World at War Mafia

On March 24 2010 03:14 Zona wrote:
Current version of proposed plan
1. No one is to initiate a nuke.
2. Anyone who initiates a nuke should be revenge-nuked by TWO players with real nukes. To ensure only TWO revenge-nuke, those with real nukes need to refresh the thread, and see if two have already been launched. If not, shoot one.
3. If any of the revenge-nukes turn out to be fake, the faker needs to be lynched or nuked as well.
4. Do not launch fake nukes. This only serves to muddy the picture for the town and gives an opportunity for the target to get another nuke in the air.
5. Anti-nukes should be used at their owner's discretion. However, save some for the late game, so that at that stage, the mafia can't simply nuke a large proportion of the remaining town members and win.

6. If the town COLLECTIVELY (not by some individual thought) feels that they're probably close to losing, start using nukes as daytime vigilante hits.

On March 24 2010 05:55 Abenson wrote:
I will vote for L simply because he is temp-banned and not much help as of now.
##vote L

On March 24 2010 08:48 Versatile wrote:
so what makes abenson a better target, iaaan? for the most part, everyone is just as dumb as everyone else. the only thing that makes L different is he got himself banned.

what's the issue? what big grand plan did he come up with to implement before he got himself banned?

listen. i don't care who it is, the dude got himself banned. period. he won't be active for two days. i'm usually for not lynching anyone on the first day because there is so little to go on, but since we've got someone sitting right there who will not benefit the town for two days, why not lynch them?

honestly, if it was some other player, there would probably not be so much protesting to keep L alive. hop off his dick for a second and look for reason, loser.

On March 24 2010 09:43 d3_crescentia wrote:

I don't like rules 2 and 3. I dislike rule 2 because it increases the number of available targets to retaliate against. It's entirely possible that the aggressor in this case is sitting on a stockpile of nukes, and having two additional people nuke him could potentially mean two more retaliatory strikes. I think it should be limited to just the victim and maybe just one more person that's allowed to fire in return; only in the case where the victim can't shoot back should two revenge-nukers get involved.

I dislike the implications of rule 3, because it's possible we won't know which nukes are/aren't fake if they get shot down by anti-nukes, and so it could cloud the issue. Though I guess it stands to say if we all follow rules 1 and 4 then it it'd be a non-issue.

On March 23 2010 16:13 ~OpZ~ wrote:


Aye....I will make certain to fire many nukes in the interest of assuring mutual destruction if things do not go properly. First step of these talks shall be a statement of bargaining. L, if you bus someone for something for a previous game, I can assure you destruction. Abenson has done nothing improper yet in this game and hasn't even had the opportunity to post. I feel he at least deserves the opportunity to prove he can be a better player.

We should first discuss a plan of action. Ace was pretty smart by not telling us what countries were included in this game, otherwise we could of simply called out our countries (not including our arsenals), and seen if the country we had mattered. I'll assume countries with anti-nukes are like day time paramedics. I'm curious if their are ones that protect against night actions.

While Zona has a decent plan to deter nuking, it involves a lot of secondary nuking. (One nuke = Two more nukes being fired as retaliation). Then his suggestion of a third party scares me into believing he himself is a third party. Seriously, one retaliatory nuke should be enough. We have no idea how many nukes can actually be fired before we wind up fucked from radiation.

Until we hear from every person I don't think we should decide on a lynch candidate. We have 2 days to find a target, let's use them. Everyone post an overall strategy, don't just cosign someone elses. I support L's M.A.D. only because I will not let someone bully me, or force a band wagon when half a day hasn't even went by yet.

Be wary of following L too hard. I don't support holding grudges like that. Also, Abenson, remember this: I'm only defending for now because you haven't posted. If you continue with your habitual one liners, I may be forced to side with L and support some corrective actions. Don't take this lightly. L is rather amazing at creating band wagons, but I see people have become atleast mildly fed up with his strong grudge holding.

We also have no need to day lynch, remember this. We can start shit and throw suspicion as much as possible. Ace said we need a majority of players, and once he notices, the days over. No changing your vote after that. Day cycle ends. This can hurt us severely. Everyone must be active or else we will be thoroughly fucked. Keep yourselves read up on the thread at the least, don't miss anything. If you see a bandwagon, hesitate. Don't just jump on it because you might just wind up ending the day and regret it later.

Good Luck. Let's try and play nice.

On March 24 2010 10:05 Versatile wrote:





haha. nice. an actual response, and then a jab. thank god everyone isn't a crybaby.

On March 24 2010 11:57 ~OpZ~ wrote:
Good point Zona...

##Vote: Phrujbaz

L has a reason....The rest of you all need to up your posting game. With some content.

Okay...I'm going to say this again. We don't need an exact definite decision against nukes. I think our biggest worry will be people about to be lynched firing off their nukes anyway. That's the kind of stunt I would pull. I think that retaliation for nukes should be done on a situational basis. Two nukes is kind of much given that we don't know how much it will increase the ToD. That's my only problem with it. A combination of lynch/nuke is my thought, with some respect for the individual situation. I'm sure random nuking will be enough to piss off a majority of the town.

Also, we need to focus on a good lynch target. Be aware that we aren't near a lynch. Even though a few of us have been posting we need the whole towns participation. Not talking is bad for the town. Stuff like that will get you lynched and it's bad for use to not post. One liners don't help. Now please, start posting some content people.

Lots of people seem to be wanting to vote L. If he was some random person he would be a good candidate. But he is easily one of our best planners. Even if no lynch occurs today we will have some information gained from it because he will likely be a mafia target tonight, or even if someone else is, we should pay attention for those who push for L's lynch. Johnnyspazz hasn't posted much and voted for L originally. Abenson hasn't either and he voted for L. Nikon hasn't really posted either.

I propose Phrujbaz along with Zona. (Should he actually be modkilled right now? Has he confirmed to ace, or in the thread? Game's been up for 24 hours right?)

On March 25 2010 07:54 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
lol dude what the fuck? Its a good thing I read the last page before anything else. You are insane.

On March 26 2010 01:09 Versatile wrote:
well, i know RoL thinks zona is mafia, but i think that's just because he's pissed.

as far as suspect, my personal list would be jspazz and iaaan.

you convinced me on jspazz and iaaan has had a posting style that stands out as strange to me.

i'm not sold on nemy yet. need more analysis.

On March 27 2010 00:38 meeple wrote:


I still suspect Iaaan of devious actions, since he hasn't really responded to any criticisms... although if I recall someone did offer some reasons why he would make those decisions, I would prefer something from him.