EPTTL Mafia XXXV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
Because it is unlikely that mafia would frame a lurkering town. So if dts check lurkers, then it will reduce the risk of them mischecking a framed target. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
On December 27 2010 11:50 Pandain wrote: WHAT TO DO FOR TODAY I say to do this ery day, I say to do this now. Town should lynch inactives. This is actually a somewhat complicated process. Right now in the beginning I will just begin voting people(pressuring) until they make enough of a meaningful post and then I’ll vote someone else. Now, the point is to lynch those who “contribute without really contributing” not those who are just going to get modkilled. That is why at the end it’ll end up being one of the “semi lurkers”, not the dead ones. SUMMARY 1.Contribute without spamming 2.Be active, make well thought out posts. 3.Lynch the semi inactives, inactives for now. On December 27 2010 11:51 Pandain wrote: ##Vote: Mr. Wiggles Contradiction? Pandain say we should lynch inactive for day1 then vote for Mr. Wiggles? Pandain, please explain. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
Pandain did give out many good advices but I'll nitpick this one: Vigi- I still think this should really be a town decision who to shoot. There are so many times when town is going to need that extra certain kp in situations in the future, in addition to the fact that most likely you will shoot a town. Only shoot if we tell you too, or(and I’m being very cautious on this) you just know I like the idea that vig's shot should be decided by town. Unless vigs are veteran, the town are better figuring out who is scum. Also, shots from vigs aren't wasted if more than one shots at the same person are made. I also want to discuss should vigs use their shots early to try to get lucky and kill mafia? Reducing mafia KP is very important and we also have two double lynch to compensate for lack of vig in the later in the game. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
Also in most of the games I played, vigs are killed before they were able to make shots. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
Vigs can only hit on or AFTER night 2 | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
After night 1, dts would have checked some townies and pms are encouraged between them. There is a slight chance that a mafia will take the risk to fake the dt role, but it would be hard for them to do since they have to predict but role that person is. I don't like the idea of pressuring a certain person to speak up one at a time. If the mafia choose to pressure a townie and that townie is afk, then we are falling into mafia's trap. We should consider all inactive. When day1 is half way over, we should come up with a list of people who are inactive/all spam/suspected and discuss who to lynch. Maybe then, those people on list will speak up and defend themselves. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
On December 28 2010 00:56 LSB wrote: EBWOP It doesn't do anything about inactives. It just says we make a list of inactives and see what happens. We've done this practically every single game. Does it work? Not really. LunarDestiny, can you elaborate a bit more then? I don't like the idea of pressuring a certain person to speak up one at a time. If the mafia choose to pressure a townie and that townie is afk, then we are falling into mafia's trap. Looking at the voting thread, there are 3 people that were voted. Mr.Wiggies quickly responded after pandain voted on him. Pandain also respond after the mass vote on him. But Jackal had yet to respond after being voted by pandain. Accusing someone encourages participation from that that person. But what if that person is afk? He won't be able to respond. Also, IF pandain is mafia, then town will be sidetracked. Other inactive mafia will go under the radar. We should consider all inactive. When day1 is half way over, we should come up with a list of people who are inactive/all spam/suspected and discuss who to lynch. Maybe then, those people on list will speak up and defend themselves. I am saying that we should not target inactive (afk/spam/suspect) at a time for day 1 lynch. At some point on day1, we should come up with a list of possible lynch and that will encourage those people on the list to speak up. Again all of the above is for day 1's lynch when town have almost no information. I want to put pressure on all inactives to speak up and maybe contribution. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
-Lurkers who post bare minimum to stay alive. There is a lower chance that framer will framer a lurking town. I encourage dts to check these people. There is the downside where these people are more likely to be modkilled because they might be people who lost interest in the game. Without more people as replacement, dt checks might be wasted. So dts have to judge between lurkers who lost interest in the game and those who are posting minimum to stay alive. -People who have taken a huge stand on issues and are in long debates with others. These people are most likely to be framer's target since there are, at most, a few of people in this categories. The probability of successful framing of these people is higher than probability of successful framing on lurking town. And even if a dt check says that a person of these categories comes out to be mafia, this information is useful, but less compared to other mafia games where there are no framer To summarize, dts should use checks on lurkers to avoid framer. But should judge between real lurkers and discouraged players. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
I agree that behavior analyze is important. Especially in this game, mafia check by dt on people who are in long debates are less convincing compared to other games because they are likely to be a framed townie. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
@1)I want to ask you how should we put pressure on specific player to contribute. It would be bad if a mafia is calling out inactive townie. Also, who should we choose? Go to a list of inactive and randomly pick one of them and say "xxxx, please contribute." @2)If the list is short enough (less than 10 people?), then the list is convincing enough to pressure people to speak up. @3)Again, I am not trying to post to make me look town. Heck, I could have lurked from the beginning and not attract attention to myself. By my "plan", I assume you mean me saying "who should dts check" and "on day 1, we should pressure inactive to speak". Yes, both requires almost no work on my part. The first is advice to dts and the second is relating to generating discussions. As of now, I do not have good point of why or why not anyone is mafia. I do not want to accuse anyone without good point. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
On December 28 2010 04:57 Barundar wrote: I’m sorry to point it out, but I can’t help but notice how general and unproductive your posts are, LunarDestiny. 1) Lists are a good way to appear like you are contributing, without actually adding anything. 2) Pressure is not done in general, pressure is specific to make the player unable to hide. Your list of pressuring “all” inactives is the same as pressuring none. 3) There is a fine line between a plan, and suggestions that make you appear to be active while sending the town on a goosechase. Your plan requires no work from yourself (“we” should do this and that), is very general (“at some point”), and it’s limited to inactives instead of scumhunting, making it mechanic, so even when we hit town, the mafia is not guilty. In general, the player list is a little more stacked with active players than Pokemafia/HPmafia, so inactives shouldn’t be as much as a problem (even if I just replaced one…) My respond is above. (Thought I could post right under without quoting) | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:23 LSB wrote: What's the difference between the two scenarios? In both we are putting pressure on people to contribute. In both we need to make a list of inactives. Because if we do something like "xxxx you have not been contributing and that makes you look mafia, please contribute." We get contribution like Mr.Wiggle which is good. But if the mafia is the one pointing fingers, then other mafia will be left alone. Also, we are targeting a smaller group of people compared to having a list of people. I also like to say that I am not discouraging pointing fingers at non-inactive. Having debates between active players especially useful since it is the best way to find mafia because a mafia dt checks on these people are less convincing than other mafia games. | ||
|
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:26 LSB wrote: Okay, now your post makes a bit more sense. But the point still stands. Why is it so bad to put pressure on one person and then move? Why is this better than RNG? I think I answered your first question in my post above. For your second question: The list is better because it will affect more inactive. Now I think RNG people to pressure them can be use in combination with having a list because I don't see why we can't use them together. To rephrase what I was saying, only RNG people and accuse them is not a good choice to pressure inactive. Having a list will pressure on a bigger group of people. You can RNG people and pressure them, BUT the list is needed because RNGing people is not enough. | ||
| ||
