EPT
Well, I promised to play if this game ever got set up, so play I shall.
/in
My Little Pony Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
Well, I promised to play if this game ever got set up, so play I shall. /in | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
In all seriousness, though, I myself have a hard enough time posting in Mafia games without restrictions, so having additional rules to follow or needing to stay in character would only exacerbate my difficulties. Besides, as Personality Mafia showed, posting restrictions can make both reading and playing the game a lot harder for everyone, especially if one or two players take their posting restrictions a little too far or get carried away "roleplaying" their assigned personality. So, I'd rather not have to face that this game, if that's all right. | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
| ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
| ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
With the way the show is written, though, I do like all the members of the Mane Six, because I feel like I can relate to every one of them in some way. Which is why, despite not knowing anything about My Little Pony before this series, I'm now addicted to MLP:FIM. Sadly, I have no videos to share.  I don't really know much about the culture surrounding the show, especially the brony phenomenon. Oh well, yay ponies! | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
On September 13 2011 02:12 Forumite wrote: Lucidity, dreamflower and wherebugsgo are the only ones I haven´t played a game with (WBG died immediately after joining as a replacement, so he doesn´t count). Have you played a lot of Mafia? I've played in about 5-6 games on TL Mafia, most of them pretty early on, when the "TL Mafia" games were followed by a single-digit number. Or at least a number under 20, anyway. So, of the players here, I've played with tnkted and (I think) OriginalName once in PYP Insane, but that's pretty much it. Also, I am not "really good," hmph. In fact, I think I'm pretty bad at Mafia games. But I do like My Little Pony, which is why I'm here anyway. On September 13 2011 01:12 Forumite wrote: Yeah, yeah, all right, but what to talk about? It´s more or less a first day, what is there to discuss? I have to agree, I'm a bit at a loss too. Normally, I think we would discuss roles and plans on Day One, considering we don't have to elect a Pony Mayor. With the closed setup, though, none of us have any idea what roles are out there, so I think it would be too speculative to spend a lot of time concocting plans or good uses for certain roles' abilities if it turns out those roles don't even exist. Nor do we know which characters have been made into roles, so it's pretty hard to start guessing about their abilities or alignments. Especially when GMarshal explicitly stated that roles don't reflect alignment. I guess one thing we should probably do, though, is not digress too much into pony-related discussions from now on (or at least definitely when Night begins), as much as I like talking about the show. First, it would get spammy, and even with the lovely new "filter" option, I'd rather not have to go back later and read lots of posts about MLP instead of the game. Second, I think it gives Mafia an easy way to look active and post a lot without contributing. I think that usually on Day One, with an absence of information, the usual route is to ask everyone to contribute and look for the players who are being inactive. If the Mafia can get away with hiding in plain sight by posting a ton about the show, that would hurt the town a lot. | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
At the moment, I am more in favor of lynching an inactive, because town lurkers still don't help the town if they're not sharing their thoughts or giving us information and Mafia lurkers are, well, Mafia. I am currently unconvinced by the cases so far, as they tend to be based on post-by-post analyses of posts made on Day 1, when most of us were unsure of what we should be discussing or trying to accomplish. Generally, I tend to be skeptical of post-by-post analysis, as they often are just nitpicking at small contradictions or confusing phrases in posts that perhaps the poster just didn't think through clearly and they seem to assume that Mafia will give themselves away a little in every post, which they usually don't. Right now, the cases made against Forumite and Greymist strike me as being more like townies accusing townies, so I'm hesitant to vote for a lynch based on those cases. I did think it was a little odd that Forumite asked for a DT check on Jackal. But it seems like Jackal is a pretty well-known player, so I suppose it makes sense that he is subject to the scrutiny that well-known players tend to receive, like Ver or Ace. Jackal himself also seems quieter than I expected, though perhaps that is only because it is so early in the game. So, I would much prefer lynching a lurker right now. The lurkers that stand out most to me are Sevryn and DroneAllDay. Of these two, the latter has specifically stated that he is very new and will be lurking a lot, which on one hand could be an honest statement of confusion but on the other hand could be a Mafia trying to look like a clueless newbie. The former, Sevryn, has made only a few game-related, non-pony-discussing posts, most regarding the Day post and how it'll give us more to talk about. Yet, he himself hasn't said anything substantial after the Day post except "Oh yay Day post. So, what are the Elements of Harmony?" I would very much like to hear from these two players sometime soon. I also wouldn't mind hearing about everyone's thoughts regarding the merits and flaws of lynching inactives versus lynching someone in particular. | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
For now, I guess I will just vote for DroneAllDay. And learn to refresh the page a lot better while I'm posting. ##vote DroneAllDay | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
