| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
KH1031
United States862 Posts
Having inactives alive will create more buffer head counts in town. Having them dead just increases the number of dead blues. I do, however, agree that we make everyone post so that we have some material to work with, as well as telling if they are active or not. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:38 KH1031 wrote: Mafia kill activesHow does lynching inactives help the town? Don't get me wrong, having inactives hurt the game, but I do not think it necessarily hurt the town. Having inactives alive will create more buffer head counts in town. Having them dead just increases the number of dead blues. I do, however, agree that we make everyone post so that we have some material to work with, as well as telling if they are active or not. Actives actively vote If it comes down to the wire town wants to maximize actives to avoid mafia vote rigging hence killing inactive is good | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
Also the game just got posted last night (like 1 AM if I recall). How can you already make a list of inactive players. Some people were sleeping? I read it because I saw it right before I went to sleep, but I couldn't post. Don't accuse people who don't post immediately of being mafia, fusion. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Mandalor
Germany2362 Posts
If, however, they won't die within a few days, I suggest killing them. Right now, voting for an inactive player seems to be the best idea since I don't think we can nail anyone based on so few clues. | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:38 KH1031 wrote: How does lynching inactives help the town? Don't get me wrong, having inactives hurt the game, but I do not think it necessarily hurt the town. Having inactives alive will create more buffer head counts in town. Having them dead just increases the number of dead blues. I do, however, agree that we make everyone post so that we have some material to work with, as well as telling if they are active or not. Its better to kill mafia than actives, but its better to kill inactives than inactives. Since we dont know who is mafia yet, its better to kill inactives. Because: -Inactive (or just dont talk or analyze) mafia have a really easy time, and dont have to worry about saying the wrong thing, or accusing the wrong person etc. So by forcing mafia to be active, we increase their risk. -When most people are inactive, the active people are more at risk from mafia hits. If mafia kills all the active people, they win, regardless of the amount of inactives left alive. -We force people to make clue analysis. When someone dies, we can tell their motives (whether they were to trying to influence or decieve the town). Also, even a shitty clue analysis might lead toi a better clue analysis from someone else. -By lynching inactives we force people to post, which is good based on the things above. -we make it easier for a DT to post his findings subtly without being autotargeted by mafia. inactives hurt us, and actives help us. By lynching actives, we increase participation, and make it harder for mafia. This early in the game we wont really have any solid lynch-worthy clues, so this is our best option. | ||
|
Infundibulum
United States2552 Posts
 )also, ace, i like that plan to an extent but any mafia false claiming DT can really mess that up, as the town has no 100% way to verify what a DT says is true - although say we have 2 dts speak up and say one thing, and one dt says another, perhaps then that leads us to the mafia? though we also use many rolechecks this way... | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote: I don't think lynching inactives is a very good idea. First of all it's pretty much clear that everyone should be active, hence the smaller game. Most of the people here previously played mafia and they know what to do. Lynching "inactives" is only good if it just so happens that they are mafia players trying to hide their votes, which to me doesn't seem overly smart. I agree keep those names in check, but don't kill off inactives because they didn't post. We should ONLY be killing people who have clues pointing towards them, which to me the most obvious choice is DecafChicken. Also the game just got posted last night (like 1 AM if I recall). How can you already make a list of inactive players. Some people were sleeping? I read it because I saw it right before I went to sleep, but I couldn't post. Don't accuse people who don't post immediately of being mafia, fusion. we wont be lynching right away based on inactive but if its like 4hours away from the deadline and you still havent posted anything useful to the town, you are useless, so why should we keep you? Again, for the decaf clues: [C:\Files\tl\Day 4.txt] Line 5 : [4,3]Empyrean got up from his desk, thirsty, went to the break room for a cup of coffee. Line 25 : [4,13]He got up to go get some coffee himself when he noticed five nails on the ground, he walked slowly over to them to investigate. this is from last game. He was innocent. One mention of coffee is just not enogh to go on right now. For the people on the list, just try to do something in the next couple of days as long as you arent the most inactive person in the town, you are safe | ||
|
KH1031
