EPTOn June 14 2010 19:35 flamewheel wrote:
Dumbledore should be dead.
Dumbledore should be dead.
Get some spoiler tags on this!!
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
Get some spoiler tags on this!! | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
(sign me up plz  ) | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 20 2010 20:07 Radfield wrote: While we're waiting for the game to start.... Does anyone else find this bizarre..... This is a christian game of harry potter mafia, of course... | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 21 2010 14:16 ~OpZ~ wrote: Alright...I would like to announce that I am pro-town and in disagreement with name claiming or role claiming just yet. Name claiming may allow the mafia to realize (if) who the hidden horcrux is...so we have got to have more discussion before any claiming... I agree. For now we should worry about the election and try to find a strategy that doesn't out the entire town. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
If you're new and you don't know a lot about the people playing then I wouldn't nominate someone. Only nominate someone if you know that they would do a good job. From there we can start to generate a list of players who are aligned, trust me this doesn't guarantee you are a death eater, but it's a start in the right direction to make sure we can minimize losses of good townies early. Also mayoral candidates should consider a working list of people they think they should lynch, but don't post who you would lynch immediately. The best system is to get a majority on who the town would like to lynch, since Day 1 lynches are typically pretty random we should just make sure it's a choice the whole town is behind. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 21 2010 20:13 Radfield wrote: The question always seems to be, lynch someone who is inactive, or someone who is mildly scummy. Given the likelihood that we have a fair number of townies with some sort of special power, lynching an active player doesn't seem like a great idea. However, we have two days until we(the mayor) need to make a decision, and hopefully we'll have a good amount of discussion on all topics by the end, so it should be easy to pick out the contributors from the non-contributors. By no means am I saying that we should lynch an active townie, but we should more-or-less alleviate the blame of the day 1 lynch from the mayor to the town as a whole. This gives us a "suspect list" to work with rather than turning on the elected official, which happens more often than not. I'm a little skeptical as to how these spells work or how they are allocated, but we should be careful about protecting players. I think we also may have a lot of people who can role block (expelliarmus). Pretty much we should decide how to allocate spell-casting so we don't have people overlapping and we make the best role blocks possible. We don't know if the red spells are mafia-only spells or if they can be used by blue players (ie a vigilante role using avada kedavra) Also excuse my spelling I am not a Harry Potter fanatic so I won't reference the OP just to spell-check... | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
There are A LOT of unfamiliar names in this game who I've never played with (Welcome if this is your first game!!!  ) Please do not hesitate to be active and speak out. Don't let your opinions get drowned out by aggressive players, though I don't think we have the hardcore players in this game.Still please let's be active and try to figure out how we want to play this game out. We have a lot of helpful spells that I'm sure a majority of the town has, so we need to be organized to win this! | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 22 2010 02:56 Bill Murray wrote: AK is uncounterable. Some things are close to the book, others are not. I have no idea if it's balanced. Then why is Episky in this game? | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
Right now there are a lot of spells that can be used, and a bunch of spells mixed with roles that can really mess everything up. If I'm reading the rules right the mayor/pardoner positions are actually not as safe as one would hope. If the bus driver is in fact a DE role then that could cause trouble for us (If I am elected I could be swapped with another player and the DE could target the other player, thus killing me without going through any bodyguards.) Possibility No. 1: With that said it might not be worth it to have the DT's potentially waste a check on someone who's able to be killed so easily....Now we don't know how many DT's we have in this game... but maybe they should focus on checking out the nominators first. Then we have role blockers... I'm not entirely sure what we should do with these guys. It might be smart (depending on how many we have) to have them block inactive players first and each day rotate who gets role blocked. Possibility No. 2: I'm also half-considering the role claiming idea just so we can see what spells we have at our disposal. This would make the bus drivers role