EPTWorld at War Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
| ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
| ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
| ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 23 2010 02:52 ~OpZ~ wrote: But how do you prove you can post coherently while sitting out? -_- Personally I liked many of bills post, when they weren't spammed one liners. L wasn't lying Bill, it made you look like you were trying to hide something. Seriously, we can't have spam like that going on forever, but I think we should give him a chance. Ace's call, and I'm gonna assume he's gonna stand by it. Well the penalty of the spam is sitting out this game... then the next game he's given a chance to prove he can post coherently, assuming Ace isn't dead strict about his perm ban or another host is running the game. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
| ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
/confirm | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
Nukes should be used closer to the end, similar to vigi kills in order to turn the tide of the game or finish the mafia off. I don't think there's that much incentive to early nuke for individuals unless they're frustrated that their ideas aren't being listened to and take it into their own hands, but counter nuking is kinda a crappy option, since it limits our ability to use nukes later on. Also the idea that we would use 2 nukes to counter the one from our itchy trigger finger guy relies on the dubious fact that we have plenty of nukes lying around to use for this purpose. Shouldn't we be more focussed on taking down mafia with our limited nuke arsenal? As for the first day lynch, it's a bit shady at the moment, but I would like Opz to respond to Elemenope's accusations. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 00:44 Amber[LighT] wrote: yah he's going to hop right in and steer the town away from victory. this is repetitive behavior and it's best to just nip it in the butt and get rid of the excess of retard in this game. I dunno, being overconfident in your perhaps incorrect accusations in a past game isn't grounds to lynch someone. The goal is to get mafia, as tempting as some people might be. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 00:55 Caller wrote: Well guys, in case nobody noticed, before we can lynch anybody, a nuke has to be launched, or day won’t end. Seeing as how nobody else has been an obvious target, I propose that we "nuke" L this turn around. As town, we need more information, and the best way of getting information is by killing a few people. For instance, we don’t have any idea what possible roles there are, aside from our own. More importantly, he won’t be able to contribute to town for a good 40 or so hours. By which, of course, the day would have ended, timewise, unless we nuke somebody to postpone it another 24 hours. And if necessary, we can always delay the day by nuking someone that’s already being nuked, or somebody without any nukes can launch a “nuke” to prolong the day. In fact, the best way to go about this is for somebody without any actual nukes to nuke L. This will postpone the day and give us a lynch without raising ToD or killing L in the event he is town. Since a nuke has to go off to progress the day at all, a fake nuke at this point would be the best. We should save our real nukes for when we need them. Ace, can you clarify this? Do we need to launch a nuke before voting? Can the nuke be a fake one? | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 01:17 Amber[LighT] wrote: Read Nikon's post. You need a lynch or no lynch to end the day, not the other way around. And I'm not accusing L because of past game performance. I'm accusing L because he is the "most" inactive player for the next two days. Why keep him around anyway if he's going to not contribute. When he's unbanned chances are he will continue to muck up the thread with his "stellar" analysis. Yeah I didn't refresh before I posted that... I don't particularly mind if L goes... but in general I prefer to lynch active players that looks scummy. At least they leave post trails and we can look at who they support and such in order to get info on more potential mafia. Having said that, this early in the game there's not much of a trail in any case. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:39 Versatile wrote: well then, it's time to decide how many nukes are going to be lobbed then, aye? there needs to be an established game plan, asap. if there isn't, as soon as the first nuke is launched, there's going to be mass-hysteria and confusion. mafia will take advtange of this. there must be a plan of action that can be carried out right away if/when this happens, and people need to know the consequences for their actions. otherwise, this is what's going to happen: person A: ##nuke your mafia ass, person B. person B: oh hell nah, ##nuke your ass back, person A. mafia 1: wth, person A and person B, what y'all doing? ##nuke both your hoe asses. this needs to be decided and set in stone RIGHT AWAY. if a nuke is launched before it is, give up all hope of town order as far as nuking goes. @ this point, i haven't see a single reason why someone wouldn't nuke. someone could do it, and say oopsie daisy, kill me if you want. and then you have to convince 12 people to lynch this lone wolf. and who knows how many mafia are even in this game who can screw with that count? i applaud the efforts of zona and whoever else so far, but we need faster action. I have to