EPTWorld at War Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 21 2010 10:53 d3_crescentia wrote: BRT Marco Polo style. I want to be China so y'all can pump opium in me. Wait a second... | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 23 2010 08:14 Ace wrote: no ^_^ T_T | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 23 2010 10:33 ~OpZ~ wrote: I say we lynch RoL first.... ;>> That is all. I'd take you up on that but abenson is playing. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 23 2010 11:44 Ace wrote: Just to Clarify: If you have anti-nukes they can be used to destroy nukes in the air heading towards any player before they land. This means you can save anyone including yourself if you have them. One of the first 11-12 players to confirm has anti-nukes. sup. I figured out your secrets Ace. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
Don't fucking nuke anyone at all because we might lose to radiation. First person to nuke gets chain nuked by everyone else. I call this strategy M.A.D. for Mutually Assured Destruction. Sound awesome? I know it does. Now for day 1 lynch: Kill abenson. Kid's terribad and not worth keeping alive. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 23 2010 13:47 Zona wrote: No chain nuking. There might be a third party who wins by annihilating the world by radiation, so everyone launching revenge strikes might lead to them winning. One or two revenge nukes at most. I do think a no-nukes idea is good for the most part, but later in the game the town can use them as daytime vigilante hits if we really fall behind by mislynching, so I wouldn't rule it out completely. Stop bringing past games into this. Your grudge against BM last game hit town and didn't meaningfully advance that game towards town victory (the overwhelming setup advantage did, though). If you think someone is terrible, convince the entire group of players to ignore him, rather than waste a lynch, especially a day 1 lynch which should provide information otherwise. The biggest reason is that if everyone piled on some target you proposed, we will have no differentiating votes to examine later on. And then we go to day 2 without that much more information than day 1. 1)Nah. Fucking chain nuke the guy. If you set up a deterrent as concrete as possible its less likely that all actors attempt to move in a manner which will result in them losing. As it stands, your assumption that only a few people fire back essentially allows people to nuke tactically if they have anti-nuke capabilities or if they're part of mafia and know that their gambit will pay off for their team. 2) K, then propose someone. My hit on BM was clearing the abenson list, the list that was so chock full of mafia that they quit when they couldn't stop me from enacting the plan. Allowing people that I think are bad to be ignored is a PERFECT method for mafia players to avoid suspicion. If you impute that an illogical player should be ignored because you think he's illogical, then you're hoping for dear god that he's not mafia. More importantly, I'm not saying string him up on day 2-3. This is the day 1 lynch. The day when the town has zero information. Taking our historically least likely to hit lynch and taking away a town liability now rather than when more information is on the table is a perfectly prudent course of action. I'm not saying 100% of people should vote for abenson, either. When has that ever happened on a day 1 vote? | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
1) If abenson confirms that he/opz are masons, killing one of them lets every person in the game roleclaim to opz via confirmation. This is big shit. Sidenote; Do we discover roles upon lynch? That would be important here. 2) Lol lynch attempt on me? 3) RoL? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL got some schools to go to, I'll be back an' post s'mores later. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 00:04 haster27 wrote: How can we role-claim to him without getting it also known by anyone else when PM is prohibited? The simplest way is to use say something in the open that is qualified by something only Opz would know. Then again, I guess most people don't know anything to use in that manner. Granted the fact that this is a sc site, ask him to play some games, then develop a conditional based on the results of the games. If we went 5-0 i'm a dt if we went 4-1 i'm a townie if we went 3-2 i'm USSR and i have a billion nukes. You can easily get by the restrictions on PMs if you know you can code your information based on something that only the other player would know. Whether or not that's too much work for most people is another question entirely. Granted the lazy factor up in here. On that note, if anyone wants to play 5 or so games of SC2, feel free to look my name up in the HoN thread. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
Kid clearly wanted to wagon me. I'd much prefer that we nuke the shit out of RoL and use anti-nukes on any retaliatory strikes. If he's town he shouldn't throw extra nukes out. If he's mafia, good. 2 seems like a good number of missiles. The list of people who wanted to off me during a 36 hour ban is either full of retards, mafia, or people who are still consumed with the ghost of the rage donut. I suggest the best course of action for the town is to simply lynch everyone on that list. