EPT/in
World at War 2 Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
/in | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
| ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
| ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
 | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
This game looks like it will be confusing as hell. I basically agree with what has already been said. Do not nuke without great cause | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
How many lives do you have? Uhh one. Okay, let's test that. *Nuke* *dies* told you so Not only does that raise the radiation level, it also kills more people. Our scum reads in this game will probably be less accurate than normal. So, let me say this. Play this like you would a normal mafia game Forget about nukes. Use them if need be. Do not make up shitty plans utilizing them. They will not help us. Treat them as vigi shots to use if people are being anti-town or are confirmed scum. They are not to be used in any other situation. | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 05 2011 21:41 Palmar wrote: Here's what I think about your plan ##Nuke: Sandroba Don't try to be a hero. Not only have you already stated you have no nukes, making this worthless and not about to help anything, but it's the night phase and you can't even use actions. If you don't agree with his plan, don't follow it. Simple as that. So far I'm seeing ten pages of "herp" "derp" "herp" "derp". I don't agree with any of the plans that have been proposed, and people didn't agree with what I suggested in lieu of them. All this arguing is doing is giving scum and conspirators a barrier to hide behind, and I can guarantee you that the conspirator(s) are somewhere in this discussion trying to influence our nuke policies. Have we done any scumhunting so far? No. So here's the deal. Come day 1, absolutely no more discussion about nuke policy. If we haven't decided on anything by then, too bad, but at that point we start scumhunting. This means that if you have a plan that you want put into effect, you need to be persuasive. If you have a plan, outline it as follows. (Your Name)'s Plan for Not Letting the Conspirator Win Nuke Policy Fire/Don't Fire under the following circumstances: Punishment This is what happens if you break the rules: Why Explanation for why this is the best plan: Support How does this plan compare to WaW 1? How could it have affected the results of that game? Other Tidbits Anything else you want to say. ##Vote: (Your Name)'s Plan And people will vote on your plan. The goal for these plans will be to have 12/29 players vote for them. This is relatively close to a majority, and is achievable for anyone. If we're getting close to the end of day and no plan is close to achieving it, you'll have to consider moving your vote to a different one. If no plan results in 12/29 votes, we don't follow through with it. If we do, every player is required to follow it, and if you do not, you are lynched. A plan must follow the format as outlined above in order to be eligible for voting. Now stop derping and get stuff done. | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 05 2011 22:20 sandroba wrote: @chaos13 as you can see my plan is extremelly pro-town and is gaining momentum. Now is the perfect time to discuss plans since the game has not even started. Most reasonable people are agreeing with it and others are trying to shut it down for no sane reason. If you don't agree with it you better provide some reason. We will not leave it to be discussed day1 when we have to focus on who to lynch. Also if you think I haven't done scum hunting so far you are in for a surprise. That's exactly why I posted that. This has it outlined in a clear manner that I can easily see, and I'm making sure I know what's going on by day 1. After sleeping on it I came to the conclusion that we do need some form of structure in regards to nukes. The plan GM just outlined looks good to me, so long as it isn't the 24 hour lynch-nuke-24 hour lynch. I say we do 1 lynch/day. That needs some clarification to me before I vote on it. Will we nuke the top lynch target at 24 hours? | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 05 2011 22:26 sandroba wrote: @chaos13 LOL why would you pass on the opportunity of having 2 lynches per night cylce? Because one of those lynches raises the radiation level and we have half the time to decide on each lynch. 1 well-discussed, well-thought out lynch > 2 hasty lynches that +1 Radiation Other than that I think the GMroba plan is brilliant, and I would vote for it without that. As it is though, I'm leaning towards Palmar's. The only problem with his is that I'm not sure there is great enough deterrence for nuking someone without good enough reason. | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