disagree.... if someone nukes without any good reason, the town can just anti-nuke it, no harm done, other than wasting the protection. The person who did it will get bitched out for a while and perhaps lynched/nuked. I do feel we need to progress the game though, so I'm calling out Opz from my guts about his post earlier. Convince me otherwise, but for now ##vote Opz | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 02:55 Zona wrote: I said in an earlier post that at least a portion of anti-nukes needs to be saved for the late game in case mafia decides that the numbers are in their favor and tries to nuking to finish off most of the remaining town members. If we had a policy of always spending anti-nukes on every nuke that is launched, we could go into the late game having used most or all of them up. Perhaps mafia could even launch fake nukes early on to consume anti-nukes just for this purpose. @Ver, I do think my plan is superior and would definitely be happy if my plan was "set in stone" but I'm not going to be like incognito and just declare it to be so. Other town members are welcome to consider it and point out flaws in it, as L did with the first version. @XeliN. If we decided only to lynch nuke-initiators, what if two people initiate with nukes over the course of one day? Plus lynching is a lot less reliable, and needs a lot more coordination to pull off than revenge-nuking. If you can get the entire town on board with the idea to lynch the first nuke initiator and then revenge-nuke any subsequent ones, then that would be an improvement to the plan. But I suspect with a closed setup game like this there's probably some roles with extra hidden votes or some other way to mess with lynch votes. I wouldn't say we do it for all of them, but just ones where its agreed upon that the targeted person should live. I agree that the mafia can abuse this, but if they launch an unwarranted nuke they're putting themselves in huge danger and likely will be lynched/nuked back... Shouldn't there be a protective system in place instead of just retaliatory? We're given anti-nukes for a reason and should use them. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 06:30 nemY wrote: Can someone summarize what's gone on so far? What I can make of it so far is: L's been banned. we're adopting a "no nuke" policy, if someone breaks the policy we nuke them 2x, don't use fake nukes (if you have them), and ~OpZ~ is being an idiot? Well... kinda L's been banned, and we are adopting a no-nuke policy, I think that at least has been agreed upon But there are some factions that are somewhat against retaliatory nuking, and although I would think that it has majority vote of the people active, its not necessarily unanimous. Don't use fake nukes if you're town aligned... thats pretty solid OpZ isn't really being an idiot... he made some odd posts in the beginning but he's defending himself decently, and although I don't agree with some of his points I am considering turning my vote. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 24 2010 06:48 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: Regarding lynching nukers, we should always lynch the aggressor. If the person being nuked retaliates with nukes, then not lynching is dangerous because there may be anti-nukes in the air directed at either party. A way to sidestep this is to evenly vote for each player (11 on each) such that if one player gets protected, he is lynched anyway because the other target is invalid. However, this does have the potential to result in a wasted lynch if no anti-nukes are fired. In addition, it requires full town participation which seems unlikely to me. However, it does sound better than the alternative of waiting for the nukes to fall and then voting, because the time frame will be very small and thus more subject to vote swings from the mafia, since they are organized. if anyone has a better solution than that, speak up (there must be a better one, i just can't think of it right now). but we need to avoid entangling nukes. Regarding lynching L: it is stupid. We wouldn't be voting for him if he wasn't temp banned. We should be voting for people that we think are mafia. People that stick out to me are anyone voting for L. And Nemy for feigning ignorance. On the same token, not lynching anyone the first night is just as stupid. Anyone who suggests this is either dumb, mafia, or both. I agree that we shouldn't use retaliatory nukes so freely, but given a proper situation I wouldn't be against it. It's true that mafia like to ride wrong bandwagons, so it might be useful to look out for people that jump on a shaky idea. It's possible Nemy is feigning ignorance, but its also possible that he doesn't have the time to read the whole thread. On the other hand, he is suspect to me because of how he made a questionable statement that was ill-informed, that promotes the wrong type of ideas. (Saying that OpZ is being an idiot) | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
##vote Abenson | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
