|
On November 25 2011 21:08 sandroba wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 20:58 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On November 25 2011 20:38 sandroba wrote:On November 25 2011 20:21 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On November 25 2011 20:06 sandroba wrote:
There are many problems with this plan. You have to make the whole town agree on the people that should be lynched/shot on the day before. This is by itself non optimal, because you are using one shot vigs on day one and deciding who you are going to lynch with a LOT less information. Day 2 we will 8 kp and possibly roleblocks/hits/claims to analyse. Also we have no idea of mafia roles. Let's supose your propose list has 1 mafia in it and mafia has 2 medics. They can saffely assign the other medic and a framer to a townie, and if that person ends up being hit people will obviously want to lynch him the next day.
This wastes yet another day and his flip does not contribute anything towards revealing sanity, because it could have been tempered with in the previous night or not. The flips of any of the people in the list similarly contribute nothing to clearing sanity.
Example: Sane dt checks framed red -> returns inocent. Said red gets shot/lynched->flips red->sane dt thinks he is naive/insane.
The correct way to use DTs this game:
You check into people you think are suspicious. You don't breadcrumb your role. You breadcrumb your check the next day. You simply say something along the lines: I think X is scum/town because of Y. Or whatever other clever way you can come up with. Be active and contribute in the thread. This will not be suspicious to the mafia because other townies do this all the time. There is a fuckton of people saying they think one player or the other is scum/innocent. Now you ask me how do we figure this guy's sanity? Said DT will at some point claim/die. At that point we look at the breadcrumbs and compare it to the flips in the game so far. We piece toghether the current info and deduce the sanity, the same way a DT would deduce his own sanity. There is no rush for confirming sanities and by focusing on doing so you waste a FUCKTON of information for no benefit. This is a huge, long game. Long term benefits FAR outwheight short term gain to have a DT say "Hey I'm sane and I found 1 single scum, yay", even if such plan to get early sanities was reliable. If we have a bulk of information we can clear/condemn a lot of players with very high likelyhood and get a much better perspecctive on the game as a whole, resulting in nailing much more mafia in the end. Your bolded phrase is wrong -_- horrrrrrrribly horrrribly wrong. check how the dt sanities work before making random statements like that. a paranoid/naive dt you do not want breadcrumbing checks period. IT fucks with the town and forces them to come out late game with "im a x dt and all my reads up till now could be moot" and if that player has been pushing anyone shit gets fucked. In a game where you have millers, gf, framers and sanities you really do not want to wait long term in hopes that dts can figure their sanity out quickly as to not fuck with the town more than the mafia already is. I don't think it is wrong. I know how sanity works. Please explain me how it works then. Host, can you please clarify this? Keep in mind I am referencing my style of plan before WBG as his nulls my reason for saying you had it wrong. As no one else seems to like my idea, this also fucks it up the ass. IF you had a list of say 2-3 players, and all dts are narrowed in on that list. You essentially bottleneck the framer correct? those 2-3 players will almost surely be suspect players to begin with, also correct? So if your a sane dt and check player x who flips red to your check, and you know the framer was almost certaintly there. You just instantly narrowed your sanity. IF you saw red when you should have seen green you know instantly you are one of two roles sane/paranoid/insane. If you know the target was framed this reduces you to sane/paranoid except paranoid dts cannot actually see anything but red. So any check after your first one (especially on a framed target) clears you. Non framed targets put you on sane/naive and insane/paranoid which takes longer to clear out. Sane/paranoid or insane/naive clears you in two checks unless you get horribly unlucky by hitting another framed player. If your sane in the sane/paranoid slot and find a legit red on your second find then yes you could be "what am I' the guy flipping clears that. IF you ever check and discover a green however (which is more than likely) your cleared. proposed dt check list early on slots you instantly into 1 of 2 sanities. This means as a town we have done almost all the work the dt would have to do to narrow it down from 4 to 3 to 2 to 1 down to 1 in two game days. As the people on those checks will be suspect and potentially lynched/shot through by beginning of day 3 every dt should have their sanity cleared out. Sigh, you don't KNOW the target was framed, how are you supposed to know that, you don't even know if such a role is present in this game. Framer + sanity is insanity and you add millers and gf on top of that.
for all intents and purposes hitting a gf works to clearing your sanity as he appears town to checks so for all intents and purposes IS town to checks. In terms of sanity clarity that is a moot point. A miller only helps clear it as well. miller works exactly as a framed townie would. If you hit a miller after day 1 and day 1 have a green check hit miller and have red (and you have a flip of your day 1 or end up with a flip of your day 2 miller) you are instantly confirmed for sanity -_-
as now that I have mentioned the framer abuse yes its unlikely you can guarentee it. But until I mentioned what I have, would you as red framed into a list of 2-3 players? If you say no you are outright lying. Even with a list of 4 players mafia has to frame at least once into it to hope and screw one dt over.