On September 14 2011 00:32 Jackal58 wrote: Dreamflower lynching inactives is counter productive. Inactives are most likely going to be mod killed. Lurkers on the other hand are a different animal. There is a difference between the two. When you said inactives I'm pretty sure you were still referring to lurkers. Ah, true. Yes, I was referring to lurkers when I said inactives. My apologies. A lot of my thinking still dates back to the olden days before inactivity modkills or the Ban List, so please excuse me if I phrase things oddly like that. I also agree about OriginalName, whom I'm a little annoyed about not noticing myself. I also noticed that DroneAllDay's statement of Mafia newness came very soon after he signed up and long before roles were sent out, so that pretty much rules out his being a Mafia trying to masquerade as a newbie. My mistake there. OriginalName's one contribution to the thread after the Day post has been to call Forumite's post "a huge pile of fluff," but after that he hasn't said anything else at all. That does look more like lurking than outright inactivity. To add my own opinion on the merits of lynching lurkers, I think it is a good idea early on, when we don't have much information to work with. I agree that lynching lurkers doesn't yield much information afterward, but I don't think going after "real" targets always does either. The people who argue for a townie to be lynched or vote for their lynch are not necessarily Mafia themselves. So, I don't think either approach can give us much in the way of useful information. | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
On September 14 2011 03:54 wherebugsgo wrote: We gain next to nothing by lynching a lurker, unless of course that lurker happens to be mafia. Lurkers, by definition, haven't contributed anything. Thus, except in exceptional circumstances, we can't really link them to anyone else, and we can't even be sure about their flip until they die. It's just an unreliable scumhunting method IMO. With your last sentence you can easily replace "townie" with "lurker". What happens when the townie is also a lurker? Then, what's up with you concluding that neither approach can give us much useful information? If you think neither method is good, then wtf do we do? Do we go after behavioral clues, which are easiest to spot among active players, or do we lynch lurkers? I'm not understanding your conclusion, you don't really suggest what we should do. First, yup, I am old-timer-ish. It is nice to meet you too. Second, what I was trying to say in my awkward, inarticulate way is that if we lynch someone who is widely believed to be a "real target" and he flips green, we don't necessarily get any more information than if we lynch someone who is lurking. The people who accused them or started building cases against them might just have been misled or confused townies. What is worse about the former situation is that, when people try to build early cases against someone and get them lynched and then the lynchee flips green, the town often turns around and starts accusing the people who originally accused the green lynchee. This can turn into a self-destructive pattern for the town, which I was wanting to avoid starting on Day One. Lynching a lurker early on will at least avoid creating any sort of accusational crossfire for the following days, so it seems to me to be less potentially destructive (but admittedly not at all informative, as you've noted) if it fails and we lynch a townie. In the long run, of course we should look at behavior, voting patterns, and even night hits for finding Mafia. (For night hits, I mean that if the Mafia hits So-and-so at night, we should go back and read So-and-so's posts to see if they might have said anything that would've gotten Mafia scared enough to hit them, like an accusation, a good case, or even making a good point about the game setup.) But right now, for our first lynch, I think it would be better to lynch a lurker on Day One. On September 14 2011 04:35 wherebugsgo wrote: So you want us to lynch into this list: Lurkers
9.) OriginalName 11.) sinani206 If and only if we don't have a more active, scummy target? So, yes to the above post. No one right now is jumping out at me as being active and scummy, so I would prefer lynching a lurker this early in the game. | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
To answer Lucidity's questions, the reason that I thought the cases against Forumite and Greymist seemed like a situation of "townies accusing townies" is because I don't think Mafia would stick their necks out like that and either create plans for the town or openly build cases against another player, which is what I believed Forumite and the people who accused him or Greymist were doing. My instinct is usually that Mafia like to blend in, avoid drawing suspicion, and maybe nudge the town along inconspicuously, instead of making themselves visible and thus accountable by trying to direct blues or constructing cases about people. But I have been known to be wrong about that in the past, so maybe you are right and I shouldn't have been so dismissive; I honestly don't know. My displeasure about Sevryn's post wasn't due to his vote for Forumite, but because I accused him of lurking in my post only to see that he ninja'ed me by posting and voting while I was writing. I wasn't really focused on his vote; I just felt like an idiot saying he was a lurker when he stopped being a lurker right before I said it, so I made a grumpy face. I still think trying to lynch lurkers on Day One is a good policy to follow, especially in this closed setup, but now that no one is really lurking anymore (DroneAllDay has checked in and voted; I'm going to let OriginalName/Curu off the hook for now, because it seems like ON must have been too busy to play if he needed to replace out and Curu is definitely being active; and sinani206 has posted a lot too since then), I am going to go back and reread everyone's posts. Right now, there are many accusations going back and forth, and I would like some time their quality and accuracy before placing my vote. ##unvote DroneAllDay | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
