|
On March 19 2008 09:47 Ace wrote:
If ANY Detective speaks up against the Mayor and we can't decide whether or not who to believe, we go to the ultimatum approach - just lynch the DT first and if he is telling the truth the Mayor is Mafia. Boom - Mafia Mayor gone by the second day.
That's what I was looking for. You've completely won me over.
|
Shallow, on this page alone you have three posts that pretty much contribute nothing. I'm sure everybody appreciates your clue analysis from before, but the pointless one liners are annoying. There are enough posts to wade through already, and you've made 20 or so such posts already today. Please stop.
|
On March 19 2008 07:54 ahrara_ wrote:
CLUES AT THIS POINT ARE USELESS.
All this pointless, unsubstantiated finger pointing is annoying, QUIT IT.
When a lot of them start to add up, and there's behavioral clues to add to it, then it becomes worth talking about. A lot of people were lynched last game on a whim. Let's not do that again. The clues pointing to Ghar aren't very sound at all. I don't buy them for a second, but if a lot of them started to suggest him loosely, then I'll consider it some more. In fact, I would ask that clue analysis be kept to yourself for now, because it makes you a target and it causes unneeded and unwarranted suspicions amongst townies. Although you should by all means continue analyzing, just post them ONLY when you have a strong case against someone. This and this clue might point to this person is pure shit. The town can only be hurt by this pointless finger pointing.
I actually find a lot of his one liners pretty funny.
I really don't.
|
I think those 2 should be in the top list of who to lynch first, pretty good connections made by xdark.carnivalx
1-Zeks
2-CTStalker
This is just bad logic. You can't go about lynching people based on one clue. A lot of clues from last game were misinterpreted so that innocents were lynched. People ignored behavioral clues. Had they paid attention to how people posted, Empyrean would've been long dead. There are people whose behaviors already warrant serious suspicion, besides the obvious ones, if you take the time to look at people's posting history.
|
Ok, I see what you're saying there, and agree with you. It's still a bad idea to ask others to lynch people based on a clue.
|
I see clues as largely a means of supporting a suspicion, not the beginning of one. Like I said, if you've been following the thread, there have been people who've done some weird things that warrant suspicions. Nothing for sure, but plenty of starting points not based on clues.
|
Ok, I understand now. Thanks for taking the initiative.
|
I'm posting here to urge people to withdraw their votes for Empyrean and switch to randombum, in the hopes that enough people will listen so that Empyrean is not made pardoner. At the same time, I think the town has agreed that Ace should be the mayor, so let's not get carried away and make randombum mayor by accident. Keep an eye on the vote tally, but let's work together to keep Empyrean out of office.
The only reason people believe Empyrean is worth putting in that valuable spot is because he claims he is a detective. This is not verifiable information in any way, and there is no reason to trust Empyrean. For the purpose of electing a mayor, that statement can be tossed out the window. Randombum is just as likely to be a detective as Empyrean. However, there's the added bonus that randombum is less likely to be a mafia ploy because he announced his campaign before the game started, whereas Empyrean's role claiming makes him suspect.
Emp's poor decision making and suspicious activity make him a poor candidate for a leadership role, whatever his reputation from last game may be. This is not grounds to support emp at all.
I strongly urge everybody to VOTE RANDOMBUM in order to keep Empyrean out of office. If you're holding out because you think Empyrean taking Pardoner is inevitable -- it's not. We just need TEN people to vote randombum, or FIVE people to change their vote. That's out of 130 people playing. Change your vote now, before it's too late.
|
On March 19 2008 18:08 Ghar wrote:
No love for Ghar? =[
Well, you had my vote initially. Unfortunately, you're the Ralph Nader of this election. If you endorsed randombum, we can keep Empyrean out of office, which I think is important.
|
Just so I don't look like a total moron in case Empyrean turns out to be innocent ...
