EPTResistance 3 - Page 5
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
| ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:25 raynpelikoneet wrote: Picking a team that will get 100% downvoted (if that includes yourself) does not serve any purpose. I agree with rayn. In Resistance 2 I picked BH and VE, two really town seeming guys (I think we even had 2/3 of the scumteam at that point), but I wasn't trustworthy so Sent-BH-VE got rejected. I don't think there's anything scummy about picking 3 people everyone or almost everyone thinks is town, even if you're not one of those 3. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:30 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Hi everyone! Glad to see game's finally started :D I agree with rayn. In Resistance 2 I picked BH and VE, two really town seeming guys (I think we even had 2/3 of the scumteam at that point), but I wasn't trustworthy so Sent-BH-VE got rejected. I don't think there's anything scummy about picking 3 people everyone or almost everyone thinks is town, even if you're not one of those 3. Lets suppose at least 1 of those 3 go on to fail a mission. Are you, as leader, culpable in the failure? | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:33 Hopeless1der wrote: Lets suppose at least 1 of those 3 go on to fail a mission. Are you, as leader, culpable in the failure? The same amount as you would be if you were on the mission yourself. | ||
|
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:33 Hopeless1der wrote: Lets suppose at least 1 of those 3 go on to fail a mission. Are you, as leader, culpable in the failure? It should be a consideration, not a slam dunk. But there is at least one spy on the team, that is concrete information. So you look at the leaders motivations for sending each person on the team. | ||
|
Grackaroni
United States9856 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:33 Hopeless1der wrote: Lets suppose at least 1 of those 3 go on to fail a mission. Are you, as leader, culpable in the failure? Only if Rayn is the leader. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:37 Adam4167 wrote: It should be a consideration, not a slam dunk. But there is at least one spy on the team, that is concrete information. So you look at the leaders motivations for sending each person on the team. but now, you've coerced a player into doing "town's" bidding without having a clear view of his motive. I find that the vote mechanics serve to control how you view players much better than forcing the teams that people want to see. Since we have up to 5 opportunities to get this done each round, I'd rather be confident in my read of the leader (and subsequently his selected companions) than have to second guess his motives down the road. I'm not saying that each round is going to slam-dunk. I think that the consideration should FOLLOW the team being selected when people vote on it, and the leader should be playing to their optimal scenario. | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:44 Hopeless1der wrote: but now, you've coerced a player into doing "town's" bidding without having a clear view of his motive. I find that the vote mechanics serve to control how you view players much better than forcing the teams that people want to see. Since we have up to 5 opportunities to get this done each round, I'd rather be confident in my read of the leader (and subsequently his selected companions) than have to second guess his motives down the road. I'm not saying that each round is going to slam-dunk. I think that the consideration should FOLLOW the team being selected when people vote on it, and the leader should be playing to their optimal scenario. Wouldn't "optimal" imply a scenario that you have control over, as opposed to the next person in line? | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
This is just me theory-crafting but let me know if I am way off. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
Anyways, other than Koshi who wants to be in, are there any other suggestions on who should be sent on the first mission? Since it's the first one, I'm alright with any team that goes in. | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 27 2013 10:30 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Hi everyone! Glad to see game's finally started :D I agree with rayn. In Resistance 2 I picked BH and VE, two really town seeming guys (I think we even had 2/3 of the scumteam at that point), but I wasn't trustworthy so Sent-BH-VE got rejected. I don't think there's anything scummy about picking 3 people everyone or almost everyone thinks is town, even if you're not one of those 3. This is my feeling as well. I will go further to say that it's not inherently scummy about refusing to up-vote a team that doesn't include one's self, but it's strictly speaking closed minded and overly cautious play. | ||
|
Grackaroni
United States9856 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On December 27 2013 11:05 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Wouldn't "optimal" imply a scenario that you have control over, as opposed to the next person in line? I guess optimally would be the team that best fulfills the conditions where the members are all town and Vote consensus=Yay. You have more control over the team selected and less control over the vote consensus. If we're talking in absolutes, then yes - if I know a team with me in it will be rejected, I shouldnt put it up there. However, I am very hesitant to believe the game will get to the point where I assume everyone thinks I am a spy. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On December 27 2013 12:25 Grackaroni wrote: We definitely need to be willing to vote for missions that don't include ourselves; otherwise, we would just get stuck with the final leader's selection. But, if you think you can feasibly get your team voted through with yourself on it then that is optimal. If 4/5 leaders all look like scum, we got other problems to deal with my friend. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
Anyone who refuses to cooperate in mission selection as a leader and pushes through a selection that is doomed to get a fuckton of nay votes should not go a mission. That's what i think. On December 27 2013 12:08 Chairman Ray wrote: There are definitely situations where the leader would not put himself in. It would probably be best to analyse this case by case when these kinds of situations arise, because I always find that people suggesting sub-optimal teams, getting rejected, and letting the next good team pass gives more information than people doing the right play in the first place. We get information for why they chose the team, who approved the team, and who rejected it. Anyways, other than Koshi who wants to be in, are there any other suggestions on who should be sent on the first mission? Since it's the first one, I'm alright with any team that goes in. I think you are scum because of this. In 5 pl setup this works because it's actually better to pass the first mission as scum, in 9 pl setup this is different and not necessarily true. Seems to me like an attempt to stop the conversation before it even started. CR - Does Koshi seem town to you? Why? | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
| ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
On December 27 2013 13:58 raynpelikoneet wrote: Corazon if you were a leader now would you send a team that does not include yourself? Seeing as I just said that I don't really think it matters, I don't understand why are you asking that question. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
| ||
| ||
