|
On November 24 2011 22:30 xtfftc wrote:
Palmar, what do you mean by "successfully pushed for mafia lynch"? In XLIV you pushed for a mafia player to be lynched, but it was unsuccessful as we ended up lynching a townie.
Bad wording on my part. It should be "Successfully identified mafia, and pushed for his lynch" As you remember from that game I grudgingly gave sevryn a 0.2% chance of flipping scum (and predictably, he flipped town).
You cannot deny I wrote a case and pushed hard to try to get BB lynched. It's irrelevant, but it feels fair to clear it up.
@BloodyC0bbler: With all the drawbacks of your plan, are you sure that the benefits outweigh them?
Mafia doesn't have to repeatedly frame all targets, I am working under the assumption that mafia can have 2-3 framers in such a big setup. All they need to do is to keep framing one target to screw with part of the DT (Detective) force, and thus keep us guessing.
With so many millers, framers, godfathers and sanities, in the game, no matter what route we take, DTs will only be effective late in the game.
What big advantage does your plan over just letting DTs do their own thing? I think your plan simply implements a higher risk (mafia manipulation) for higher reward (more confirmed DT sanities) version of the classic version where they do their own thing. Obviously the drawback of the classic method is the inability to compare your results to someone else's, but to do that both players would have to claim anyway, so in both situations, we'll be waiting for a flip of the person who got checked. Because we have no way of knowing if mafia is chain framing someone.
And it's not a win/win to "tie" the framer up. Framing offensively is one of the hardest and most random things you can do in mafia, so if you know that some target has a slightly higher chance of being checked, I'd frame that in a heartbeat. It's actually the most logical use of framing, unless there is a huge reason to believe someone else will be checked.
Please, correct me if I'm wrong.
|
On November 24 2011 22:05 youngminii wrote:
See you guys have already been sucked in by Palmar's smooth talking. When did I ever say Palmar's scum is better than his town? That's just a strawman that Palmar invented to make his own points stronger.
On November 24 2011 18:37 youngminii wrote:Show nested quote +I am one of the most transparent player in this game, my town play is top notch, my scum play is pretty bad
Unlike some other candidates, you can actually call me out for being wrong, because I'm not bad This is a lie. Your scum play is better than your town play, according to memory. You have so much sway with the majority of people that if anyone actually calls you out once you have your tight rein on town, you'll get your herd to quick lynch the offender.
hmm...
|
/confirm
Now I missed all the mayor campaigns because games always start at something like 5 am and have to read through them all.
Also you guys need to make me sherif! Just look at my past games: n0 = townie, n+1 = townie. Therefore it's proven by induction I can't be scum!
On a more serious note: Am starting to read beginning on page 26 now, just wanted to hop in and confirm first.
|
young, of no important new info/discussion arise, I will vote for you to be the first lynched.
|
On November 24 2011 22:39 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 22:30 xtfftc wrote:
Palmar, what do you mean by "successfully pushed for mafia lynch"? In XLIV you pushed for a mafia player to be lynched, but it was unsuccessful as we ended up lynching a townie. Bad wording on my part. It should be "Successfully identified mafia, and pushed for his lynch" As you remember from that game I grudgingly gave sevryn a 0.2% chance of flipping scum (and predictably, he flipped town). You cannot deny I wrote a case and pushed hard to try to get BB lynched. It's irrelevant, but it feels fair to clear it up. @BloodyC0bbler: With all the drawbacks of your plan, are you sure that the benefits outweigh them? Mafia doesn't have to repeatedly frame all targets, I am working under the assumption that mafia can have 2-3 framers in such a big setup. All they need to do is to keep framing one target to screw with part of the DT (Detective) force, and thus keep us guessing. With so many millers, framers, godfathers and sanities, in the game, no matter what route we take, DTs will only be effective late in the game. What big advantage does your plan over just letting DTs do their own thing? I think your plan simply implements a higher risk (mafia manipulation) for higher reward (more confirmed DT sanities) version of the classic version where they do their own thing. Obviously the drawback of the classic method is the inability to compare your results to someone else's, but to do that both players would have to claim anyway, so in both situations, we'll be waiting for a flip of the person who got checked. Because we have no way of knowing if mafia is chain framing someone. And it's not a win/win to "tie" the framer up. Framing offensively is one of the hardest and most random things you can do in mafia, so if you know that some target has a slightly higher chance of being checked, I'd frame that in a heartbeat. It's actually the most logical use of framing, unless there is a huge reason to believe someone else will be checked. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.