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 06:09 haster27 wrote: I am seriously beginning to doubt my decision to argue in your favour. First, there are lot of things wrong about launching nuke against him, with cliches such as ToD waste of nuke etc etc, but the most damning of all is that the very fact you are advocating nuke as his mean of death instead of the lynch. First, RoL is the player who decided to launch a nuke because he was pushed into majority lynch position. His comments and spats against other Townie prove that he is type of player who base at least part of his decisions on emotions. Do you seriously expect he will not retaliate when someone launches an nuke against him, especially if its by 'unconfirmed' Townie? You propose we should use anti-nuke at his retaliatory missile, but isn't the conservation of Town's defensive ability part of the reason why we are acting reluctant to save Caller (although agreeably his lurkish behaviour also contributed to this a lot)? Why risk decreasing Town's nuke defense capability by 1 when we can simply lynch him out? If you were serious about eliminating all the people that bandwagoned against you with intent of being an pro-town, you would have proposed lynching RoL and nuking tree.hugger. This plan is far more efficient than your quoted idea because: 1) It both leads to your suspect's death. 2) More realistic; has no worry about day 1 ending with no lynch during the confusion the Town switches their votes from RoD to tree.hugger. 3) There are less risk of retaliatory nuke- the Town does not need to waste anti-nuke needlessly. 4) More information; whether tree.hugger possesses nuke or anti-nukes. I mean, I know you are half-joking, but this is such an horrendous proposal that I just had to write this out. Of course the most pro-town move would be to HOLD OFF THE NUKES, wait for the alignment of RoL (and possibly Caller) and NK, then make day 2 lynch as an rational human beings. Nuking him was my initial suggestion. The idea is that the ToD will indeed rise, but that means that mafia has less incentive to nuke upon being lynched for fear of them losing the game gratis based on radiation. Do I expect RoL not to launch nukes? I don't know how many he has. If he's town, he will NOT want to retaliate. If you believe that RoL is green and simply made a bad move, you can confirm that here with ease. You'll actually see why this is important in the next paragraph. On the topic of not anti-nuking caller: the main justification should be that the town overwhelmingly thinks that a player of Caller's caliber isn't producing enough to justify keeping him alive. If people had a substantial pro-town read on Caller, they would probably argue FOR the deployment of an anti-nuke. After all; the entire point of the anti-nuke is to prevent town-directed nuclear hits (err, or mafia directed nuclear hits if mafia has anti-nukes). Its rather quite irrelevant here: If RoL throws off retaliatory nukes, he's almost 100% certain to be mafia. If he is, we're shooting down mafia nukes. Its the best case scenario. So essentially nuking RoL allows us to ask, as a town, a question to him: Are you green and believe Caller's red? If so, take the nuke in the face, die, and that's that. If you're red and retaliate? We will shoot down ALL your missiles, including the one directed at Caller. Lynching RoL and nuking tree.hugger is precisely what I do not want to do; checking if we can change votes is a barometer of activity, for one. Additionally, if tree.hugger is indeed mafia, then he's likely to throw off as many retaliatory nukes as possible. Note how the lurker responds nearly immediately when called out. RoL by contrast might even be out of nukes by this point; between him and tree.hugger you need to assess if you believe RoL is town. If you do, your plan is concretely inferior by miles. So my suggestion essentially minimizes the potential for raising the ToD in days to come. If we don't react to nukes with other nukes, people have carte blanche to throw off single nukes when they're going to get lynched like RoL did. Additionally, not throwing retaliatory nukes gives town players the ability to nuke someone at the cost of their own life. Why is this important? If I'm 99% certain that you're mafia, but I can't get the town to listen to me, its actually in my best interest to nuke against the town's will and then take the lynch in the face. That is NOT the type of incentive scheme we want going. We need to concretely dissuade ANYONE from throwing a nuke by making the penalty as close to "everyone loses" as possible. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
Yeah last time I checked, rules were meant to be worked around and broken. What the fuck? Do you think you are showtime? Stop being an asshole and just communicate in the thread. Its not a rule being broken. There's no PMs. Everything is done in the open. The difference is that some people will take different information out of the post than others; Heads up, that happens in every game. L I think the town shouldn't save Caller of their own will because the act of agreeing to do that could save a mafia, or a townie. I think they town shouldn't save Caller because saving him would save someone?Well no shit, sherlock. A better argument might be "because I honestly think he's mafia", but you seem to have avoided that for some reason. Anyways, RoL just said he has no more nukes. If he lies, he's mafia. That pretty much green lights my plan. I'd rather not try to change the vote target and have people fail because we don't have enough people, so I'm going to go ahead and ask people: If you're cool to engage with the nuke RoL and lynch tree.hugger plan, say so in the thread. Lurking people work against us here. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 07:49 ~OpZ~ wrote: His nuking of Caller is the only reason we have time to talk about this. L, I thought of a potentially deadly downside to your plan. You being mafia, 2 possible town kills become 3. There is no guarantee that anyone listed is mafia. While, you did catch tree.hugger lurking, and the plan does sound pretty rational, the missing information is very much a problem. I would be willing to risk it though and change my vote to tree.hugger. Its potentially deadly that we aren't hitting assured mafia members? Shocker. That's kinda the risk that any lynch has. | ||
| ||
