Sleeper Cell Mafia II

On January 26 2012 04:12 bumatlarge wrote:
By the by, if I get lynched day 1 and I flip DT, please don't ignore my reads

On January 26 2012 12:22 Radfield wrote:
/confirm




First things first, please do not do this. Consider: Mafia do not know who their partners are. Therefore, high up on the priority list of the mafia is figuring out who the other members are. We need to not let this happen easily. The mafia have access to several pieces of information we do not, most specifically the number of mafia in the game. Players popping out and saying they think there are X amount of mafia are immediately getting a note in my scum book. Why? It's one way for a mafia player to indicate he is mafia to the rest of the crew, without raising suspicion. Makes sense? So no speculation on mafia numbers please, at least not right now.

Second, mafia have very limited forms of communication this game, and from the looks of the Inception agent role, we can assume that town has some way to view their messages. This means mafia have to be extremely careful with what they write, so blatant things like lets kill X tomorrow are probably out. So mafia need a means to try to indicate to their brethren who should be getting hit. Imagine I am scum, I want to make sure that my buddies don't accidently send in hits on players I think are scummy, I want them to send in the hits on people I think seem like sure town. So what am I going to do? I'm going to repeatedly hammer it home in thread that I think Player Z is sure town. If there is general consensus among the group that player Z is town, he is a great target for mafia to lump in on.

We need to ensure this does not happen. Therefore I propose that NO ONE call anyone else town. Players are either scummy, very scummy, definitely scum, OR not scum. That is all. If you think someone is almost for sure town, you still just have to call them 'not scum'.

Benefits: Stops mafia from finding clear night-kill targets, and increases the chance of them shooting themselves.

Cons: Possibly leaves us low on town leaders. Certain players may spend too much time going after obvious townies.

Likewise, we should not be making medic lists. If you think a particular player should receive protection, that's probably cool, but no listing 3 or 4 people. In this game, that's just giving mafia a clear list of targets to shoot at, which is exactly what they need(a list). Medics in this scenario should be protecting whomever is most likely to die anyways, as there is no WIFOMing your medic protect around.

Third, and this is straight out of resistance mafia, no talking about mafia strats. We simply do not talk about optimal mafia moves, or likely moves, as that is simply a way for mafia to galvanize their actions together. In a game with minimal mafia interaction, we need to ensure that they cannot use the thread to disseminate information

So this game we talk about townie strats and townie moves, not mafia ones. On the flip side we do not call people likely town or town, we call them not scum or varying degrees of scum. Thoughts? Agreement or Disagreement?

On January 26 2012 12:46 Navillus wrote:
I agree with Radfield though I wish you hadn't mentioned the possibility of the inception agent seeing their messages, I agree that they probably would realize that but now they know for sure, and usually I say assume mafia is playing optimally but this is different because any noob scums aren't in communication to vet scums and so might have slipped up. Obviously we can't not talk about what mafia is likely to do at all though so basically I'm saying just be very careful with what you post about what we might have/do and they might have/do, and people who post a lot about that are very suspicious as that would be an easy way to transfer info.

On January 26 2012 12:57 Radfield wrote:


Not sure I follow. The idea is that you shouldn't be calling anyone town or probably town. You should either call them scummy(or some degree of scummy) or 'Not Scum'. ie: Don't reveal the degree to which you think someone is town, as that is a way for mafia to communicate, and a way for mafia to galvanize their hits onto townies.

Or were you asking something else?

On January 27 2012 01:56 Radfield wrote:
You have to be joking Cwave -_-

On the bright side, Cwave was kinda bad during election mafia too(he tunneled me all game), and threw around pretty random accusations. Tragically it's par for the course so far.

Very possible his 5 words thing is a scum-slip, but also possible that he pulled it from hesmyrr's post as he said.


Jackal, I'd like to see you post at least 5 or 6 more times during Day1.

On January 27 2012 02:13 Radfield wrote:


Yeah I can keep track if you like :D

You have a tendency to coast as scum. This is something you surely agree with. I'd like to see you not coast.