I am not saying Empyrean is Mafia. I don't even have strong suspicions at the moment. I would NOT vote to lynch him, and strongly suggest that paramedics protect him the first night, until we verify his role, and until he uses both his role checks himself. I am arguing from a logical point of view that there is no reason to trust that he is detective. There is no reason to believe he's not a detective either. I'm just saying that given that we can't trust anybody, it's equally likely randombum is a detective. Role claiming at this point is useless, and more likely to be a ploy. If Emp turns out ot be innocent, well fuck me. I'll end up looking like a moron, and Ace too. In my opinion though, it's better to be safe than sorry.
|
On March 19 2008 19:06 CDRdude wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2008 18:10 ahrara_ wrote:On March 19 2008 18:08 Ghar wrote:
No love for Ghar? =[ Well, you had my vote initially. Unfortunately, you're the Ralph Nader of this election. If you endorsed randombum, we can keep Empyrean out of office, which I think is important. If you know so much about American politics, why does your profile list you as from Afghanistan? I'm not really sure about Ralph Nader's international prestige, but I really doubt it extends to Afghanistan. And it might not extend to Australia either, which is what Ghar's profile lists.
Dude. Afghanistan was the first country on the list. I am obviously from the states. For game purposes, I'm not going to change it now.
|
Falcynn: Not if they can take out 4-5 medics along with the guy.
Ya, I forgot about the suicide bomber. So Empyrean's screwed. That's his fault.
|
On March 20 2008 08:32 Yogurt wrote:thats not the one, but again, ill wait for ace to post it again
Go ahead and post it now, so we can discuss it and ACE will see if he can correct it before finalizing the plan.
|
On March 20 2008 09:00 butidigress wrote:
I think we're making a big mistake here by not voting for Empyrean. I feel fairly confident he's a DT; I cannot imagine mafia making that kind of bold move. Even with the saboteur position removing his powers while he is being protected, I think we would do well to have someone who is most likely a townie to be up there.
Also, why is everyone so confident that Ace and randombum are clean? While Ace's plan is pretty good, that shouldn't guarantee his innocence.
Why are you so convinced Emp is innocent? Electing the mayor is a shot in the dark. We don't know if they are or aren't townies. We do the best we can. The best we can suggests that Ace is innocent, because he's contributed a lot of ideas that can help the town. Emp made a stupid decision that can either cost us a detective or land up with a mafia as pardoner. Nobody is voting by certainty, just by likelihood. Just because there's the possibility you'll be hit by a bus doesn't mean you shouldn't cross the street.
As for the detective innocence problem -- this is a big issue. The problem is the detectives don't know who each other are, and to be sure the investigation is actually completed, they'll ALL have to use up a role check on the mayor. My solution is simple. Instead, we should have both jacks check up on the mayor. Jacks are not as useful, and we'll be wasting two checks instead of four, and we can't have emp do it (assuming he is a detective) because no doubt the mafia will use a saboteur on him. If we rely on emp, it'll be another night before we find out if the mayor is clean.
that means we'll end up killing several bodyguards and potentially the mayor for a mafiaso. not a good trade.
This has been brought up a million times. The bodyguard plan has already been shown to be a flawed method for proving the mayor's innocence. The only way to be sure is to sacrifice a jack. That's likely what will end up happening.
EDIT: OOPS! I misunderstood the jack's role. Ignore what I just said. It's better to sacrifice four detective role checks than lose a jack.
|
Show nested quote +Also, why is everyone so confident that Ace and randombum are clean? While Ace's plan is pretty good, that shouldn't guarantee his innocence. We're not, Ace is voted because he has a plan of action that will benefit the town even if he were say mafia. Bum is just voted to kick Emp off because of his irrational approach to being elected. I have a concern with Ace's plan:
suppose that the mayor is townie and all the bodyguards get the right messages
then suppose that a mafia false claims that hes a bodyguard.
that means we'll end up killing several bodyguards and potentially the mayor for a mafiaso. not a good trade. If the mayor is innocent, then he'll straight out deny the fake bodyguards, thus we have free mafia to kill without any wasted effort. This is the 3rd times already that im telling you to learn how to make a proper quote. Stop only quoting what a certain person wrote, Leave His NAME.
What do you mean?
|
Yes, and I was making fun of his pettiness.
|
The value of role checking is it lets the mayor coordinate the players.
|
Hey folks, it looks like the voting is split between randombum and Ace. Just to be sure, let's have a few people change their votes back to Ace so we don't end up with bum as a mayor by accident.
|
I hope people aren't PMing you their roles already o_O.
I really think people shouldn't do this yet. Ace seems trustworthy, but it could all be a ploy to earn our trust. An experienced player would know just how to pull that off. If that's the case, he probably figured he could sacrifice himself to make it harder, if not impossible, for townies to get organized.
|
Well, I still don't think you're worth trusting even with strats and suspicions.
Alven:
I sure as hell hope detectives aren't revealing their roles to him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
