EPTOn March 13 2008 07:44 Alventenie wrote:
valentines is 2/14, not 3/14
valentines is 2/14, not 3/14
3/14 is pi day
Team Liquid Mafia [gg] - Page 160
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
clazziquai
6685 Posts
3/14 is pi day | ||
|
unsoundlogic
United States391 Posts
| ||
|
Dapperdan
United States38 Posts
On March 12 2008 20:51 Tracil wrote: Inactivity *is* a very serious problem. You had, what, *70 people*? Even at half that number you would have had an extremely large volume of posts. Someone coming to the game late and *giving up* is a definition of inactive towny and yet another reason why large games are a pain. In general, inactive town is far more harmful to town than inactive scum is harmful to scum *if* both sides are inactive in roughly equal measure. No. You simply don't know what you're talking about as well as we do. (this is at all the complainers of inactivity, not just Tracil) The main point of townie balance is the mafia hit balance vs # of townies. As in, cannon fodder townies work perfectly in sync with the balance. The town will always have many more voters than the mafia during the day unless the inactivity includes almost all the players -- all the inactive townies aren't needed to get the town to lynch who they want, the active ones just need to not suck. Also, in all legitimate games of mafia chuiu or I have ever been a part of, a mafia has not been elected pardoner or mayor, so the town has that additional advantage also. Your inactive townie vs inactive mafia argument only almost works because all it takes is one good mafia to run all the teams hits, however, if 90% of mafia were inactive and 90% of townies, the townies would still have the same proportion in voting advantage. A vote turnout on any day of 50% or more is strong activity and more than fair for the townies. Trust me. If a player signs up for 2 games and is inactive and both then he would warrant a ban of at least 1 game, and that would be fine. After we have a couple more games and get a better sense of active and inactive players the rule can be changed to 1 inactive game = 1/2 game ban. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Meh
Sweden458 Posts
| ||
|
Falcynn
United States3597 Posts
On March 13 2008 09:05 Amber[LighT] wrote: True, I think next game town will do a lot better since we should have a better idea of how to interpret clues and detect mafia behavior (and know not to go on a witch hunt of accusing everybody). All mafia had to do this round was just sit back and watch us kill ourselves from the inside out so that was an obvious advantage.Honestly the inactivity situation was a small problem, but even with the amount of people who decided not to play wouldn't have made it an auto-lose. The problem was no one trusted anyone and we couldn't make decisions as a town. The second someone said something the other person would come back with some part of a clue that might have 1% relevance. If you're a townie you should remain calm and try to work on something without outting the person that outted you. It was annoying to see that every single round and we got so frazzled we voted for the person who "wasn't the nicest" (Hence why we fucking lynched our mayor WTF was that?!) | ||
IntoTheWow
is awesome32278 Posts
| ||
|
IntoTheWow
is awesome32278 Posts
| ||
|
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
| ||
|
Camlito
Australia4040 Posts
On March 13 2008 09:27 Wizard wrote: when does the next round begin? This weekend. | ||
|
Tracil
Australia505 Posts
On March 13 2008 08:59 Dapperdan wrote: No. You simply don't know what you're talking about as well as we do. (this is at all the complainers of inactivity, not just Tracil) The main point of townie balance is the mafia hit balance vs # of townies. As in, cannon fodder townies work perfectly in sync with the balance. The town will always have many more voters than the mafia during the day unless the inactivity includes almost all the players -- all the inactive townies aren't needed to get the town to lynch who they want, the active ones just need to not suck. Also, in all legitimate games of mafia chuiu or I have ever been a part of, a mafia has not been elected pardoner or mayor, so the town has that additional advantage also. Your inactive townie vs inactive mafia argument only almost works because all it takes is one good mafia to run all the teams hits, however, if 90% of mafia were inactive and 90% of townies, the townies would still have the same proportion in voting advantage. A vote turnout on any day of 50% or more is strong activity and more than fair for the townies. Trust me. If a player signs up for 2 games and is inactive and both then he would warrant a ban of at least 1 game, and that would be fine. After we have a couple more games and get a better sense of active and inactive players the rule can be changed to 1 inactive game = 1/2 game ban. ... Firstly, I do know what I'm talking about, and spewing lines like that out in