5 mafia, D1-D5, and wins) 5 cycles
It's literally impossible to win this game on D5 regardless of what you do as any alignment assuming the nine starting games are anywhere near balanced. You just cannot lynch mafia fast enough and mafia cannot kill townies fast enough.
Had a dream about Marv. We were playing world of tanks trying to assasinate some diplomat in the game. Never played world of tanks before. I remember Marv was bragging about how much better than everyone else he was though.
On March 13 2016 22:54 nnn_thekushmountains wrote: Had a dream about Marv. We were playing world of tanks trying to assasinate some diplomat in the game. Never played world of tanks before. I remember Marv was bragging about how much better than everyone else he was though.
On March 15 2016 22:37 nnn_thekushmountains wrote: My prediction: Trump will win Florida but not Ohio. So the GOP canidacy will still be up in the air.
I might be opening a can of worms with this question, but in honesty, what are the chances of this so-called "brokered" convention happening, particularly resulting in a situation where someone other than Trump gets picked? I read a few articles trying to break down how these delegates/"superdelegates" worked in these things but I found it confusing at best.
On March 15 2016 22:37 nnn_thekushmountains wrote: My prediction: Trump will win Florida but not Ohio. So the GOP canidacy will still be up in the air.
I might be opening a can of worms with this question, but in honesty, what are the chances of this so-called "brokered" convention happening, particularly resulting in a situation where someone other than Trump gets picked? I read a few articles trying to break down how these delegates/"superdelegates" worked in these things but I found it confusing at best.
The republicans don't have superdelegates. That's only for the democrats.
If Trump does not get a majority of the delegates, there is a strong possibility of a brokered convention. Say Trump gets 40%, Cruz gets 35%, and Kasich gets 25%. At the Republican convention, the delegates, who are supposed to vote what their state caucuses tell them to vote, can change their votes. Kasich is hoping there will be a brokered convention, and the delegates will rally behind him. Because Trump is Trump and everyone in Government hates Cruz. A few years ago, Cruz shut down the government for a bit and made everyone come in on weekends.
On March 15 2016 22:37 nnn_thekushmountains wrote: My prediction: Trump will win Florida but not Ohio. So the GOP canidacy will still be up in the air.
I might be opening a can of worms with this question, but in honesty, what are the chances of this so-called "brokered" convention happening, particularly resulting in a situation where someone other than Trump gets picked? I read a few articles trying to break down how these delegates/"superdelegates" worked in these things but I found it confusing at best.
I read this blog for sports news mostly, but it has some excellent election coverage.
Anyway, the difference between normal and "super" delegates are that the former are obliged to vote based on their state's primary bylaws, while the latter are free to vote anyone they please. For example, in a state that awards primary delegates proportional to the percentage of votes received, delegate votes will be distributed according to the popular vote. Superdelegates can still vote whoever they want, regardless of what people vote.
The Democratic party has superdelegates (which have been overwhelmingly voting Clinton), while the Republican party has none. They are typically viewed as a way to weigh the primary process in the favor of establishment candidates, and the difference between the Democratic and Primary results so far is a good example of their effect.
Anyway, Trump is currently on target to win the nomination if things continue as they go. He has the most delegates, and is poised to win a lot of big states tonight in the polls. That being said, he pretty much needs to win the delegate count to win the nomination. If a brokered convention is reached, the Republican establishment will pull out all the stops to block a Trump nomination.
His chances are hard to predict going forward, because they heavily depend on the other candidates. If a few drop out, it will allow establishment voters to rally around one candidate. It also depends on whether or not the other candidates are willing to work together to block Trump's nomination. Rubio recently asking his supporters to vote for Kaisch in Ohio suggests such cooperation.
EPT
