EPTHammer Mini Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
| ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
1) You can have a greater voting power then 5 during the day period? If 3 people traded you 3 votes each during the night you could be at 10? Correct? 2) Whenever you vote do you use all your voting power or can you choose to use less then your maximum voting power? | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
| ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
| ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
| ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
Its funny how you can think of a plan to do this and you think you had it figured out. Then Sentinel post before me with a plan that is easier, smarter and better. I'm just not that smart i guess =/ {speculation} I think its quite safe to assume that both town and mafia have powerroles. I also believe that some of the roles are attached to the votepower mechanic. Maybe a powerrole that only activates with a certain amount of votes? Or you need to have less then a certain amount? {/speculation} | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
On January 26 2012 17:54 wherebugsgo wrote: Here's my attitude when it comes to speculation: 1. Does it help us find scum? If yes, then cool. If no, then on to #2. 2. Does it help us find/establish townies? If yes, then cool. If no, then #3: 3. Does it help us to not get fucked over by some broken scum mechanic? If yes, then cool. If not, then #4: 4. If you got here then you shouldn't be speculating Since your speculation falls under #4, why are you doing it? What purpose does this serve? I disagree. As long as you don't take the speculation and add it to real information gained later I see no reason not to speculate now. Speculating might open up ideas/possibilities for others that they have yet to realize themself - myself included. Also it provides discussion at the start of day 1. | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
On January 26 2012 18:45 wherebugsgo wrote: So what goal does your speculation achieve? I'm really curious about this. Did you just not quote the post where i wrote it? | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
This also leads to a lot of WIFOM on the person who gets more votes after the night kill. WIFOM on whether or not they are possible mafia. Yes. Mafia will be able to control who gets extra votes depending on who they kill. Will they gives extra votes to themself or to a townie? I don't see this as a problem the first few days but later on Mafia might be able to just kill the right person to gain the majority of the voting power if we continue with this plan. What if we just decided our self who to gives votes and how many and also wrote in the thread who we gave votes to? That would give complete transparency over the night votetrading. It will be harder for mafia to shuffle votes around among themselves and I don't see how mafia can lie about the nighttrading even though they are the last to post their actions. They can of course lie among themselves who gave who, but if all town post the thruth (and they should) there are no way that town should not know where mafia votes went. How much info this gives us are relative. With no flips it can be hard to look back and with certainty determine anything out of votetrades but there would be less confusion about who gave who votes. People would also be able to see where votes goes before they trade their own votes. This might mean that we don't get a, potential scummy, person with a big part of the voting power. Could also make a big confusion where everyone keep changing who they gives votes to... | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
I don't know if you misunderstood the mechanic or I misunderstood your post. It IS possible to have more then 5 votes during the daytime. If everyone give their votes to palmar he could potentially have 31 votes day 2. Come night 2 he would have to give away atleast 24 votes to one person. I think that paperscraps have a point that we need to agree on a method to control the votes. 1) and 2) are only viable for a short amount of time (as lay pointed out) but can be good in the start to keep votes spread out. 3) is the best way to continuosly keep track of where people put their votes. | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
That one person have 4 votes instead of 3 during day2 and the potential to have 5 votes and everyone else still have 3 on day3 is not something that I find particularly scummy. Even if mafia want to hammer on day3 they can't since they will only have 14 of the 38 votes. If they during the night2 trade differently then we planned they can potentially got to 18 votes day3. It only gets scummy if someone suggest to continue with the plan - and no one have. (This assume that 1 townperson dies in possesion of 2 votes each day and night. 4 person and 8 votes total. Also assume that everyone trade 1 vote each night) Given that there might be power out there to influence votingpower I don't think we should be using the "Everyone trade 1 vote to player below" plan more then night 1. After that option 3) is a much better alternative. | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
We should go with voting with 1 vote to the next person for night1. I don't think its a valid plan on Night2. If people don't follow that we lynch them. On January 27 2012 13:09 LSB wrote: Since I still have about 2 days to get things done I will temporarily abstain myself from doing analysis and focus sole on pushing forth my plan. What?! No you may not abstain from scumhunting when you propose a plan that is basicly the same as everyone else is saying + a selfcorrection mechanism that is wrong. Risk: Why can't you see that a votecircle (atleast night1) is the best way to make sure that mafia don't get a big amount of the votes? If everyone just give away 1 vote to whoever they want mafia will most likely give votes to themself and some town will give a vote to scum. This means scum will get an increase in votes. That increase could be anything from 0-11. If you can't see that you are either not very smart or scum deliberatly trying to make us not follow this plan. Palmar: You are disinterested and obstructive to the town. I don't like it! Get your head in the game! | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