Agreed. Blazinghand what other games have you played with Cwave?

On January 27 2012 04:25 Zephirdd wrote:
Let me summarize the plan for you guys.

Don't worry about semantics, just try to not create leaders. This way scum won't have a solid target.

Why is it so hard to understand something that simple?

On January 27 2012 04:34 GGQ wrote:


<3

On January 27 2012 05:03 Zephirdd wrote:


Let me exemplify what he means, as it seems you couldn't understand from his last example.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&currentpage=15#287

This is what should not be done. Go ahead, defend someone and call him town(or "not scum"), that's not a problem. The problem would be to throw "this guy is town" left and right on the thread. The problem would be to say "Since this guy is saying this, then I trust him" instead of making your own analysis.

Come on, he basically asks us to not create useful lists and to not sheep. I do agree that his choice of wording is horrible, but that's what I can get from it. It's simple, really.

On January 27 2012 07:55 bumatlarge wrote:
And on that note, it's no where near certain that cwave slipped, he just might have done his homework.

(from last game)


iGrok didn't put this in the OP so it is very possible this role isn't in the game, or at least it functions very differently.

On January 27 2012 10:16 Zephirdd wrote:
Jackal, you do realize that you need to post that on the voting thread
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=306315

right?

On January 27 2012 23:04 Radfield wrote:
Yeah, I think Cwave is a bad lynch right now. I also think Navillus is a poor lynch, his posting doesn't strike me as scummy.



You're right, and I kinda wish I hadn't posted that. However I doubt it will be particularly useful for mafia. The only reason I posted it in the first place was to try and illustrate my point, which several people thought(and still think!) was just about semantics.



Can you please point out what you're talking about? I'm worried that you're still talking about this paragraph:



Do you honestly not understand the point I was trying to make? And where is the so called breadcrumb in this post? And to what effect?

On January 27 2012 23:31 Radfield wrote:
The more I think about this Jackal, the more I think you're being deliberately obtuse. You've slowly been ramping up to this point(that I must be scum), yet with no reason to do so.

You're stating that I'm am absolutely scum, when there is basically zero reason for you to think that. You are also deliberately refusing to adequately explain yourself, because that would show your entire point to be invalid.

On January 28 2012 01:25 Blazinghand wrote:
I legitimately spent some time not calling out Meapak just to see how long he'd lurk without being called out. It turns out that amount of time is "literally more than a day". He's going to come back and tell us how he was busy, he needs to catch up on the thread, etc, and then he's gonna try to half-ass some analysis out close enough to the deadline that it won't change anything then comfortably lodge himself into a wagon.

Except instead we're gonna hang him

On January 28 2012 03:39 Radfield wrote:
You're either being obtuse by refusing to explain to me why you think I am scum, or I suppose I am obtuse for failing to understand where you have laid out your problems.

Assigning varying degrees of scumminess is ALWAYS useful. It happens every game, and I don't understand how you can object to it. Lets say I have 4 players I think are scum, obviously I don't think they are equally likely to be scum. They all have degrees of scumminess, and I'm going to indicate that when I post my reads. What are you even arguing here?

Can someone else please explain to me what Jackal is objecting to, because I really don't see it(or understand it).

On January 28 2012 05:17 Radfield wrote:



That makes much more sense, and actually gives me an idea to why the line put you off. Realize that I probably spent about 3 seconds writing that line.

I disagree that the line "don't call others town" would have done the same purpose. It likely would have for some people, but look at the sheer volume of people who misunderstood my post, DESPITE me putting in the extra examples, etc. I strive for clarity in my posts(and I obviously failed hard with that one) and I tried to make my point crystal clear. That is the reason that line exists. It's not a code, it's not a breadcrumb, it's just an example in an effort to illustrate my point.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Look, just forget about that, and take my posting as a whole. If you still feel like this is somehow scum-radfield, then fine, but please don't vote me on the basis of one throw-away line - A throw away line that no one else(that i can tell) even finds scummy.