|
|
|
someone fun to hydra with should in!
|
I just realised this could be great for a larger game with noob/experienced player to get a bunch of new people.
|
|
|
On November 02 2011 22:56 kitaman27 wrote:
Introducing Team Kita, featuring redFF.
introducing team red21
|
|
|
On November 03 2011 03:16 Katzeleute wrote:
the image of Gollum skipping off into the sunset after everything brought a tear to my eye.
oh palmar do you want us to make team smurf accounts?
|
i would forget to do that
|
|
|
what an awful post gm, was gonna vote you but then i realised I ALREADY HAD
Palmar, could you add the team names to the op please!
it would make things a lot easier than having to go to page 9 errytime i forget the team names.
|
On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
We will defiantly have to rely on FOSing a lot more early on in the day, rather than pressure voting like a lot of us normaly do.
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote.
for the first part, i totally disagree. it's not like a pressure vote will turn into a 6 hour quicklynch, and if it does, then that's not always a bad thing. I prefer this method of voting tbh, don't look at it as a negative, but as a positive! Change is fun and exciting!
for the second part yes and yes.
|
On November 03 2011 08:21 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:12 redFF wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
We will defiantly have to rely on FOSing a lot more early on in the day, rather than pressure voting like a lot of us normaly do.
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. for the first part, i totally disagree. it's not like a pressure vote will turn into a 6 hour quicklynch, and if it does, then that's not always a bad thing. I prefer this method of voting tbh, don't look at it as a negative, but as a positive! Change is fun and exciting! for the second part yes and yes. LOL Red saying yes to both. Remember PYP:I, red? Where consistently a bunch of us kept saying you were scummy as hell, but ON was reasonable? It seems rather funny that you would be willing to only use one half of the two player unit as a basis for finding scum. Had we done that in PYP:I town would've had ample reason to shoot you in the face night 1. In answer to GreyMist's question, IMO we should consider the behavior of both players, particularly in cases where one player is known to be hard to read. If that person is paired with a relatively easy read, (damn I wish Mig was in this game hahaha) then I think we should lean more toward the person who is easier to read, for obvious reasons. The two player unit is very good for town. It provides us more information than we would normally have, as there is more behavior and there are more posts to analyze. Or at least, I hope this is how it turns out. If town starts succumbing to inactivity (as is the norm lately) I'll be rather pissed.
whatever bro, i was really busy in pypi and barely ever posted. you don't have to be a dick especially when you agree with me. of course we consider the behavior of both players but if one guy is obv scum you dont just go other guy looks town derp.
|
On November 03 2011 09:04 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 08:48 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. That doesn´t make sense. This tactic only help scum, Town don´t risk looking scummy from just knowing their role, so only scum would do this. Why are you thinking so much about a pro-scum tactic? This actually does not hinder town in any way. Since only the not-knowing person is actually posting and the other one paraphrasing, town does not lose a townie. You still have to do analysis with your teammate about all the other teams (without talking about own team), so you got all the pieces. If townie: your team actually plays as regular townie, so no harm If blue: your team plays as regular townie, so no extra eyes on you If scum: you play as town the first 2 days, you lose a lot of suspicion because of this.
and then you accidentally lead the bandwagon on your godfather....
|
On November 03 2011 09:06 hyshes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 09:01 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:57 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:48 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:41 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:39 prplhz wrote:On November 03 2011 08:33 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:29 GMarshal wrote:On November 03 2011 08:27 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 07:47 GMarshal wrote:
oh, wait, this is majority lynch. I knew I forgot to talk about something important.
For fucks sake, if you get someone to L-2 stop voting for him until the last 12 hours of the day, and give warning before hammering. Remember, more time is always good for town, and giving the lynchee time to dump information can only be good. Leaving the player at L-2 ensures we avoid any "accidental" lynches. Lynch minus two is three votes. Are you advocating that we just split the vote once someone reaches 3 votes?? I don't trust that this will be a great idea, particularly as people are often not available when you need them, and vote-splitting is great for scum. While we'd only need two more to lynch, that's not very comforting either. In such a situation we'd basically need to last-minute voteswitch if we think that we have a townie at 3 votes. Otherwise, we take the risk of no-lynch. Of course it opens us up to scum manipulation too. Scum can throw in a late vote "to stop a no-lynch" and then bam we lose a townie. I meant two votes to lynch, so if a player needs 7 to lynch, stop at 5. This policy would only be in effect for the first 36 or so hours of each day, but from personal experience, nothing sucks more than lighting bandwagons ending the day 3 hours in because everyone agrees someone is "scummy" and then seeing them flip green. GM are you not understanding what I'm saying? A person gets lynched at 5 votes. Lynch minus 2 is 3 votes. gm thinks this is a 12 player game hahahahahahaha Oh, frag, I forgot its a 9 team game. Oops. In my mind the smallest game that exists has 11 players :-P In that case I suppose I can live with leaving a player at L-1, but if anyone quickhammers I will rip them a new one. ... I'm suspicious, but I'll let this slide for a sec because something bigger just appeared On November 03 2011 08:42 hyshes wrote:On November 03 