pretty weak if we know what our firepower is like, and perhaps we can get aggressive fast. We would need to rally all of the medics and the roleblockers to create a test field to see who can do what. In a game of 20 people there are 4 guaranteed death eaters... and if we all role claim they may attempt to spread out their roles. This is going to require a VERY active town to pull off, and we need to be unified. Also if you're a stump maybe the best thing to do is to role claim AFTER the election is over. This will then assist in organizing lists of townies and we can immediately eliminate you from our searches (please don't let there be more than one actual stump). I'm really just throwing possible ideas out. I've been sitting here for about 20 minutes trying to think of the best possible strategy, and really what's going on here is an all-out spell brawl. It may be best to unify our efforts so we don't end up piling our spells, and keeping the information out in the open in a game without PM's might be the best idea. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 22 2010 11:44 johnnyspazz wrote: It's true that bodyguards are a little less useful thanks to Bus Drivers, but I remember that mafia aligned Drivers can't exactly communicated with the mafia team. I think your hypothetical situation will never happen in this setup if the Driver can't communicate with other mafia. I think mayor/pardoner is a lot safer than you think. We also have to remember we have both Bodyguards and Aurors. I don't think mafia would ever risk attacking mayor/pardoner since it's 50/50 if they get protected and mafia's identity is revealed. Do you think it's better to have blues or greens as elected officials? I would prefer power roles elected. I think it's better to have certain blues be elected for the two positions. You guys just need to trust that the two people running are blue. I'm completely on-board for throwing myself and Radfield on for MoM and Pardoner, respectively. I'm also going to switch my plan and suggest that at least ONE detective should check the MoM... this plan will work rather well if I'm elected. From there we will move to the pardoner, then the nominators. While we figure this out the role-blockers must make a decision on who to block for the night. I would suggest targeting players that are "wishy washy" or players that haven't done a lot to help this election process. I'm going to officially say this: Vote for Radfield and myself. The list should be split so we can then split each voter up into two classifications. All you need to do is place a vote. People who place no vote are for BM to decide  | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 22 2010 21:19 Radfield wrote: This certainly changes things. MoM is a much juicier position for mafia now, as they can effect the voting considerably. This makes it much more worth the risk to go after MoM as mafia. YellowInk seems like a smart player, and more importantly an active one, so he has my tentative vote. If you are elected YI, who will you lynch? As far as the pardoner goes, it really doesn't make sense for them to ever use their power unless they were mafia. Going against the town majority like that will almost guarantee yourself to be lynched. I'm not sure I've ever actually seen the pardoner skill used. In every game I've seen the pardoner ability has been used by a mafioso only.. and they only did it because it was too late to stop the mafia or they were just playing stupid. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 23 2010 00:00 Hesmyrr wrote: Guys, you are missing this post. acrossfivejulys -> Amber[light]. AFJ, what specific part of amber[light]'s post did you like? It is in responsibility of nominee to also give a reason for nomination so if nominated is mafia he/she can't go like "oh I picked someone in random lol". We need to know if the nomination is mafia push, or legit pro-town reasoning. zeks -> Radfield or Amber I just need a clarification in your argument. Why are you nominating conservative posting townies? I don't really get it. johnnyspazz -> YellowInk I have already pointed out this is poor, half-hearted nomination which hurts the nominated as much as the nominee. However, I still give big plus to johnnyspazz because he was catalyst that started nomination mechanics instead of some people rising up to elect themselves, which allowed townies to take more definite positions than they would have been early game. Radfield, you had one game with me (Three Kingdoms Mafia) where I had not shown any indication in my ability to catch scum, and had given up my team when simple pressure had been applied to me. There are plenty of players here, some already nominated, which are also highly active, so why particularly nominate me? Hesmyrr -> Roffles My justification for this choice is that his inquiry of questioning seemed something mafia is unlikely to do. I rather have someone I believe to be pro-town elected, since investigating mayoral position is more perilous than some seem to believe (elaborated below). Amber[light] -> Radfield or himself. I