EPTPick Their Power Mafia 2 - Page 34
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:07 chaos13 wrote: BC, what you're saying is absolutely ridiculous. 1. You do not want people to vote on Kurumi, based on that you think he has a vote-activated power, despite how he is simply trolling and being anti-town. He has not hinted at all that his power is activated based on how many votes he receives though, all he said is that it happens when he dies. Worst case scenario, he is town and his power harms town. Best case scenario, he is mafia and his power harms town. I don't know about you, but I would gladly trade a likely mafia for a townie. We come out far better from that than scum do. 2. You do not want supersoft to use his DT check. Wat. Wat. WAT. You're reasoning is that "he will confirm someone town and mafia will kill them." Let's get him to check one of our top suspects. If they're town, rather than lynching them we will move onto someone else who is now that much more likely to be mafia. If they're scum, we lynch them without hesitation (duh). Let's face it, people are going to die from mafia tonight anyway. If we get a confirmed town, then we get any medic-type roles to protect them. I really see no possible way that getting him to use his power can harm us. A DT check that we all get to know the results of is good. I'm really not liking your play here BC. I can't see why a townie would want to protect a spammer or avoid using a DT check. Its called using your head. If you guys would stop herp derping and take your heads out of your asses you would see logic. You don't let random people use powers. You do not believe you can control powers that you as your own person do not own. You do not give open firing for mafia to get a read on who is a better shot than others. Seriously, sit the hell down and stop talking about how a role will help the town and get back on course of how you actually play mafia. | ||
|
sandroba
Canada4998 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:14 chaos13 wrote: Wait, isn't supersoft's check an alignment one, not a role check? BC seems to have these mixed up... My bad I am confused on the role flip, confirms alignment and outright tells if they are lying. Still doesn't change the point. Town is more likely to want to be confirmed town than sk / mafia. Certain roles almost always wish to be confirmed first before others. Giving mafia / sk better ideas of who to snipe. As SS only claimed after he was forced to his personal alignment is suspect. We know based off his claim that his role / alignment is given to mafia, if he is red, who cares? If he is sk, this sucks, if he is town this sucks. If he is red regardless of his check the result will always be town. If it is sk he will reveal them in thread. If he is town all checks will be real. Nothing he says can be taken in truth? As such why put faith in the ability of someone you cannot confirm. His role use does not mean he is town. He was called out and forced to use his power. | ||
|
sandroba
Canada4998 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
sandroba
Canada4998 Posts
| ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22630 Posts
| ||
|
heist
United States720 Posts
Look think about it like this. 1. If we don't use the SS alignment check, then we get no "semi-confirmed" townie. Someone dies to Mafia KP anyways as mafia KP is not affected. 2. If we do use it, AT WORST CASE SCENARIO, this "semi-confirmed" townie dies. Worst case scenario, in both situations: dead townie, no confirmed townie alive. Best case scenario, if we don't use SS: dead townie, no confirmed townie alive. Best case scenario, if we do use SS: dead townie, confirmed townie alive. OR BETTER YET medic protects the confirmed townie wasting mafia KP. If we don't use the alignment check it'll be like the mafia killing the "semi-confirmed" anyways. | ||
|
redFF
United States3910 Posts
| ||
|
chaos13
Canada885 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:21 syllogism wrote: I can only see two possibilities: BC has a really odd posting restriction or he isn't town aligned. Leaning on former as this would be incredibly bad scum play and there are no village idiots. He already claimed a post restriction. However, I am having serious trouble figuring out what it is, if it even exists. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:19 sandroba wrote: BC, do you have any doubts that his power is an aligment check? Do you think DropBear is lying and got a penalty on purpose just to out his own teamate and also endangered him of being lynch fucks for kicks? No. They can't both be mafia, so his role does indeed provide an aligment check and that's it. I'm not giving it the freedom so whoever wants to be checked can do it. I'm asking for a check on kita. If he fails to comply we lynch him. That simple. Even if supersoft is scum how does an aligment check helps him? It does not, it can only have potencial of helping us if he's town. Also if someone flips and he said his aligment wrong, there we got him. What's the downside to this? if he is red, all checks reveal town maybe sks reveal third party. He just wouldn't out his team. So your idea of reversing all his checks is dumb, its not even guarenteed a red is ever checked by his alignment as they would have no need to participate. Also, lynching a player based on not participating in a plan that cannot be confirmed without other players using powers / the user of said original power dying is dumb. Kita asked questions, perhaps that is a posting restriction. Foolishness is using a ton of TLPD in his posts, perhaps that is his posting restriction. We also have players who were using day vig powers. We have players who on day 1 were calling for people to use day vig powers. We have enough scummy, suspect play on day 1 already. How about we sit back and play normally instead of hoping our trust is rewarded. Luck should not be a factor in how we proceed if its not backed by solid analysis or very very very solidly made plan that has a near 0% chance of failure. | ||
|
heist