##Vote: Palmar's plan | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 05 2011 22:17 GMarshal wrote: GMrobas's Plan for Not Letting the Conspirator Win Nuke Policy One nuke is shot per day, if a majority of players (50%) agrees to it. no other nukes are fired for any reason Punishment Policy lynched, no excuses allowed, you fire, you die. Why double lynch, increased information, decent use of kp, no need to fire if its not necessary/an appropriate target cannot be deiced upon Support Its not a clusterfuck Other Tidbits Hi coag. ##Vote: GMroba's plan And I am all for not nuking anyone or anything today. If someone nukes, I say we lynch them. As for the campaigns, what I think it comes down to is whether we think the Axis or the Conspirator are a bigger threat. The Dunkirk Operation will be good if we manage to get rid of the conspirator quickly, but as it is the Axis will just use more nukes killing these players and we end up with dead Allies and higher radiation levels. Operation Watchtower is decent. It stops the Conspirator's progress completely for a day, removes Axis firepower, but also removes Allied firepower. This one would be more powerful later in the game when we need to keep ourselves alive. Operation Gunnerside is brilliant. Not only does it remove Axis firepower, it helps keep radiation levels down. It helps us and harms two threats - both Conspirator and Axis. ##Operation Gunnerside | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
| ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 06 2011 08:26 deconduo wrote: There's quite a few people lurking, we should start pressuring a few of them at least. I've been guilty of this, but I've been busy all day so I've just had a chance to skim through some posts and not be very active. I should be more active this evening and (hopefully?) tomorrow, but I've got stuff to do now that I'm done school. | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 05 2011 18:37 sandroba wrote: I sugest you go read WaW 1 before posting nonsense like this. How is controling nukes is gonna lead to disaster as oposed to NOT controling nukes? It's been proven already that if we don't control it leads to many townie deaths. People nuke each other out of spite and because someone else nuked a player and he flipped town. Mafia has measly 1 kp this game, if we get 2 days worth of lynch per night we are going to rape them, unless people go about killing each other. @Palmar can you provide reasoning as to why this plan is bad? Am I missing something, or is this a blatant scum slip? Where has Caller stated the mafia KP? | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
##Vote: sandroba | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 06 2011 09:18 kitaman27 wrote: Why are you proposing a formatting for plan submission without posting a plan yourself? That seems kinda weird. I didn't have a better plan, but I was confused about the ones that had already been suggested. This outline made sure that they were explained clearly, and organized people's opinions on them. Well, it would have if we had a longer N0. As it was, the day cycle started earlier than I expected it to. | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 06 2011 10:46 Curu wrote: Sandroba has a scumslip but at least he didn't vote for Operation Gunnerside (if he had after initial conversations with him, I would have bandwagoned the fuck out of him). That said IMO lurkers hurt Town more than anything else. With a full active playerbase Mafia has to be active meaning more chances for scumslips and important information leaking out. If they can just hide in the lurkers, we have nothing to go on. I'd like to lure out Cthsazsa, Zona , ~OpZ~ or gtrsrs as they haven't posted -anything- at all. Looks like there's one other for Zona so let's get that started. ##Vote: Zona ..you agree that he made a scum slip...and you vote for someone else. What the fuck? | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 05 2011 19:12 sandroba wrote: @Curu Based on last game. I thought I read it in the op, but it says "night kills", so I'm probably wrong. Still all the more incentive to have double lynches every day. Vigs work well because they are hidden and can claim their shot in thread afterwards to confirm themselves etc (since they are protown in most setups). Nukes are NOTHING like that because they have to be announced in thread, which tends to generate hate and retaliation when the player flips green and turn into a chain reaction of townie deaths. Independant thinking is gonna lead us to disaster, you can mark my words (or read WaW 1). If you want to nuke a player that badly just fucking explain us why and we will vote on it. Rest assured sandroba that if I leave my vote on you, it won't be for this. I'm back reading through the thread and taking notes so I'll have a better idea of what's going on in a bit. What time does Day 1 end? | ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
| ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 06 2011 10:55 sinani206 wrote: This post is scummy as fuck. It sounds like you and sandroba are both scum, and you screwed up by sharing his scumslip and now you want to come back and defend your ally. Why should your vote hinge (to use your word) on which operation he voted for? Your vote should be for the scummiest player. The whole lurker excuse is complete bullshit. ##Vote: sandroba I propose a nuke of Curu Not only is this an OMGUS, it encourages nukes. Do you really think your reads will be that accurate on Day 1? No nukes Day 1. | ||
| ||