United States862 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:41 Plexa wrote: Mafia kill actives Actives actively vote If it comes down to the wire town wants to maximize actives to avoid mafia vote rigging hence killing inactive is good I don't think we can assume that mafia will necessarily kill actives, what I would agree is that the mafia will kill the ones making the greatest threat to them: 1. They certainly won't kill active reds 2. They probably won't kill idiotic actives that interprets the clues wrong and leads the town in a wrong direction. Also, I don't quite understanding how does maximizing actives avoid mafia vote rigging? | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:46 Mandalor wrote: Whoever we vote to lynch now, I'd suggest not voting for the active clue checkers from last game. I will not name them to not give the mafia ideas, but if I was mafia again, I would definitely kill these people first. Mafia might use double-logic here and not kill them so that we do the job, but every day these people (I have three names in mind) are alive, will hurt the mafia. If, however, they won't die within a few days, I suggest killing them. Right now, voting for an inactive player seems to be the best idea since I don't think we can nail anyone based on so few clues. agree fully on this. For the main reason that I (and most of the town) are familiar with their abilities/habits. It will be harder for them to be mafia and still play the same as they did last game | ||
|
ZBiR
Poland1092 Posts
On November 02 2008 23:21 Caller wrote: 22. aZnvaLiaNce (weak to moderate) "Whoever wins, the battle does not end. The loser is set free from the battlefield, while the winner must remain there. And the survivor will live out his life as the warrior until the day he dies." -Big Boss aka Naked Snake "Embrace the release that death brings you", he stated as he pulled the switch This seems to me like a viable connection, aZnvaLiaNce should definately be watched. Vengeance was the theme couldn't this link to Unforgiven? (again ) | ||
|
Falcynn
United States3597 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:49 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: We'd do the same thing we did for the mayor plan last game. If a detective speaks up we lynch him. If he's red he's dead (I love rhymes I just want to point out guys that clue analysis at this point seems very tenuous. Granted, I havent been able to find anything not aready mentioned, but the general anarchy, vengeance (vengeance was the theme, "pay the price"), and "embrace the moment" themes i think will be important later on. If you remember last game Chuius clues were always very vague in the beginning, and began to get stronger over time (which i suppose balances out mafia killing town members, or something.. but it makes sense )also, ace, i like that plan to an extent but any mafia false claiming DT can really mess that up, as the town has no 100% way to verify what a DT says is true - although say we have 2 dts speak up and say one thing, and one dt says another, perhaps then that leads us to the mafia? though we also use many rolechecks this way...  ) and if he's blue then we kill the person he spoke up about.It may be unlikely that a DT would sacrifice himself...but it's all we got. | ||
|
KH1031
United States862 Posts
| ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:49 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: I just want to point out guys that clue analysis at this point seems very tenuous. Granted, I havent been able to find anything not aready mentioned, but the general anarchy, vengeance (vengeance was the theme, "pay the price"), and "embrace the moment" themes i think will be important later on. If you remember last game Chuius clues were always very vague in the beginning, and began to get stronger over time (which i suppose balances out mafia killing town members, or something.. but it makes sense )also, ace, i like that plan to an extent but any mafia false claiming DT can really mess that up, as the town has no 100% way to verify what a DT says is true - although say we have 2 dts speak up and say one thing, and one dt says another, perhaps then that leads us to the mafia? though we also use many rolechecks this way... Yeah I like the plan too. Do we have to lynch the DT after he speeks up or what? Otherwise we just have a rolecheck from a DT we cant trust on a DT we cant trust on a victim we cant trust | ||
|
Infundibulum
United States2552 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:54 KH1031 wrote: Also, I don't quite understanding how does maximizing actives avoid mafia vote rigging? if less townies are voting, it's possible for some mafia to sway the lynch just by voting for that person. of course this is risky for them, if some DT is smart enough to check the vote list. | ||
|
fanatacist
10319 Posts
| ||
Bockit
Sydney2287 Posts
| ||
|
fanatacist
10319 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:55 Falcynn wrote: We'd do the same thing we did for the mayor plan last game. If a detective speaks up we lynch him. If he's red he's dead (I love rhymes ) and if he's blue then we kill the person he spoke up about.It may be unlikely that a DT would sacrifice himself...but it's all we got. This. Wouldn't it be safer to lynch the person he spoke up about, and if he DOESN'T come up red then lynch the DT? By lynching the DT you have a 1:1 ratio of blue : red losses at best. With the idea I just posted, a DT who has verified himself by giving a red name could keep producing results, thus being far more useful to the town than was if he was dead. It would also take away the whole sacrifice element that would prevent DTs from speaking up; I think they would become relative loners and would try to make posts that are convincing but not too convincing, acting as one of the analysts, in order to hide their role, and their factual knowledge of who is mafia and who isn't could be lost. | ||
|
Infundibulum
United States2552 Posts
On November 03 2008 00:56 fusionsdf wrote: Yeah I like the plan too. Do we have to lynch the DT after he speeks up or what? Otherwise we just have a rolecheck from a DT we cant trust on a DT we cant trust on a victim we cant trust lynching would confirm, although it seems like an awful waste of a DT to me. there is probably a better way to go about this, albeit more indirect. | ||
|
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
fusion plan for today Ace plan longterm imo | ||
| ||
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
WardiTV Invitational
ByuN vs herO
Classic vs SHIN
Patches Events
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Escore
IntoTheTV X SOOP
Korean StarCraft League
GSL
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
