EPTFor the hosts, this is my second game, the first was newbie mini mafia IV under a hydra account.
Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
For the hosts, this is my second game, the first was newbie mini mafia IV under a hydra account. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
7. Whomever has the most votes at the end of the day will be lynched! So just to double check, we're not using a majority lynch system? | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
On June 22 2012 14:29 BassInSpace wrote: So just to double check, we're not using a majority lynch system? Um just gonna ask again since it seems my question got buried. Sorry if it seems like a stupid question but I just wanted to double check since from what I've seen most TL games use a majority lynch system? | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
On June 24 2012 00:24 JieXian wrote: erm actually since I'm at +8 gmt wouldn't there be a problem for me when it comes to voting? I'd have to vote a lot earlier than everyone else You're not the only one, I'm at +10 GMT. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
Now, I interpreted hopeless1der's post to mean that we should lynch those who are actively lying/trying to mislead town (aside from blues protecting themselves, of course). Release, I do really think you were arguing semantics here. Obviously someone putting effort and logic into building their case, but turns out to be wrong shouldn't be lynched even though that could be technically considered "being caught in a lie". That's all I'm going to say about this argument, which has wasted a lot of discussion time IMO. Esspen, your contributions to the thread so far: On the policy: I believe we should try to identify and lynch mafia first. Simple policy, but with great results Which is the whole point of the game and stating the obvious... I do not get all that "lynch the liar" for several reasons. Townies obviously cannot know whether someone lied or not, only clues they can grasp onto are inconsistencies and vagueness. The only players who know the truth are scums and if the whole game is going to revole around us identifying who lied, mafia is going to win rather easy. Mafia can win just by ereasing their memory that they are mafia and simply playing with a mindset of a townie, leaving townies lyinching each other as they find innocent inconsistencies in their speeches (ie posts). Secondly, even blues have to lie in order to survive. But that also means when I say "I am mafia." you should lynch me no matter whether it is true or not, as if I'm telling the truth, you just lynched mafia, and if it is not true you lynched liar. (breaks my heart ) But I believe we should try to identify and lynch blues first, confusing mafia and leaving them vulnerable... And this post. No one is saying we should focus on finding liars. Lies will be just some of the evidence we will use to build up cases against the mafia. And did you just say we should actively find and lynch blue roles? This is some pretty bizarre logic, and you can bet that the rest of the players in this game will be questioning you when they see that post. That had better be some catastrophic typo, or you'd better have a good explanation for that. If you don't, by the next time you post, I will be placing my vote on you for trying to fish for blue roles. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
I don't see how a lie could possibly help town. Town players are supposed to establish their innocence by being open and honest in their posting, lying does not help to achieve this. Special cases apply where blue roles are concerned of course, but we shouldn't be trying to find blue players and forcing them to lie in the first place. Thus, I am inclined to lynch all liars. As for lynching lurkers, things get a bit murky for me. Both lynching and not lynching lurkers hurt town in my first game, so this is something that depends on the situation. I am of the opinion that we should stick to our convictions and vote for who we actually think is mafia, rather than stack our votes on a lurker because of pressure from other players (remember, lurkers are easy targets for mafia to bandwagon). This is where I stand on those 2 policies. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
Okay then...which lurker are we lynching? Im seeing Aegon, NrGmonk and BioSC as our prime candidates. You have a FOS on esspen, who you already said you find suspicious for trying to bring attention back to release, but then you ask which of our "prime candidates" out of those 3 we should lynch? If policy lynching really is the last resort, should you not be pressuring esspen more, or waiting closer to the voting deadline when there has been more activity before you start wanting to lynch lurkers (by my count there are still 22 hours until the deadline)? That is the whole point of a last resort. I really don't like how much attention you were putting on voting for lurkers before BiosC responded to you. I'm not sure if you'll get to see this and respond any time soon because of time zones, but I will hold off putting my vote on you until I go to bed just in case you manage to post before then. As for esspen, I really don't know. That really is just way too obvious a move for mafia to make as others have said, but I am getting a stronger read from hopeless1der. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
5. In the event of a tie the person with the most votes first is lynched. 6. Voting is mandatory. You may NOT abstain. 7. Whomever has the most votes at the end of the day will be lynched! Because of this, I am very hesitant to decide between BioSC and hopeless1der right now with the current info in the thread, since this will be my last post for the night and I may not be around in time for the deadline. Both players' cases against each other are not enough to convince me, and I would love to be able to analyse both players' posting more. Hopefully I have the time in the morning to read more, but I doubt I will have time to post thorough reasoning for my vote (will be on my phone as well). For now however, I am going to vote for roflwaffles55. On June 25 2012 14:37 roflwaffles55 wrote: Good to see that we already have some conversation going + Show Spoiler + even if it is just Release flailing his FoS everywhere. :D Figure I'll address a couple of the policy points with my opinions while I'm here. I haven't really seen a good reason to NL early game, so I'd prefer a mislynch to a NL day 1/2. As for Release's strategy, at the moment, it is likely just scaring scum from posting. I'm exhausted, going to sleep now, I'll contribute something more meaningful in the morning. He didn't post anything useful in his first post, and hasn't made good on his promise to post "something more meaningful in the morning" If I don't see anyone who sticks out more to me in the morning (or I don't get the time to check), then I am leaving my vote on him/her. ##Vote rofflewaffles55 | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