You are missing one clear advantage my plan that requires being elected. It skews the #'s from higher reward higher risk to clearly higher reward with a low risk.
I do appreciate the criticism I do. It was also expected. However in a game of mostly newer players, are you genuinely ok for people just doing their own thing? We as more experienced players should be offering advice, giving ideas of how to use the role, etc.... rather than leaving them to just figure it out.
|
On November 24 2011 22:30 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
If Palmar would be so kind as to outline his goal for this game, and ideas he has for this specific game I would be all ears to hear it. However as it stands now you are campaigning on previous experience without actively giving any of that experience back.
Also, enforcing a Policy Lynch system like LAL in a game of noobies who do not realize just how bad a lie is in this game is not productive. It is good to educate them that lying is bad but until they see the downside to it we will not get them to stop.
No problem at all.
The goal for this game is to win. I feel the best course of action is to secure someone I trust for the mayor spot. I happen to trust myself.
Securing the mayor spot gives me certain prestige in town too. I have in the past shown that I have no problems calling out popular bandwagons and in detail explain why I don't agree. I have the confidence, experience and activity levels to act as a guide in this town, filled with newcomers. I will be actively pushing people I believe are working against town, I will also call out bad logic wherever it's applied. It's pretty common for newcomers to misunderstand scumtells.
I will be working with my normal mantra of "It's not a matter of what people do, but how they do it". I will provide cases, I will even outsource my targets and provide alignment analysis, in hopes of quickly bringing those newbies up to speed.
I will explain in detail how blues should act.
This game is surprisingly hard for a newbie game, but given the hosts we have, I wouldn't expect anything less. There is very little information in the game going to be concrete, owing to the setup's many alignment traps, and both sides having many conventional town roles. Normally vigilantes can claim a hit to be confirmed, this is not the case now.
Regarding LAL, I completely disagree. I think the absolutely best way to educate newbies about how to play is to strictly forbid them lying. I have both explained why it's important they don't lie, and provided a link to short article discussing the issue. A slap on the wrist is not going to do, there will be no excuses for lying.
As surprising as it is, a spectacularly well thought out and good lie from yourself in a mafia game when I was still very new to the game (closed casket), is the reason I subscribe so strongly to the LAL policy. Your lie was perfect, it was based on solid reads and it was clearly pro-town, yet because of unforeseen problems, it backfired spectacularly. Ironically, the reason your surprisingly good lie backfired, was because another townie had already lied.
|
Okay,
Vote Erandorr for Mayor!
I have put some thought into this. People like Palmar, Sandro or BC would be a huge asset for Town if we could be sure of their alignment. Strong town players in those positions can almost win games by themselves. The recent PYP game proves that.
Yet I still feel very uncomfortable . These players all have the skill to massivly fuck over town if they are scum. BC is rumored to have the best Scumplay on TL, Sandro was considered Town for a very long time in PYP with a great early game , and Palmars play is extremely hard to judge, even though he claims differently.
Now why do I think that I am a better candidate then those guys?
- I will be active and try to push town in the right direction. I recently changed my play to this sort of style (Look up Mini Mafia X for that )
- I think I am good enough to get called out on any bad or scummy posts.