So... I guess for now we assume Abenson and OpZ are town-aligned masons. It would take massive mafia cajones to pull it off otherwise. I've said before that I don't agree usually with lynching most inactive, I mean it tells us nothing about the person or possible ties. I don't know why Zona was so pushy for it, since there are obviously some better targets when we consider that we have two basically confirmed townies and a better choice would be to sift through the votes for Abenson(yes I know I'm on that list...) and see who tried to push the bandwagon. Having said that I'm rather glad that RoL launched the nuke... since it gives us a little more time to consider what the hell just went on here. There's no reason to lynch him for "being dumb" or not reading the rules to their fullest extent. It's kinda a weird game, and not really that similar to traditional mafia so of course there will be miscommunications. Zona, I dunno why you're pushing so hard still for RoL when he seems in the grave for sure, but neither of the reasons that were given to lynch him are really all that valid. Hell, if anything his slip-up gave us a rare look into real motivations... where he's seeking to prove his innocence by his own demise and perhaps take out a red with his last breath. I fully expect RoL to turn up green... However, I'm not totally against him being lynched, seeing as he did violate the "Nuking without town consent" policy. I'll follow this up with some more analysis soon. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 25 2010 13:37 Bill Murray wrote: I haven't heard much from Meeple. Mod, could you prod meeple? Damn... I'm kinda impressed someone noticed I was gone. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 25 2010 15:20 johnnyspazz wrote: opz, you had 4 votes on you MAX lol jesus you are bad you really need to check your facts before you spew your nonsense i pushed for abenson cause he was ALWAYS ahead of you in the vote count you can't really blame me for doubting abenson, he was failing pretty hard While I can't blame you for suspecting Abenson (He even failed his mason buddy...) you voted for L with little reason, other than "No better suspects and he's banned" and the idea that we should lynch a role-claimer to prove the innocence of his buddy is pretty rough. They're in the spotlight and if they are mafia and slip up then we bag two of them. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 25 2010 15:27 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Just to remention this again in a separate post. I think most of the thoughts towards nuking were ill conceived. A town consensus on nuking would never be reached, and not using our nukes for more than one day would be dumb. Although I like how this is turning out so far even if i die. Well... as this game goes on, that much is becoming more clear. It took some desperation to get a majority vote, so getting everyone to agree on a nuke is tough in any case. I'd like to urge people to rethink their votes. For me... I'm going to change my vote to ##vote tree.hugger He has very few posts in the thread, and they center around lynching L because he'll be inactive. More than anything, I want him to step up and post more and defend himself. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On March 25 2010 15:31 Zona wrote: I can't sleep, so I'm still here. You do realize if we never reach >50% consensus on lynching, we'll never get to lynch? So the policy on nuking is identical to the mechanics of lynching. The policy is there to use nukes as extra lynches when the town is desperate and feels it might be on the verge of defeat. Using nukes otherwise brings us towards the situation where no one wins (except for my guess on a third party which wins when radiation is too high). For a day 1 lynch I thought he was the best target, as once we had the mason claim from Opz on behalf of himself and Abenson, he was the least active poster other than those two and the banned L, and his few posts were garbage. Only after he had many votes on him he began to contribute...and launch that nuke. If YOU think there are obviously some better targets for the day 1 lynch target you should have been here to promote it. You're actually here AFTER the original day 1 lynch deadline, which was extended because of the nuke. Actually, I see no good reason for you to delay naming your "better targets" so perhaps you could kindly name them now? It will give the town the benefit of your analysis and show how I was mistaken to focus on inactives. Please give the town the benefit of your insight. It definitely would not do for my voice to be the only one out there, as I have my blind spots. I would like for you to contribute what criteria you think was better than just inactives for the day 1 lynch and which players are lynch candidates based or these criteria. My words may seem forceful but I am not against changing my mind when other players give me reasoning superior to what I have proposed. One example of that is amending my original "revenge-nuke" proposal to a "lynch the first nuker, and revenge-nuke only later nukers" which incorporated other players' superior ideas. Also let's look at this: You seem to agree with the "nuking without town consent" policy, so I will assume you have considered the REASONS why this policy was put in place, since I expect that you make decisions based on reasoning. (A very-cutdown-summary: launching new nukes doesn't help the town, and could lead towards defeat. I don't want to repost our entire discussion on this.) Then why are you glad that RoL launched the nuke? The extra time is not worth it when weighed against all the arguments against launching nukes in the first place. I say I'm glad that the nuke is launched because it gives me more time to read and catch up and post before my ill-advised vote for Abenson goes through, but that was just kind of a selfish statement. I didn't mean that its better for the town if people nuke, and I've always been against early nukes so I don't support RoL's decision. | ||
| ||
