EPTGame is full before Kronen could join but I'll put you up for replacement.
Newbie Mini Mafia XXIII - Page 6
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
Game is full before Kronen could join but I'll put you up for replacement. | ||
Kronen
United States732 Posts
| ||
|
Mordanis
United States893 Posts
| ||
|
goodkarma
United States1067 Posts
/out And: /obs? While it would be fun to play even as a replacement, I see a great learning opportunity from /obsing if hosts and veterans are there to commentate on play as has been mentioned. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25557 Posts
 ![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/d/d3/Banshee.png/180px-Banshee.png) | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/s8czF.png) 12 people, 3 scum. Good luck, have fun. Deadline in ~48 hours | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Much to my delight, I’ve rolled Vanilla Townie this game – I hope strength in numbers shall prevail this game! I ended up rolling mafia-goon in the last newbie game I played (Newbie Mafia XXI), and two members of my scumteam got away with blatant-lurking for days because of poor D1 discussion and a disorganized town. Our scumteam ended up winning that game in large part to this lack of productive discussion. So to get things moving in a good direction, howabout some policy talk? I propose the following:
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Townies are the most important players in the game! You have no reason to fear death and you can post without inhibitions! Be thoughtful, be unafraid, and have fun! Don't be bored/dissapointed that you don't have a power role; posting is what makes this game fun, and that's what a vanilla townie does best! ...and don't forget to post post post! | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
I like executing bad dudes, because I'm a good dude. Policy talk: Blindly lynching lurkers is probably just as bad as blindly lynching active people. If scum divides roles properly they will try to have ~2 posting actively and maybe 1 trying to lay low. Also, it's a huge tell if a lurker starts getting really active later in the game, so scum lurkers are not my primary concern right now. I do not agree with not lynching players just by merit of being active. But since it is highly unlikely that we find a big scumslip on day 1 (though one may hope), I would be fine with getting rid of a lurker day 1. I would also be okay with a no-lynch on day 1, since the chances of correctly lynching without information is 25%, so basically it's a crapshoot. But I'll understand if I find few supporters for that idea... Just putting it out there. | ||
|
Golbat
United States499 Posts
Note that the term "Lurker", at least in the sense I'm using it, is a player who either is not posting at all, or has several posts that don't add anything to the game. Basically, if it's not going to help us catch scum , you might not want to say it. When everyone's opinions are voiced, it gives town a better environment to figure out who is town and who is not. That doesn't mean however, that the hunt should be postponed until everyone has posted. While we may end up lynching a lurker on day one, that doesn't mean we aren't hunting for scum as well. So, yeah. Everyone have fun, good luck, and let's kill us some mafia! | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
A couple of things regarding your post: On August 06 2012 08:28 Dandel Ion wrote: Policy talk: Blindly lynching lurkers is probably just as bad as blindly lynching active people. If scum divides roles properly they will try to have ~2 posting actively and maybe 1 trying to lay low. Also, it's a huge tell if a lurker starts getting really active later in the game, so scum lurkers are not my primary concern right now. I don't consider sudden activty later in the game a "huge-tell" - can you explain this to me? I do not agree with not lynching players just by merit of being active. But since it is highly unlikely that we find a big scumslip on day 1 (though one may hope), I would be fine with getting rid of a lurker day 1. I would also be okay with a no-lynch on day 1, since the chances of correctly lynching without information is 25%, so basically it's a crapshoot. But I'll understand if I find few supporters for that idea... Just putting it out there. No-lynching Day 1 is a terrible terrible idea. Even in the event of a mislynch, town gains so much information from the voting process that even a lynch with "poor odds" is beneficial. Furthermore, I believe town has a higher than 25% chance of lynching mafia if we don't bandwagon on an active/controversial poster (this is where most of the mislynches come from in the recent games I've seen). A no-lynch gives mafia a free night-kill while keeping the town in the dark. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Welcome Dandel Ion! Good to see you in the thread so soon =) yaaaaay typos. | ||
|
Golbat
United States499 Posts