- There are incredibly good players to judge my play
- I am transparant
- I am town
Some talking points :
Newbies
Basicly no one is going to play well in their first game. I don't know of anyone who did. But to use something some smart Player once said : The greatest thing you can do as a Townie is making you alignment apparant. If you stay lurking in the shadows, we have nothing to asses you and will probably have to waste Powerroles or lynches to get rid of you. In that case you are actually hurting town more than helping. Thats why there is so much focus on activity. Its okay if your reads are a bit off in your first game, it is usually fairly easy to spot the intentions behind it. It is especially important because we have no information about you , your playstyle and capabilities(Meta)
Lurkers
I still think it would be naive to assume that every newbie will follow those directions. Palmars plan to coordinate Lurker shootings is great, so I will just go ahead and steal it.
If you are not a newbie, please don't pick this game to not give a shit. This is not a game where we can afford it.
My propsed plan on this: Coodinate the lurker shootings and go hard after every experienced player who feels content hiding in the masses of players.
Liars
Don't.
Day1 Lynch
I would never single handedly decide this. In case of being elected, I will try to get a majority, I would , however, never lynch someone I myself have a townread on.
I believe thats it. Vote Erandorr for Mayor!
|
On November 24 2011 22:39 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 22:30 xtfftc wrote:
Palmar, what do you mean by "successfully pushed for mafia lynch"? In XLIV you pushed for a mafia player to be lynched, but it was unsuccessful as we ended up lynching a townie. Bad wording on my part. It should be "Successfully identified mafia, and pushed for his lynch" As you remember from that game I grudgingly gave sevryn a 0.2% chance of flipping scum (and predictably, he flipped town). You cannot deny I wrote a case and pushed hard to try to get BB lynched. It's irrelevant, but it feels fair to clear it up.
I wouldn't say it's irrelevant. Good analytical skills alone don't make someone a good player. As I indicated in my earlier post, this is actually a reason why I would consider voting for you for mayor: I don't think that your diplomatic skills are good enough but as a mayor you wouldn't have to convince that many people to join in. Of course, I need a reason to believe that you are not mafia first.
It's probably time to raise an important point for discussion that some of you have already addressed briefly. We should not vote on someone simply based on their campaign or metagame. This is completely unacceptable because they don't give us any means by which to differentiate between those of candidates who are mafia and those who are town. The mayor is a powerful figure, so the most important thing is that make sure that he is not from the mafia team. Focusing on people's campaigns would lead to a coin flip.
This is why it is of utter importance that we start hunting for mafia immediately. No point in discussing empty words; let the prospective mayors prove themselves. When they start posting some analysis, we would be able to base our votes on something. Dear candidates, don't try to convince us to vote for you. Make a case on some mafia player and let us vote on how good your analysis is.
Otherwise you might seriously want to consider voting for me instead of a veteran.
|
EBWOB: bad grammar, etc. I have to redevelop the habit of editing before I've posted and not after.
|
On November 24 2011 22:51 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 22:30 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
If Palmar would be so kind as to outline his goal for this game, and ideas he has for this specific game I would be all ears to hear it. However as it stands now you are campaigning on previous experience without actively giving any of that experience back.
Also, enforcing a Policy Lynch system like LAL in a game of noobies who do not realize just how bad a lie is in this game is not productive. It is good to educate them that lying is bad but until they see the downside to it we will not get them to stop.
No problem at all. The goal for this game is to win. I feel the best course of action is to secure someone I trust for the mayor spot. I happen to trust myself. Securing the mayor spot gives me certain prestige in town too. I have in the past shown that I have no problems calling out popular bandwagons and in detail explain why I don't agree. I have the confidence, experience and activity levels to act as a guide in this town, filled with newcomers. I will be actively pushing people I believe are working against town, I will also call out bad logic wherever it's applied. It's pretty common for newcomers to misunderstand scumtells. I will be working with my normal mantra of "It's not a matter of what people do, but how they do it". I will provide cases, I will even outsource my targets and provide alignment analysis, in hopes of quickly bringing those newbies up to speed. I will explain in detail how blues should act. This game is surprisingly hard for a newbie game, but given the hosts we have, I wouldn't expect anything less. There is very little information in the game going to be concrete, owing to the setup's many alignment traps, and both sides having many conventional town roles. Normally vigilantes can claim a hit to be confirmed, this is not the case now. Regarding LAL, I completely disagree. I think the absolutely best way to educate newbies about how to play is to strictly forbid them lying. I have both explained why it's important they don't lie, and provided a link to short article discussing the issue. A slap on the wrist is not going to do, there will be no excuses for lying. As surprising as it is, a spectacularly well thought out and good lie from yourself in a mafia game when I was still very new to the game (closed casket), is the reason I subscribe so strongly to the LAL policy. Your lie was perfect, it was based on solid reads and it was clearly pro-town, yet because of unforeseen problems, it backfired spectacularly. Ironically, the reason your surprisingly good lie backfired, was because another townie had already lied.