My overall bafflement with you is that you are so unwillingly to even have scummy players checked. inexperienced players are not going to easily be able to pick out who they should be checking day 1 and possibly day 2. This is not me trying to be mean it is just they won't know all the signs to look for. THIS coordinates people into checking potential scum while clearing out dt sanities. It serves to only help the town whereas you are actively voicing against helping the friggin town.
|
heading to work be back in like 8-10 hours.
|
yep, everything BC said is spot-on.
Sandro I don't understand how you are coming up with this lol. You are averse to a plan that gifts DTs flips in preference for them to rely on breadcrumbs. You yourself stated that sanity checks are worthless without flips. We know that, the whole point of this plan is to give DTs the flips they need.
With your idea (in other words, if this plan is not implemented) none of the DTs are guaranteed any flips. Very few, if any, will get two flips by day 3. With BC's plan or my modified version you will get a huge majority of the targets to flip.
Think about it. If you're a DT doing your own thing and you get a check with two opposite results, on day 3 neither of them flip and you don't know if you're sane or insane. If you're sane the red could be a framed VT, it could be a miller, it could be scum. The green could be a VT, a framed miller, a GF, a framed scum. If you're insane these are all opposite. You know next to nothing.
On the other hand if you're a DT following the plan and both your targets flip, you know EXACTLY what they are. You know if you are insane or sane.
DTs who get two greens and opposite flips are the only ones we should be worried about with this plan. It's not even that big of a deal. Lack of plan and you have dozens more possibilities to worry about.
|
I think you are mafia BC. How you have been operating this game is exactly how you did in mafia 39. I won't post my case or try to get you lynch today, because you are likely to get shot tonight if somehow you are town.
|
Why youngminii should be on the DT check list
We want scummy fuckers on the list. I have for the most part already covered why YM is scummy, and this is mostly just a copy paste of a case I already made against him. For clarity, if anyone wants their analysis on the list, please re-post them with the title "Why X should be on the DT check list".
Several things in YM's play so far stick out to me.
First off, the immediate goal of his campaign was simply to discredit me. He didn't have any intention of running himself, or actively support anyone else into office.
And no matter how good he thinks I am as scum, he cannot possibly be so afraid of me that I will simply autowin the game. I command some respect, but that's over the top. That's simply fear tactics. Notice the difference between YM and BC in what they suppose will happen if I get elected mayor and am scum. YM says it's autowin for scum, and BC says it's okay as long as good townies remain alive.
It's simply absurd to think the game is gone if I were scum and voted into office.
Once again, it reeks of over the top fear tactics.
While it was probably a mistake, youngminii also contradicted his own words, as outlined here:
On November 24 2011 22:39 minus_human wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 22:05 youngminii wrote:
See you guys have already been sucked in by Palmar's smooth talking. When did I ever say Palmar's scum is better than his town? That's just a strawman that Palmar invented to make his own points stronger.
Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 18:37 youngminii wrote:I am one of the most transparent player in this game, my town play is top notch, my scum play is pretty bad
Unlike some other candidates, you can actually call me out for being wrong, because I'm not bad This is a lie. Your scum play is better than your town play, according to memory. You have so much sway with the majority of people that if anyone actually calls you out once you have your tight rein on town, you'll get your herd to quick lynch the offender. hmm...
I also find it weird how he's so much against putting me in office just in case I happen to be scum, while being perfectly fine with supporting sandroba, based on very little.
Not to mention he tries to paint an opinion as a lie. It's simply bending the truth. I've said multiple times I consider my own town play to be better than my scum play, in other games, and possibly even in threads that aren't games like the misc thread.
By definition you cannot lie about something that is an opinion.
It's pretty damning that YM flops so easily on his opinions. I want people to understand that despite saying he's not 100% sure I'm scum, he publicly stated that he was willing to support any candidate whose plan was to lynch me on day 1.
On November 25 2011 05:06 youngminii wrote:
FYI I still want Palmar dead just because he's caused so much trouble for me thus far.