United States720 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On July 26 2011 04:58 BloodyC0bbler wrote: use a dt check on SS first. Don't trust someone whos suspect to give real feedback. Make him earn his damn check. You do not reward roleclaimers ffs. How contradictory. You think that having SS use his rolecheck is rewarding him (not town, just him) for roleclaiming, but then say we should wait for another DT to check supersoft to confirm him as town or not. Here's how that fails: -Framers -Fake DT claim to take out Day DT -Continual Role block after today on SS -Having to have an actual DT claim to confirm him So, you don't want to reward roleclaimers, but then want another DT to claim to confirm a known DT, who's alignment is unknown? That makes no sense at all. The best thing to do, is to use his check, and have him announce his result to town. The catch is we don't act just based on his check. We can check a lynch candidate if we want, but that gets dangerous if he's scum, though another 1-1 trade wouldn't be that bad. The other thing we do is check someone suspicious, who isn't necessarily getting lynched today and having him announce his check, and just leave it until we can confirm him. Then if he gets popped, we know all his checks and results, and if we can act on them, and if he gets confirmed another way, well we know all his results too. I'd actually suggest checking you or DB, and then leaving it for now. As well, why would we check people asking to be checked, and why would anyone be dumb enough to ask for a DT check on them without already being suspicious anyways? If they're asking to be checked, they're town or a covered role. Town wouldn't want to waste a DT check on themselves, as compared to suspicious people. Use the tool to hunt mafia, not to confirm town. An innocent check doesn't prove innocence, but the only way we're getting a red check back at this point is millers or a day-framer. Day 1 has the least chance of anything interfering with the check, and is the best time to use it. I'd rather have 1 check in, than have none and SS gets shot tonight. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:21 syllogism wrote: I can only see two possibilities: BC has a really odd posting restriction or he isn't town aligned. Leaning on former as this would be incredibly bad scum play and there are no village idiots. My posting restriction actually would make me the scummiest looking player in the game / near VI level. Thankfully I have the choice of never using it and being vanilla. | ||
|
sandroba
Canada4998 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:25 BloodyC0bbler wrote: if he is red, all checks reveal town maybe sks reveal third party. He just wouldn't out his team. So your idea of reversing all his checks is dumb, its not even guarenteed a red is ever checked by his alignment as they would have no need to participate. Also, lynching a player based on not participating in a plan that cannot be confirmed without other players using powers / the user of said original power dying is dumb. Kita asked questions, perhaps that is a posting restriction. Foolishness is using a ton of TLPD in his posts, perhaps that is his posting restriction. We also have players who were using day vig powers. We have players who on day 1 were calling for people to use day vig powers. We have enough scummy, suspect play on day 1 already. How about we sit back and play normally instead of hoping our trust is rewarded. Luck should not be a factor in how we proceed if its not backed by solid analysis or very very very solidly made plan that has a near 0% chance of failure. Are you allowed to claim your post restriction BC? Because this is getting annoying. Where did I sugest we reverse his checks? Also how do you propose we do analysis when *anything* can be a post restriction acording to you? I'm done arguing with you, you don't make any sense. | ||
|
redFF
United States3910 Posts
 Really don't understand why you guys are arguing against a  free alignment  Check. | ||
|
Kurumi
Poland6130 Posts
| ||
|
redFF
United States3910 Posts
just finds in your post if you mention a broodwar player and automatically tlpdizes him, that's COol, but a fairly easy post restriction to follow, I didn't even mean to mention those players lol. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:27 Mr. Wiggles wrote: How contradictory. You think that having SS use his rolecheck is rewarding him (not town, just him) for roleclaiming, but then say we should wait for another DT to check supersoft to confirm him as town or not. Here's how that fails: -Framers -Fake DT claim to take out Day DT -Continual Role block after today on SS -Having to have an actual DT claim to confirm him So, you don't want to reward roleclaimers, but then want another DT to claim to confirm a known DT, who's alignment is unknown? That makes no sense at all. The best thing to do, is to use his check, and have him announce his result to town. The catch is we don't act just based on his check. We can check a lynch candidate if we want, but that gets dangerous if he's scum, though another 1-1 trade wouldn't be that bad. The other thing we do is check someone suspicious, who isn't necessarily getting lynched today and having him announce his check, and just leave it until we can confirm him. Then if he gets popped, we know all his checks and results, and if we can act on them, and if he gets confirmed another way, well we know all his results too. I'd actually suggest checking you or DB, and then leaving it for now. As well, why would we check people asking to be checked, and why would anyone be dumb enough to ask for a DT check on them without already being suspicious anyways? If they're asking to be checked, they're town or a covered role. Town wouldn't want to waste a DT check on themselves, as compared to suspicious people. Use the tool to hunt mafia, not to confirm town. An innocent check doesn't prove innocence, but the only way we're getting a red check back at this point is millers or a day-framer. Day 1 has the least chance of anything interfering with the check, and is the best time to use it. I'd rather have 1 check in, than have none and SS gets shot tonight. Check the bolded part. In almost every case of someone asking or begging for a dt check they are town or covered role. Most people do this to confirm themselves and thus starting a blue circle that can rofl stomp mafia. It is very common practice for people to want to be cleared as to move through a game with 0 harassment from anyone. No mafia would willingly throw himself up for a dt check as it would screw him in the end. You say no townie would want it used on them, but that would again, leave you a pool of 0 people to check. you are then down to the idea of "we want you checked you let yourself get checked or lynched" which is a horrible way to play. Seriously, you all are talking about role use being the huge factor in catching people. I now say, everyone go back read pick your power 3 and realize playing lets analyze roles, or someones role means they are legit, etc.... and realize roles do not say shit about the players alignment. Who cares if SS's check is an alignment check if you don't know his alignment. Have a watcher/tracker check him. If he visits anyone at night at this point in time he is mafia. have a dt check him. Dt's could breadcrumb results, or the like. Seriously, before a plan is proposed you sort it out, you make it ideal, you account for multiple situations. So far the only situation proposed by you lot is SS is likely town for shooting a red. Likely town does not mean town. | ||
| ||