hahaha fucking caller. Ruining games from the beginning of time.
The reason I say it however is enforcing policy lynches especially this early is not going to get us a win. You can show a game where lying is bad but in the case you mentioned my lie was insanely good. It failed due to another player lying as well but in a case where only I had the game would have flipped completely differently than it did. LAL is a policy because most people have no idea how to read a situation like I did in closed casket and use the tool effectively. A newer player is not going to be able to make the distinction between a good lie or a bad one. In that sense LAL works to hopefully deter it. However if we spend the entire game LAL then we are not likely to be offing reds. Mafia on TL tend to sit back and for the most part only "lie" in the case of roleclaim situations. A smart mafia will always know the posts he or she wrote and when attacked be able to rephrase or the like to get themselves out of a tight situation without lying. A mafia team with a solid player can educate the others to do a similar point.
My point is policy lynching someone for actively harming the town or the like is far more beneficial than doing so then by lynching liars. IF you are so sure of LAL policy turn it into policy vig shots. It gives vigilantes better targets to shoot as to avoid shooting randomly into the town (instead only hits reds or people who have a slightly higher chance of being red) and leave lynches to be analyzed and agreed upon by town as a whole. One person pushing policy lynches does not actively get people in a good mindset when they first start playing.
|
On November 24 2011 21:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Detectives
Regardless of if I win this election or not I will post three names during night 1 (hopefully near the start). EVERY single one of you will investigate one of these names. The reason for this is for sanity clarification process. All of you will be sitting on the information of one specific person. It will all be different. Sane people will have the person flip the natural alignment. Paranoid will have it flip scum always, insane flip in reverse (anti town as town and town as anti town) and naive always town. But mr. BC with this a mafia framer can easily fuck everything all up! This could almost be true. Except this is where the rolecop comes in. All rolecops will also check into this list. IF a rolecop spots a red in this list we lynch that person, medics now have a medic target to protect for further nights. In the event multiple reds are caught via this process we have night 2 vig targets as well.
Oh snap, I didn't even notice that the sanity mechanic was part of this game.
But wouldn't the blues need 3 days to get all the information needed to properly judge which cops are sane or insane or something, since they would all have to scan the same 3 people and the rolecop would have to scan all 3 too right? Or am I misunderstanding something?
By the way, I'm hesitant on voting Palmar since he's a puppetmaster. That's not to say I want him to die, since if he is town he'll be very useful in actually putting the vote on scum, but if he's mafia making him mayor means mafia has incredible power to lead lynches. But on the other hand, if he is town mafia are probably gonna pop a cap in his ass night 1.
I dunno, gimme some arguments pro and con.
|
On the other Campaigns
sandroba
One of the best players in this game. He hasn't campaigned very hard yet so it is hard to say anything about him than he is among the top3 players playing in this game, both town and scum wise. I think he is wrong when he says that veterans will be able to tell very easily whether he is town or not. In PYP:I he was one of the last scum standing, and he easily played better than any other scum in that game. You can read the post game where some of the best mafia players chime in a agree with me on this.