On August 06 2012 08:41 Hapahauli wrote: Welcome Dandel Ion! Good to see you in the threat so soon =) A couple of things regarding your post: I don't consider sudden activty later in the game a "huge-tell" - can you explain this to me? No-lynching Day 1 is a terrible terrible idea. Even in the event of a mislynch, town gains so much information from the voting process that even a lynch with "poor odds" is beneficial. Furthermore, I believe town has a higher than 25% chance of lynching mafia if we don't bandwagon on an active/controversial poster (this is where most of the mislynches come from in the recent games I've seen). A no-lynch gives mafia a free night-kill while keeping the town in the dark. I agree that A no-lynch is the worst thing the town can do day 1. A free night-kill for mafia while keeping town in the dark? Not for me, thanks. Blindly lynching a lurker can also be a bad situation for town, which is why we need open discussion on who to lynch. Lynching lurkers is only possible if there ARE lurkers though. The threat of being lynched for inactivity/uselessness is there to prevent lurkers from being allowed to lurk. If everyone is actively posting, we can easily lynch a non-lurker day 1. But there are some people who are just useless, and are better off for town if they get lynched early. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
On August 06 2012 08:41 Hapahauli wrote: Welcome Dandel Ion! Good to see you in the threat so soon =) A couple of things regarding your post: I don't consider sudden activty later in the game a "huge-tell" - can you explain this to me? If somebody lurks all game and suddely gets really active when scum is in a dicey position, randomly bandwagons on somebody out of nowhere/etc. I would consider that extremely suspicious. Getting cred as an "active townie" after not contributing for days is pretty hard, I'd imagine. I have never played mafia before (forum or otherwise), so sure my opionions might be absolute BS, but right now, I don't feel threatened. On August 06 2012 08:41 Hapahauli wrote: No-lynching Day 1 is a terrible terrible idea. Even in the event of a mislynch, town gains so much information from the voting process that even a lynch with "poor odds" is beneficial. Furthermore, I believe town has a higher than 25% chance of lynching mafia if we don't bandwagon on an active/controversial poster (this is where most of the mislynches come from in the recent games I've seen). A no-lynch gives mafia a free night-kill while keeping the town in the dark. But with scum being able to coordinate themselves, I'd imagine it's very easy for them to force a bandwagon on a townie, no? | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25557 Posts
| ||
|
Golbat
United States499 Posts
On August 06 2012 08:50 Dandel Ion wrote: If somebody lurks all game and suddely gets really active when scum is in a dicey position, randomly bandwagons on somebody out of nowhere/etc. I would consider that extremely suspicious. Getting cred as an "active townie" after not contributing for days is pretty hard, I'd imagine. I have never played mafia before (forum or otherwise), so sure my opionions might be absolute BS, but right now, I don't feel threatened. And why would you feel threatened?  But with scum being able to coordinate themselves, I'd imagine it's very easy for them to force a bandwagon on a townie, no? Well, that's the point of the lynch. If a bandwagon forms on a player who afterwards flips green, the bandwagon formers, (as well as people who hopped on late with no reason) are under huge scrutiny and suspicion. It's one of the best ways to catch mafia early imo. At the very least, we get good discussion and that can set us up for future lynches as well. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
@ Dandel Ion: I disagree to a certain extent - not all scum will suddenly become active and incriminate themselves to bandwagon a player. Many scum in newbie games are comortable staying out of the thread and never being active. I do not believe that the "sudden activity read" it is an excuse to not be concerned with "scum lurkers" early in the game, and we should smoke-'em out as early as possible. On August 06 2012 08:50 Dandel Ion wrote: ... But with scum being able to coordinate themselves, I'd imagine it's very easy for them to force a bandwagon on a townie, no? I think you over-estimate the power of mafia. Mafia only have 3 votes as opposed to town's 9 votes. Furthermore, if Mafia violently forces a bandwagon, it reveals their hand and makes them easy lynches in subsequent days. | ||
|
Synystyr
United States1446 Posts
On August 06 2012 05:22 Blazinghand wrote: LOL I believe that not lynching players simply because they are active is a good way to go about things. You could be scum using that as an excuse to cover up. While I do see the benefit in lynching a lurker versus an active player, I do not believe this should be the sole reasoning on how we lynch someone. | ||
| ||