And still pushing for my death.
On November 25 2011 05:48 youngminii wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 05:43 Nisani201 wrote:On November 25 2011 05:32 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 25 2011 05:29 Nisani201 wrote:On November 25 2011 05:19 sandroba wrote:
You are wrong at your assumption nisani. You do want a mayor that can persuade the town on his reads and one that has good reads. No, YOU are wrong. If a mayor is persuasive, it is bad because there is the possibility of them being wrong. Being wrong about a read is OK, but it is not OK when you are successfully convincing someone else that you are wrong IN ADDITION TO having a 3x vote. A persuasive mayor that is scum is even worse. That is why I am voting for xtfftc; even if he is scum, he wont have too much power. So in a game that's about persuasion, a persuasive scumhunter is bad in mayoral office? Beyond that, all I hear from you is "derp derp derp derp" Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. No one deserves that much power. Thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaank you. Someone with some fucking sense.
This will only make sense to the players who have played mafia on TL quite a bit. But it's pretty common knowledge Nisani201 is a completely useless town player. He increases mafia's chance of winning no matter which side he is on.
And Nisani's point is bad logic. The only reason to prevent me from gaining power is if you have a reason to believe I'm scum. I am not scum, and there is no evidence pointing towards me being scum. youngminii is basically buddying up to terrible logic. If those guys made a case that somehow pointed towards me being scum, then it'd be a whole different story.
youngminii is pushing fear over analysis and logic.
Finally:
On November 25 2011 06:45 youngminii wrote:
I've had a change of heart.
Palmar, I'll support you if you decide to lynch BC. I can't see how a detective/rolecop day 1 plan to check their sanity would be feasible in a huge game like this with so many new players. You'd think a player of his experience would know better than that.
I mean, he recognises that certain things aren't possible in a game like this: "Also, enforcing a Policy Lynch system like LAL in a game of noobies who do not realize just how bad a lie is in this game is not productive. It is good to educate them that lying is bad but until they see the downside to it we will not get them to stop."
He reeks of scum.
Suddenly it's ok to vote me into office, but only if I work like a complacent little bitch and lynch the person he wants to get lynched. This is bad on so many levels. The case against BC isn't even particularly good.
I have no reason to think youngminii can possibly be town at this point, and that only leaves one alignment:
youngminii is scum
|
yo Palmar, do you think sandro could be scum?
He says BC is scum now lolol.
The DT check business is making me really question sandro's motives. His logic isn't making sense to me, and his suspicion of BC is even more perplexing.
|
Currently the deadline is time, but that is subject to change.
When is the actual deadline?
P.S. Please let it not be at 3 AM European time again ^^
|
On November 25 2011 21:32 wherebugsgo wrote:
yo Palmar, do you think sandro could be scum?
He says BC is scum now lolol.
The DT check business is making me really question sandro's motives. His logic isn't making sense to me, and his suspicion of BC is even more perplexing.
I think one or the other might be scum. Sandroba is using terrible logic.
I want to hear how syllogism feels about sandroba.
|
You guys don't seem to be understanding what I'm saying. I won't repeat everything over, because I already said why the plan is worse then DTs doing their own thing. No one is stoping anyone from posting lists of suspicious players to help people in their checks. This game is huge, has clues and will go on for a long time if one side does not rape the other. A spread out spectrum of DT checks is much better and safer in terms of sanity clearing than any given list. Shooting a shitton of players early on is bad because you need the kp later to kill fucking 16 mafia, we can't relly on lynching everyone. The longer the game goes more clues and more checks, more rolecop (which is the best role in this game) checks, more flips for dts to find out their sanity. In terms of reliably confirming sanity early your plan does not help. That's all.
|
The only real advantage in this DT coordination is giving possibly newer players decent targets and producing some discussion. Other than that you won't be able to figure out your sanity particularly faster.
If you are a sane DT, you check two targets and they come back T T and then flip T T, you've no clue about your sanity; the same is true for pretty much every scenario. Without coordination it's much less likely that your target is framed and thus once your targets flip, you can be more certain of your sanity. It might not take that long anyway given that mafia has 8 kp. I suppose coordination is slightly helpful if one of our DTs flips and he has breadcrumbed his checks properly.
|
Thank you, finally someone that has a brain.
|
Actually you do!
If they flip T T then you know you aren't insane, and you know you aren't paranoid. That leaves naive and sane.