Since we haven't agreed by now I think we should agree to disagree. Would be better to continue plans during nightphase. ##Vote Prplhz On January 26 2012 18:28 prplhz wrote: Everybody should give away as many votes as they can every day. This is a good idea because it will prevent scum from eliminating voting power through night kills, and voting power will only get eliminated through the lynch which is more likely to hit scum than night kills. Free trade or circle trading. Giving as few votes as possible seems to be best. That way least amount of town votes can potentielly end up at scum. Why would I, when I know my own allignment, give votes to a potential scum? I won't! This statement is weird and I find it scummy. If you read this post (clicky) it just seems to come from scum perspective. On January 27 2012 07:06 prplhz wrote: + Show Spoiler + lol i wrote the post again and then my computer crashed and i was like *RAAAAAAGE* but then my browser had actually saved the post! We have at least 3 mislynches until LYLO, with the low KP of mafia this will likely be a long game, which ultimately favors town. I think the game would be somewhat balanced with all vanilla, but that would be boring so there are likely roles out there. Medics and veterans seem a lot stronger in a game where scum only has 1 KP, they can render an entire night useless for scum. Vigilantes on the other hand seem less powerful since there are no flips. Investigation roles are going to be a lot more powerful, but also harder to breadcrumb the results of since you cannot rely on your flip as a trigger for people to go back and find them, and you cannot rely on town to pick them up while hiding them for scum. Themed roles are a distinct possibility, yes they are. Ultimately, the only thing we can rely on is analysis, so provide content and provide analysis, duh. If some dude died who is scum, but everybody thinks he's town this will be a lot better for scum, so lynching people off hunches is not going to work. No-lynching might also be an option at some point. Any plan that rests on a premise other than "You are town" can hardly ever be reliably implemented. Plans are often only good for examining the setup and for starting the game up. The only plan I can see right now which rests only on that single premise is "Give a single vote to the person you think is most likely to be town. If you have a reason to think you're going to die, consider giving all of your votes to that person." We should not tell people who we're going to give our votes to during the night but instead during the following day. The italic part is also written from a scum perspective. The whole process of saying how the roles affect scum seems to be from someone who is on the recieving end of the power roles. While everyone could think this, I don't think a town person would write it and certainly not in this way. The rest of the post is basicly fluff and nothing. After this he tell us to not lynch risk. Vote WBG and then go on the longest shoppingtrip ever. He is scum! | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
If I had to consolidate now the only valid target is Sentinel. I just don't really feel that Sentinel is more scummy then Prp at this moment so I'll leave my vote on Prp. | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
| ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
And we should lynch chaoser... | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
| ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
I gave him 1 vote because i think he is town. I was just playing with him Purgatory (he was scum) where he played differently then what he does now. | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
On January 30 2012 11:00 chaoser wrote: Dirkzor: It starts off with a post that I thought was pretty useless, basically repeating sentinel's idea http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=303505¤tpage=11#208 and then he moves onto speculating about roles, another completely useless topic. WBG calls him out on it. His posts that follow afterwards call for others to scumhunt while he does nothing, only telling Palmar to get into the game. The play seemed very passive at this point so I wasn't that suspicious. It was when he called out prplhz that I started to wonder. The concept of giving away more or less votes doesn't establish and can't really be used to decide if someone is scummy or not. That's like using different people's preferences for the circle-jerk v the free trade idea as a measure of scumminess, with people who wanted a different plan from you being considered "scummy". Bad reasoning and this made it seem like he was grasping at something that wasn't there. This, once again, is bad logic. How can you tell if something is written from a scum perspective or not? Once again it seems like he's trying to suggest something that is not there at all. Welcome to the game. This post on Prp intended to do two thing: pressure Prp and start lynch discussion instead of trade plans. Prp did not respond to my post before I had to go out so I left my vote there. I agree that my case was not in any way solid. But his posting up until that point gave me the vibe so I went with it. Trying to describe a feeling is hard. But when I read his posts it felt like he was seeing the poweroles from the perspective of someone who was scum. I still read it that way. How can you tell if something is written from a scum perspective or not? Stupid question. It they way it percieved by the reader. This whole game is about how things are percieved by the audience you write to. You can write the same statement in several different ways and the percieved outcome will be different even though the statement is the same. But regarding Prp. His posting have been a lot better since I voted for him. His interest in the lynch suggest to me that he is not scum. | ||
|
Dirkzor
Denmark1944 Posts
On January 30 2012 16:40 prplhz wrote: Can you tell me how he's playing differently and how this makes him more town? He is asking questions this game. He is writing statements. He have an opinion. While he is not the one with the most or longest posts his posts have had something to tell. In Puragtory he did not do any of those things. | ||
| ||
