EPT##Signup
redff: demons can hide one lynch flip, angels have one NK role that does the same and town has only 4 power roles
Purgatory Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
##Signup redff: demons can hide one lynch flip, angels have one NK role that does the same and town has only 4 power roles | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
We can re-evaluate when it's best for corrupted players to claim when that becomes relevant, but currently I think claiming after getting to use your "sense dark" once seems like a good starting point. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Also due to voting being done via PM, pay close attention to the vote count here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12918700 The game utilizes instant majority lynch, meaning that the day ends as soon as majority is reached. Starting from day 2 demons can immediately hammer at -1 without giving away anyone on their team other than possibly the corrupted player, so do not vote without first looking at the vote counts. Even if we are likely to lynch someone, we shouldn't end days early. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On January 04 2012 23:24 xsksc wrote: Hi guys. First multi-factional game for me as well, not really sure how we should proceed strategy-wise. Lynching an angel day 1 would obviously be ideal, although getting a demon is definitely better than a townie. Yeah, and then he went on to be one of the only useful townies that actually read the game and used his brain. Syllo, if Palmar does decide to mess around on day one again, would it not be better to wait and see how he behaves later on (like in TLXVIII), rather than just lynching him? I would be completely fine with him "messing around" as long as he in the process allows me to determine his alignment with some accuracy (as in XLVIII). However I think the route he is taking here is apathy/low activity, which is more in line with him being scum. I'm obviously not going to lynch him purely based on that random comment and he has over two days to come up with something worthwhile. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On January 04 2012 23:27 Tyrran wrote: Okay, first of all, as many people already have stated, the angel of Death should be our first target. Not only does he hold the angel KP, but the main issue for me is that The roles and alignement of his victim is NOT revealed. This does not seem to be the case if the other Angels use the slay ability. Zona, can you confirm that the role and alignement of a player killed using the slay ability, by the Angel acolyte and/or the Angelic observer are revealed? Not knowing the alignement/role of a killed player is devastating for town. Is the demon hunter still alive? Is the seer? is the sage? how many demons remains ? Setting up a stratey with limited information on the blue roles still alive will be pretty hard. The Demons can also conceal a lynch, but they can only do it once a game, so it have a smaller impact. Actually, we can use the banish ability offensively to determine the role of scummy player. If the slay ability is not used one nigth, then the banished (or the transported) player are very likely to be the angel holding the power of the death ray, and they should be priority target for investingation/future banishement. Therefore we can banish one of the player we think is an angel and see if the slay ability is used that nigth. Note that if no corruption happens on even numbered nigths , its harder to conclude because Demons could have tried to corrupt an angel or the sage. There is no reason for us not to combine the benefits of both by protecting one of the likely night kill targets and at the same time almost certainly rule them out as the angel of death, especially on day 1. Did you even read what I said? Even if one or more of such players make themselves look towny before day 2, having a plan like this in place forces angels to consider their shots more carefully. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On January 05 2012 04:19 Blazinghand wrote: I assume you mean an IRL day or something here right? We're not made out of time. Bluelightz had 3 hours, and he spent them making one-liners and posts that were literally meaningless. I consider this play to be anti-town. I don't care who does it-- you could have done it, and it would be anti-town. Then he bails. Given that he knew he had to bail in a few hours, he could have made a post with, well, content. But he didn't. No, I meant the first in-game day, that is to say up to 72 hours. Get used to certain players not immediately establishing their innocence, because that is going to be the norm. Whether bluelightz is going to be one of them remains to be seen, but there are "veterans" who to some extent do it every game. The fact that it's anti-town does not mean the optimal play is to lynch them every game for it. If you can pressure them to contribute, that's fine. Also is Mr. Wiggles actually playing? I see he edited his only post to say "can't", but he is still on the player list. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Such a lynch is acceptable if I've no strong reads of course. Policy lynching is bad as it takes a long time to actually produce any results in the "metagame" and it's unlikely for the policy to have affect new players. If the game has mostly older players, we can lynch them based on them posting less than they should be based on what we know about their town play rather than attributing the lynch to some policy. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On January 05 2012 19:02 Palmar wrote: @Syllogism: You seem to be very much against lynching Bluelightz, do you want to explain to me why? Because people were picking on him for hurrrr not being helpful as scum in Student mafia and then for not posting anything useful within the first three hours of the game, just like everyone else. If he doesn't start posting something useful he might be a decent lynch possibility, but not because he didn't do anything within the first 3 hours. However I still don't see how this is your town play so how about we still lynch you instead. Do you have an excuse for not doing anything yesterday? I've one excuse in mind but I would like to hear it from you. Other than that, for instance lynching risk.nuke http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&user=76576 appears to make much more sense given that we know how he plays town and this clearly isn't it so far. Grackaroni is another given that his only contribution so far has been to randomly tunnel bluelightz for the aforementioned awful reasons. The list of worthless people so far: RoL, risk.nuke, cwave, xsksc, Palmar, Jackal, Erandorr, bluelightz Out of those Palmar is the one least likely to be this inactive as town. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Also, If he somehow IS scum they could totally bail him out with some purgatorying from the demon hunter, but nothing stops the lynch. The demon hunter is not only useful against demons. His attacks kill anything that isn't an angel....meaning if his target lives and wasn't sent to purgatory, he has successfully identified an angel. However, since he poses a significant threat to both angels and demons, I don't really see much of a reason for the demon hunter to ever claim, except perhaps to avoid a lynch if he fucks up and appears scummy. So please don't do that. It's quite weak however | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On January 06 2012 00:00 Palmar wrote: After Bluelight's latest list of only town/null reads and his wishy-washy-ness with accusing people I might actually just off him. I was kinda leaning maybe noob-town on him, but I don't like his last few posts. Do you think he would have made that long list of reads as scum? While his observations may be wrong, making the list requires reading the thread relatively carefully. It's possible, but I interpreted that as a slightly leaning town move from. I don't really like his "If I was in that situation then no. Because I lack sufficient information to make a correct move" post though as that sounds like a bit forced. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
| ||