On June 26 2012 05:33 NrGmonk wrote: I can /in if I'm allowed to play 2 newbie games at the same time and as long as this doesn't start for another week. I have a shitload of TL-related stuff to do this week. Just something I thought I'd bring up for others to keep in mind. We seem to disagree on roflwaffles55. His commenting negatively of release isn't "very early" as you put it was easy for him to do. Release's early vote/fos style is brash and sure to attract attention/criticism. Plenty of people thought it was the wrong move due to the lack of information, and roflwaffles55 was third to comment on it negatively, after Hopeless1der and dNa. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
We seem to disagree on roflwaffles55. His commenting negatively on release was easy for him to do; release's early vote/fos style is brash and sure to attract attention/criticism. It's not a bold move or particularly townie to disagree with it; plenty of people thought it was the wrong move due to the lack of information. Also, roflwaffles55 was third to comment on it negatively, after Hopeless1der and dNa. Sorry, the first version read like crap. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
through properly. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
Esspen: On June 27 2012 08:14 Esspen wrote: There are cases, but those cases are not going to be lynched anyway as now it's either Hopeless or Rofl. I unfortunately cannot vote for Hopeless as only thing he's done is gone maybe too far with attacking you, otherwise I completely agree with him. On June 27 2012 08:53 Esspen wrote: ##Vote Hopeless1der What was that? I gave you the benefit of doubt at first, but I'm gonna be looking at you very closely again. | ||
|
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
Some of this has already been covered, but I'll just consolidate it all in this post. On the policy: I believe we should try to identify and lynch mafia first. Simple policy, but with great results. States the obvious with his very first post On June 25 2012 20:23 Esspen wrote: I do not get all that "lynch the liar" for several reasons. Townies obviously cannot know whether someone lied or not, only clues they can grasp onto are inconsistencies and vagueness. The only players who know the truth are scums and if the whole game is going to revole around us identifying who lied, mafia is going to win rather easy. Mafia can win just by ereasing their memory that they are mafia and simply playing with a mindset of a townie, leaving townies lyinching each other as they find innocent inconsistencies in their speeches (ie posts). Secondly, even blues have to lie in order to survive. But that also means when I say "I am mafia." you should lynch me no matter whether it is true or not, as if I'm telling the truth, you just lynched mafia, and if it is not true you lynched liar. (breaks my heart  )But I believe we should try to identify and lynch blues first, confusing mafia and leaving them vulnerable... We've already talked about how anti town this tactic would be. On June 26 2012 02:43 Esspen wrote: To be quite honest, just to see reactions of people. And maybe catch some scummy behaviour. Btw I must say that Release seems to be the scum as all reacted to my post it the form of "wtf? please explain" etc. wanting some explanation, yet Release is the only one actually attacking. Goes with the flow of the thread by casting yet more suspicion on release, saying he was "the only one attacking" him for that post regarding blues. This isn't true, as he'd raised most active posters' alarm bells, and release's reaction was not any more aggressive than the others. + Show Spoiler + On June 27 2012 04:12 Esspen wrote: Originally I planned to vote for either BioSC or Release, but now reading posts about Hopeless makes me want to lynch him too... anyway I'll probably vote for what majority votes, no sense in a No-lynch. Case on BioSC: His posts before someone accused him as lurker: So far he has said the obvious, embraced the discussion (while not adding anything to it - this is just weird) and answered a question. Contribution to town - zero. But after he gets mentioned as a possible target for lynch for being a lurker, he gets active and tries to put the focus on the other lurker who is even more lurkerious. He also mentiones he's not lurker which can only mean that he saw himself being active - might indicate that he wrote such vacuous things for a reason. Also he attacks the one who proposed him for the lynch. His posts after getting accused for being a lurker: Now on Release: There is just something wrong with him. Seems like a smart guy, might as well be the most heard one so noone would assume he's mafia. Why would anyone assume that the most outgoing person is mafia? That's it on him. Anyway we should all reach some consensus for whom to vote, and then all vote for him. Then this post, where he basically rehashes everything hopeless1der said about biosc with reworded commentary. Also note how he basically spams biosc's entire filter in this post towards the end with no commentary at all, padding out his post and making it look like he's contributing more than he really has. Note also that he is very indecisive; he planned to vote for biosc or release, then hopeless1der, makes a case against biosc and then votes for roflwaffles55 I know we gave him the benefit of the doubt after that bizarre post saying we should lynch blues, but he can't hide behind this cover forever. I think this is something we should deal with now rather than later. For now I'm voting for him, but this is of course subject to change if a better target presents themselves. Jinglehell, I might have something to add to your vivax case later, but I have to rush now, so it'll have to wait. ## Vote Esspen | ||
| ||