my direction (and I really cannot take it in any other way) is lame. I understand we play games of mafia differently and I'm fine with that, but I can't tolerate stuff like this, and resent the implication. Don't go down this track. Secondly, the arguments that town has more voters vs. mafia having more voters doesn't work. The game is not actually a VOTING RACE where town can easily use their voting power to get an edge over the mafia. *All the mafia want* is to *not* lynch fellow mafia, which means it is *very easy* for them to masquerade as townies, jump or start bandwagons (and keep in mind that since it's very easy for townies to be WRONG it is generally fallacious to lynch people for being wrong in isolation). *IF TOWN LURKS, MAFIA CAN LURK AND NOT NK LURKERS.* This is a ridiculously good scum strategy if they can get away with it, and expecting town to simply psychicly know which lurkers are scum are not just doesn't work. They don't need to worry about lynching particular people because they can just NK all the 'good' townies anyway using their insane amount of kills (I'm used to one scum kill per night. *ONE!* And this STILL has resulted in scum victories more often than not, in games with a comparable scum/town ratio.) Again, scum get far less burned than town if they are inactive in roughly equal proportion because of their control over what actually *happens* in the game. Paramedics *can* save the day but the mafia can easily just whittle down talkative townie numbers (and since active, smart paramedics are likely to be talkative, they'll probably get taken out as well.) Concentrating on voting advantage is not the issue, here- and this ignores the point that if the game is *balanced* assuming that half the town doesn't play, then it *breaks* if all the town *does* play in the other direction, which is just as bad. Games should assume everyone plays and take steps to ensure that they do. <-> Saying that 'in the games I have played scum have never been elected' doesn't actually mean it isn't a strong tactic for the mafia to try and get elected. It's not even *hard* to present one or two scum as candidates, and the odds of being detected as a result are low. It's not an 'additional advantage for town' unless a townie gets elected, and while the odds are in town's favour, it's hardly a sure thing. (I think Elders could've been used here, as well, and concede again that the game would've gone very differently had we pegged onto their power earlier.) | ||
|
HotZhot
Colombia677 Posts
On March 13 2008 08:27 EmeraldSparks wrote: Okay, I killed nobody. Just as well, because I checked the people on my suspicious list and they were like all townies. Thoughts on the game - I think I was just completely overwhelmed by the amount of posting. Way early I was inclined to do a brief post-by-post analysis, and later on I decided I was going to make a list of all players and take notes on them while reading the thread. I started diligently going down the list and making preliminary marks and there were so many damned people that I never bothered to finish alphabetizing the list. If I had taken five seconds on every post it would have taken hours. Combined with the fact it's hard to mentally keep track of people I never ended up doing anything. I don't think I read half the thread. So in general, I was a useless, lazy bitchy townie. Should have pmed your role you ass  ... would have told you who to hit This game is great, let's start a new one and make it 300 pages gogo. | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
| ||
|
Tracil
Australia505 Posts
| ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
You basically got upset because you werent mayor and that the rules werent exactly as you liked, so you went inactive and tried to set up a new game which failed. It seems like sour grapes to me. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
Manifesto7
Osaka27174 Posts
Anyways, if you are starting again this weekend? When should I close this one? | ||
|
Falcynn
United States3597 Posts
| ||
|
wurm
Philippines2296 Posts
| ||
Empyrean
17070 Posts
On March 13 2008 10:29 Falcynn wrote: Also, since the game's over. Can the mafia please elaborate how they killed the 2 vigilantes? Pure dumb luck? Or was there some elaborate plan set up to get the vigilantes to reveal themselves to you? All will be revealed in my wrap-up! I have my analysis up to Valentine's day at around 7:00ish. It's fun reading all these old posts and trying to remember what I was thinking. I'm sending a draft of my thoughts of the initial day to Eti right now. It's currently 1498 words. And that's only up to immediately following the election. But to answer your question, we went through the game with the assumption that most of the inactive people were vanilla townies - why else would they be inactive? We had a high chance to hit some special roles, and by some stroke of luck managed to kill two vigilantes in the same night. Coincidence! | ||
| ||