If you get T T and only one flips, you can't rule out insane, since the T could be framed and the other could be red.
If you get T T and neither flips, you can't rule out anything.
So syllo, you're wrong.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On November 25 2011 21:36 syllogism wrote:
The only real advantage in this DT coordination is giving possibly newer players decent targets and producing some discussion. Other than that you won't be able to figure out your sanity particularly faster.
If you are a sane DT, you check two targets and they come back T T and then flip T T, you've no clue about your sanity; the same is true for pretty much every scenario. Without coordination it's much less likely that your target is framed and thus once your targets flip, you can be more certain of your sanity. It might not take that long anyway given that mafia has 8 kp. I suppose coordination is slightly helpful if one of our DTs flips and he has breadcrumbed his checks properly.
However, don't you feel that co-ordination should be done between lynching and checks, so that the DTs actually have an answer earlier, building up their evidence about their sanity? Also, your point about newer players and discussion is very valid, so should that not be encouraged, considering the number of new players?
What my main problem is with the opposes the plan that wbc, palmar and BC are signed to is that i have yet to see a clear outline of how you wish it to be done.
So can you give one?
|
What are you talking about? I gave a very clear outline of it. Just go in my filter, it's like five posts up. It's at the top of page 49, second post.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
Edit through post: I've clearly not written that second paragraph right...lemme rephrase
My main issue with those that oppose to the plan that wbc, palmar and BC are signed to is that all I see right now is opposition. I see possibly important points about why it may not work, but I don't see solutions
|
Unless you can confirm your sanity, it doesn't help and you are wasting checks to potentially be able to deduce your sanity slightly earlier and also making DTs breadcrumb checks on the same small pool of players, which makes the breadcrumbs quite easy to find, especially with there being a lot of players in the game who barely post
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On November 25 2011 21:43 wherebugsgo wrote:
What are you talking about? I gave a very clear outline of it. Just go in my filter, it's like five posts up. It's at the top of page 49, second post.
I know you have wbg, but I'm saying those who oppose your idea haven't, and I'd like to see one
|
I never advocated breadcrumbing. In fact, I strongly suggest players don't breadcrumb in this game. So, with that first part you're putting words in my mouth.
Second, the sentence "unless you can confirm your sanity, it doesn't help" is completely wrong and really illogical. I just showed to you how it would be incredibly beneficial for a DT with two green checks to get two flips. It completely eliminates the possibility of millers, GFs, and at least one of the sanity possibilities. That is far more useful than nothing.
|
On November 25 2011 21:48 wherebugsgo wrote:
I never advocated breadcrumbing. In fact, I strongly suggest players don't breadcrumb in this game. So, with that first part you're putting words in my mouth.
Second, the sentence "unless you can confirm your sanity, it doesn't help" is completely wrong and really illogical. I just showed to you how it would be incredibly beneficial for a DT with two green checks to get two flips. It completely eliminates the possibility of millers, GFs, and at least one of the sanity possibilities. That is far more useful than nothing.
How is that beneficial for town? We waste checks on people we are killing anyway and potentially even wasting vigi shots because the shots aren't refunded when two hit the same one. Ruling out paranoid doesn't generally require flips anyway. There is no advantage in having our DTs know their sanities or narrow it down to 2 a bit earlier when it requires wasting checks.
|
On November 25 2011 21:55 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2011 21:48 wherebugsgo wrote:
I never advocated breadcrumbing. In fact, I strongly suggest players don't breadcrumb in this game. So, with that first part you're putting words in my mouth.
Second, the sentence "unless you can confirm your sanity, it doesn't help" is completely wrong and really illogical. I just showed to you how it would be incredibly beneficial for a DT with two green checks to get two flips. It completely eliminates the possibility of millers, GFs, and at least one of the sanity possibilities. That is far more useful than nothing. How is that beneficial for town? We waste checks on people we are killing anyway and potentially even wasting vigi shots because the shots aren't refunded when two hit the same one. Ruling out paranoid doesn't generally require flips anyway. There is no advantage in having our DTs know their sanities or narrow it down to 2 a bit earlier when it requires wasting checks.
Ruling out paranoid doesn't require flips, but ruling out insane does.
Ruling out naive requires a red check, but with flips you will always be narrowed down to at least two sanities. Without flips you are never narrowed down to any less than three.
It is beneficial for town because a great majority of DTs who live to day 4 will know their sanities. Without the plan most of these DTs will probably not know anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