As GreyMist posted earlier here, sinani206 was actively lurking early in Day One with three very general posts about the Day post and majority lynch. He apparently also thought Forumite was our best lynch target but does not post to express his agreement or views, even though the main argument about Forumite and Greymist were happening then. He then posts about twelve hours later, when Curu replaces OriginalName and immediately votes for sinani, to place his vote on me. This is also where he says that he believed Forumite was a perfectly good lynch candidate before the lynching-lurkers idea was introduced, though he does not say why he thought Forumite was so lynch-worthy. However, sinani says that the vote on me is merely a "pressure vote" because he wants an explanation of why lynching lurkers is better than lynching a perfectly good candidate. I should point out here that I was only one of many people who thought lynching lurkers would be a good idea; Nisani and Jackal were others, yet sinani has yet to put any pressure on them for being in favor of lynching lurkers. In addition, while the discussion on lynching lurkers was actually occurring, sinani never speaks up against it, even though other people objected to lynching lurkers or had reservations on who qualified as lurking or inactive. Furthermore, the topic of lurkers actually came up much earlier (in fact, it was part of Forumite's post that started the cases against him, most notably chaos13's) and sinani206 said nothing about lurkers then, either, whether to agree with Forumite or chaos13 about what to do with them. After this, when Curu continues accusing him, he switches his vote from me to Curu, with the reason that Curu is an idiot. He does not state a concrete reason why, except that Curu is being "super scummy" and voted for him. His insisting that no one answer Curu's questions to other players about their ideas also makes it look like he was trying to stifle discussion, even though discussion is widely agreed to be a good place to find information (particularly in a no-PMs game). This struck me as particularly confusing because Curu wasn't even asking about roles, just people's thoughts and rationales for specific votes and stances, which shouldn't be all that helpful to the Mafia. The impression sinani206 gives is that he was reading the thread, but didn't post his thoughts about his "perfectly good lynch candidate" or his opposition to lynching lurkers until both Greymist and Curu voted for him and accused him. This seems like active lurking to me. In addition, sinani's "polls are scummy" posts appear to want to stifle discussion in response to Curu's questions, even though discussion is the only way the town can communicate in this game with each other. He also has yet to express any real opinions and reasoning in this thread, aside from that he doesn't like the idea of lynching lurkers and thinks Curu is an idiot. So, I will vote for sinani206 for lynching today. ##Vote sinani206 | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
Well, at least we can try getting some information from the voting patterns that resulted in sinani's lynch. When a townie gets lynched, I think it's important to look at the last few people who voted for the lynch. In this case, the last three votes happened surprisingly quickly, considering how much contention I felt existed between the different people on the chopping block. That means we should probably be looking at Lucidity, Jackal, and wherebugsgo. The voter who stands out to me the most, out of these three, is wherebugsgo. Before the lynch, wherebugsgo kept saying that he didn't think sinani was Mafia and he strongly believed sinani was town. He even says at one point, "I'm not gonna vote sinani because I don't think we should lynch him today. How goddamn hard is it for you morons to understand this?" After saying all this, however, wherebugsgo not only votes for sinani to be lynched, but casts the deciding 7th vote. He is clearly aware that he is casting the decisive 7th vote to lynch sinani too, as he says, "Oops, I just noticed we only have 6 votes on Sinani" and votes for him. But then, in another post afterward, he says, "I'll actually be pretty surprised if sinani is scum. I don't believe a bandwagon on a scum would pile up so fast." This pattern shows that he doesn't think sinani is Mafia and is indeed quite sure he is a townie, but votes for him to die anyway. If he felt so strongly that sinani was town before the lynch, why did he even vote for him? With that kind of certainty, it might have been better to vote for someone else and cause a no-lynch, rather than end up lynching someone he was sure was town, even if they were playing poorly as town in his opinion. No one was forcing him to vote for sinani, either; there were still a number of people who voted for other people. However, even though wherebugsgo continually states that he thinks sinani is town and implies that lynching him is a mistake, he votes for him anyway and gets him lynched. His actions contradict his posts, which is extremely suspicious. | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
I guess some of this can be attributed to the frustration of anticipating a no-lynch to happen. But it's still weird that wherebugsgo keeps saying that he thinks sinani isn't Mafia and he's never seen a bandwagon form this quickly for a real Mafia, but jumps on the bandwagon anyway and casts the deciding vote against sinani. | ||
|
dreamflower
United States312 Posts
I guess it really would have been frustrating to not have a lynch happen last night, though. Considering how starved we are for information, I can't fault you for that. Sorry for the "hammer," wherebugsgo; I just thought the change of heart was really striking at first, though it is understandable. By the way, wherebugsgo, can you restate your case against tntked again, please? I went back over your posts, and it seemed like you were accusing him of wishy-washiness and sheeping Lucidity at one point. Is that about right? I just want to be clear on why you wanted to lynch him last night. | ||
| ||
