/in
[T][M] Resistance V - Section 31
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Rels
France13467 Posts
/in | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On October 29 2015 00:27 Fidei86 wrote: Rayn stop being coy and admit that you are going to be a cohost for this. I'm happy with a Sunday evening start. Anyone have any objections? No objection to either of these statement. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On October 29 2015 11:25 Tictock wrote: So whats the point of revealing exactly how many sabotages happened if you also intend to include a mechanic that prevents unnecessary sabotages from being made? I agree with this. If we all agree to do the "if there are multiple spies in a team, only the spy that's higher on the list should sabotage", then we just should not have access to the number of sabotages. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On October 29 2015 18:00 raynpelikoneet wrote: rofl why would you not agree to that because it is the optimal strategy if you are scum? ![]() If scum will do it anyway (having only the highest spy sabotaging), and if they won't the game is ruined, there is no need for town to have access to the number of sabotages in the mission right ? | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
| ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
| ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
| ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 10:16 kitaman27 wrote: I'd say people stating that they are happy that they didn't roll mafia typically increases their chances of being mafia, though I don't know if that actually holds true. Super stating that his read will be based on how you interact with others and you proceeding to go out of your way to interact with me could be interpreted as you trying to influence his views. Neither of these points lead to more than a "meh" Does anyone know if one faction typically wins more often than the other in a standard resistance setup or is it pretty close to 50/50? I'm not all that familiar with how the games usually play out myself. Right now I'm toying with a rng scenarios to see how they play out. Weird that it took kita 1 hour to answer this question, which was asked to him only a few minutes after his opening post. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 10:45 kitaman27 wrote: I don't think the advantage of removing spy self-nominations would be worth the trade off of dropping the resistance leader success rate in half so I would encourage resistance leaders to not try anything fancy and exclude themselves. Do others agree? I don't think a rule on that would be good. Just vote "no" to the team containing the leader if you don't like the leader. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
| ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 17:33 raynpelikoneet wrote: That's not what he is saying though. Yes he is, he's talking about whether leaders should include themselves or not. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 17:37 raynpelikoneet wrote: That's true. But you weren't talking about what he was. Then explain bro ? | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 17:38 raynpelikoneet wrote: Or like if you were for so me reason you said something super complicatedly instead of just sayinbg "i agree / disagree". I disagree. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
| ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 08:32 Superbia wrote: Do you really think this game is a nightmare for scum? On November 02 2015 08:35 Xatalos wrote: Yeah, I think it should be somewhat anti-scum. In the way that IRL Resistance is pretty balanced, but here it's much easier for town to communicate properly than IRL, whereas the scumteam can't communicate at all like usual in forum Mafia. On November 02 2015 08:39 Superbia wrote: So now that we've correctly concluded that you don't believe it is a "nightmare" for scum. Why did you open with that? LOL "Is it a nightmare ?" "Kinda" "OK now that you said it's not a nightmare ..." You misread something there bro. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 17:43 raynpelikoneet wrote: kitaman: "I would encourage resistance leaders not to exclude themselves from the team they pick" Rels: "I don't think a rule on that would be good. Just vote "no" to the team containing the leader if you don't like the leader." I don't know what the underlined sentence has anything to do with what kitaman said, and why is that in your answer. Everyone will obviously not agree with a team that in their opinion a fishy leader proposes, just as in mafia you don't usually follow a lynch a suspicious person proposes. However that has nothing to do with the original question so if you would explain why you wrote that sentence there it would be cool. I wrote that we should vote no the the team containing the leader if we don't like the leader 'cause I thought we should vote no the the team containing the leader if we don't like the leader. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 17:50 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well thank you captain obvious. I bet alot of players would not realize that unless you said it. You're welcome! I don't understand why you're hard townreading Superbia, who nitpicked something to death and made it the basis for a "mild" scumread. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 17:50 raynpelikoneet wrote: I also don't like the fact you missed this post from the Superbia / Xatalos exchange. I didn't. Then Superbia asked if it's really a nightmare, Xatalos said yeah, and Superbia said it is not anymore. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 16:17 Artanis[Xp] wrote: Clarity is mafia. Ready to hear stuff from you anytime. | ||
Rels
France13467 Posts
On November 02 2015 08:35 Xatalos wrote: Yeah, I think it should be somewhat anti-scum. In the way that IRL Resistance is pretty balanced, but here it's much easier for town to communicate properly than IRL, whereas the scumteam can't communicate at all like usual in forum Mafia. The answer to the question is "yeah". The explanation is "it's somewhat anti-scum". Superbia should have gone either "OK this makes sense you're good" or "OK this makes sense, but it's still scummy to claim that in your opening posts". Looks like to me he decided to scumread Xatalos and is looking for reasons to do so. | ||
| ||