2011 08:31 Forumite wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. Tricky... Two posters means twice the risk of mistakes, I would have liked to say that means it´s twice as easy to find scum, but Town make stupid scumslips too. I think we´ll have to take it on a case-by-case basis. Actually the best way of playing this kind of mafia is splitting up your team. If only one of you knows your role, then only one can make mistakes. The only thing you need to do together is analysis of the other teams. To prevent any possible mistakes, must the one who knows the role only paraphrase what his teammate says. Ofcourse by the second night the one who knows should tell the one who don't (a few nights later depending on the size of the game). There is an obvious easy mistake to make here: the role should always be hidden, even it's town. What in the eff Pretending you don't know what your role is, is something that scum like to do. You're advocating people split their team up so your team makes less mistakes (townies should not be afraid of making mistakes, but scum should be). Town don't strive to prevent all mistakes. Town strive to find scum. That's it. On the contrary, it's SCUM who strive to prevent mistakes. They don't want to be caught. So...not only is your "plan" unworkable, the things you are suggesting we should do are what scum would do, not town. ##vote Team Edward Ouch that came out wrong :p Eventhough i still think this is the best way of playing team mafia, i'm not promoting it. Everyone read there msg, everyone knows there role so actually nobody can do what i've told. I was actually thinking this right when i subscribed for this game, thats why i asked if we made our teams ourself. I just didn't want to have someone else to profit from. but u are promoting it you wrote it in the thread why do you post something if u are not promoting it do u feel like you have to put something in thread so u just put something you thought of before game in there and then you have a post? actually i thought it would be received by cheers because of my insight in this team-game set up.. This is genuine the best way to play this kind of mafia.
ah
6/10
|
On November 03 2011 09:16 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 09:08 redFF wrote:On November 03 2011 08:21 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 03 2011 08:12 redFF wrote:On November 03 2011 08:00 GreYMisT wrote:
We will defiantly have to rely on FOSing a lot more early on in the day, rather than pressure voting like a lot of us normaly do.
One thing that will be interesting this game will be analyzing the behavior of teams. do we judge the 2 players as a unit, looking for scum behavior in both? Or is one player acting scummy enough to vote. for the first part, i totally disagree. it's not like a pressure vote will turn into a 6 hour quicklynch, and if it does, then that's not always a bad thing. I prefer this method of voting tbh, don't look at it as a negative, but as a positive! Change is fun and exciting! for the second part yes and yes. LOL Red saying yes to both. Remember PYP:I, red? Where consistently a bunch of us kept saying you were scummy as hell, but ON was reasonable? It seems rather funny that you would be willing to only use one half of the two player unit as a basis for finding scum. Had we done that in PYP:I town would've had ample reason to shoot you in the face night 1. In answer to GreyMist's question, IMO we should consider the behavior of both players, particularly in cases where one player is known to be hard to read. If that person is paired with a relatively easy read, (damn I wish Mig was in this game hahaha) then I think we should lean more toward the person who is easier to read, for obvious reasons. The two player unit is very good for town. It provides us more information than we would normally have, as there is more behavior and there are more posts to analyze. Or at least, I hope this is how it turns out. If town starts succumbing to inactivity (as is the norm lately) I'll be rather pissed. whatever bro, i was really busy in pypi and barely ever posted. you don't have to be a dick especially when you agree with me. of course we consider the behavior of both players but if one guy is obv scum you dont just go other guy looks town derp. Except I'm telling you straight up it's more complicated than that, and you should understand it simply because you and ON were that two headed monstrosity of confusion last game. All game long I remember talking to people (including Mig, Foolish, Kav) who kept saying, damn Jacuzzisplatt is scummy as hell. It was primarily because of you. I saw what they were seeing, but I didn't believe you two were scum because ON posted very reasonably and I talked to him for quite a bit on IRC. You, on the other hand, couldn't have been scummier. I think basing our reads on both players is necessary, but with the caveat that if we have conflicting reads on the two halves we need to take the one that's easier to read into account. Ex. if an incredibly easy-to-read player A looks scummy while his partner B (who is much harder to read) looks town then we should give more weight to the scum half. yes obviously
|
|
|
the only combination of 2 good players is
3. Radfield & wherebugsgo
and ME AND KITA OF COURSE
|
On November 03 2011 09:50 Erandorr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 09:40 redFF wrote:
the only combination of 2 good players is
3. Radfield & wherebugsgo
and ME AND KITA OF COURSE
lol
where is the lol coming from, do you agree with my assessment?
|
On November 03 2011 11:08 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 09:56 supersoft wrote:
okay nothing interesting came up, yet. one thing i want to point out.
if you're town, save all your conversations with your teampartner. if you're getting lynched, these conversations may provide something that speaks in favor of you.
I know scum will do that, too now... BUT it's a lot of work to fake logs. and why should we be gentle with these guys?! Yeah I'm going to have to disagree with that. This isn't post-conversation-to-try-to-make-people-trust-you. This is mafia. Let's try NOT using shit like this to "confirm" one another. I thought we already covered this topic in PYPI
NICE TRY SCUM WHO DOESN'T WANNA DO EXTRA WORK
|
On November 03 2011 21:40 GMarshal wrote:@Kita Yay! Relevance! Not
he's right about this though
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yZiEW.png)