really do not like this. Although I can see why you would like to classify the town into two distinguishable categories, this also breaks the town nomination system and gives you too much control over our choice of candidates. I would very much like an explanation of why you chose Radfield as your rival candidate over other players. Secondly, wow are you stressing the fact detective needs to check you. I understand that determining alignment of mayoral positions is crucial, but you are leaving out the fact that: 1) more than one detective will likely check you since they aren't coordinated effectively nullifing the town investigative power d1, 2) you could be godfather and then claim pr with occulumency d2, and 3) presence of Mafia busdriver. I propose alternative plan. Below is the player list: Subversion Jugan stormtemplar Jayme acrossfivejulys johnnyspazz lakrismamma Radfield LuDwig- JeeJee Hesmyrr YellowInk ~OpZ~ zeks ~Roffles DCLXVI ElyAs Thegilaboy LaXerCannon Amber[LighT] Abenson The person with investigative powers in red tag investigate MoM The person with investigative powers in green tag investigate pardoner The person with investigative powers in blue tag investigate someone else. Much harder to counter, I think. ~OpZ~ and Amber[light] voted for Radfield. zeks and AcrossFiveJulys voted for Amber[LighT] Casual question to ~OpZ~... If you don't like Radfield, why are you voting for him? Actually what you're proposing to do role checks is what I had in mind. Either that or if you are within five players of myself (1 below, 4 above) and you can role check to role check me. This will lower the possibility of overlap, but doesn't guarantee it. From there what we could do is a player cushion style. So what you do is if you are a detective then check the person above OR below you. If you stumble upon a death eater then IMMEDIATELY come forward. In future nights we will have a protection schedule set up like the detective schedule for Day 1. I was also trying to think of a reason to block your thoughts for a night, but it really won't benefit us as much, especially if players are coming forward if they find DE's. We also don't know how many times a player can use "x" spell... I'm pretty sure BM gave number maximums since it would be a bit imba if the DE's can use the AK curse an infinite amount of times. Now this also goes back to the idea of role blockers as well. To avoid role blocking the detectives we should have the MoM, the Pardoner and the other candidates be role blocked. If any of these players are detectives they should let us know as soon as possible. What we can do is place medic (episky) on them so they can do a thought check, if they're actually able to. The role blockers will actually prevent spells, good or bad, for the night. It doesn't guarantee that they're not DE's, but it allows for the detectives to do their work without being blocked. Also how does the bodyguard role work? Are they just protecting other players at random, if any in this game? And I believe it is possible for detectives to have red or blue spells. I think the idea of the spells being colored is just to show whether the spell was actually "bad" or "good" in terms of the books. We also need to decide on potential lynch targets. Right now we have a few people who are inactive so they should be considered FIRST. People like Abenson, should start posting since being quiet is not helpful. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 23 2010 00:32 Hesmyrr wrote: The candidates definitely should propose plans, but it is in equal responsibility of the players to find faults and pitfalls as much as possible- and question the proposer to see if the weakness in the plan is unintentional or deliberate. The way you countered by building upon the plan - cushion style method for blue tag players - has alleviated my suspicion quite a lot, but I still want to hear about how you pulled out Radfield's name, and why. If this plan continues you and Radfield are guaranteed to be either MoM/Governor; which is something one should definitely be held accountable for should the future unfold peachy. Radfield and I were really the first two to start pushing against each other. Our discussions are more-or-less aligned at this point and we can probably equally bring the town to victory. I'm engaging Radfield as a candidate on my own, he did not ask me to do this. I believe that if we properly organize our efforts we can start eliminating players. I feel like if there was one other player that needed to be checked ASAP it would be him, especially if he's going to be AFK from the game. It's my fear that players use the AFK line to say they won't be around much, but they flip red in the end. It's also important to gauge his power in this game (ie the spells he could have). I will still run on my own if Radfield doesn't feel like he wants the position as pardoner. Like I said I think I can function much better as the MoM so we need to make sure the votes are in line to have myself as no. 1, and radfield as no. 2. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
| ||