He is also misleading people when he says that because of his sparse profile he will be very easy to point out from clues; mafia can just pick another person to perform the night kills and sandroba will not be clued at all.
sinani206
I guess he's also running. sinani206 has a reputation for being lurky, emotional and notoriously hard to read. He has not provided any incentive for us to vote for him other than listing past games. The first game is an example of how he apparently single handedly saved the mafia from losing. The second game is a game where he was able to abuse role mechanics to secure a town win. I have not read the other games but as you can probably read from the thread, sinani206 would be a terrible candidate for mayor. We would most likely have to lynch him day2 no matter what his alignment is.
Palmar
Palmar is also one of the best players in this game. As town, he often gets shot night1 because scum are afraid of his abilities as a scum hunter. I don't get why he started his campaign with a huge rhetorical flavor post, clearly inspired by a famous British prime minister. I am worried about how he is downplaying his scumplay abilities. Palmar is not a bad scum at all. These are the games that Palmar has participated in where he was mafia, and the end result, graciously taken from his very own profile:
SNMMII - Mafia Goon - Mafia Wins
SNMMV - Mafia Goon - Mafia Wins
PTP2 - Mafia Traitor - Town Wins
Personality - Flamewheel - Mafia Wins
SMG - Mafia Goon - Mafia Wins
XLV - Red Pyro - Mafia Wins
He has an 83% win rate with mafia, the only game lost was one where he was a traitor. In some of these games he was figured out and lynched, but that doesn't change the fact that when Palmar is scum, scum is very likely to win. I think youngminii is absolutely right when he says that Palmar is down playing his scum but I don't blame him, this is good to do as either alignment. It is just important that people actually know the truth.
Palmar is also one of those guys who are insanely hard to lynch, I don't want to see a scum Palmar who is unkillable and almost impossible to lynch.
xtfftc
Has a very interesting campaign and he points out some of the same things as I have done about transparency and experienced scum in office. xtfftc points out that he is a complete newbie. I wouldn't agree with this, but he doesn't seem like he is even intending to live up to the responsibilities that come with being elected. He is already trying to downplay expectations and saying "if I do bad, then just lynch me" instead of actually thinking he'll do good. This indicates that he will not be putting a lot of effort into the game and that he doesn't care if he gets lynched, and this is very unsettling.
His pledge to vote for Palmar is weird. Palmar does not fit the platform that xtfftc himself is running on. It seems like xtfftc wants you to vote for him for some reasons, and then he himself will vote for Palmar for some other reasons. Supporting someone else in your campaign post also indicates that he doesn't even want the office, I doubt he will push it any further.
supersoft
supersoft has already posted a lot in this thread and has been very vocal about the campaigns which is great. He is his usual town self where he is very aggressive. Unfortunately, he is also very emotional. He said he wouldn't vote for redFF because of an argument he had with him in a past game, like he is bearing a grudge. He is very loud in his support for Palmar and sandroba, and I agree with him that these two in office would be great if they were town. We absolutely cannot know this on day1 and I don't know why he isn't more skeptical. Instead he is voting Palmar based on just one single post.
His criticism of me does not make any sense. I am appealing to townies who not want to get lynched, and I am saying that I will do everything I can to prevent you from being lynched. This is a very clear promise and you can trust me to uphold that. Scum absolutely will try to jump you if you say something scummy. Some townies will try to make a distinction between "bad townie" and "scum" but not all. Very often this can lead to mislynches, and I am going to fight to prevent those. This is not appealing to emotion, it is only rational that townies do not want to get lynched, a mislynch is the worst thing for town in this game.
It is also hypocritical that he is saying that other people have slim reasonable for voting for me, when he himself has no reasonable for voting Palmar other than "he is good as town", straight up ignoring the fact that he just as good as scum.
Ciryandor
I don't know what you are referring to in LotR mafia. I voted for Erandorr on day1, but so did mostly everybody because he was a good lynch. On day2 I voted for scum who didn't get lynched, and then on day3 I voted for the same scum again, finally getting him lynched.
BloodyC0bbler's Detective Plan
Palmar has already dissected this plan. An unmentioned issue I have with it is how you want to rely on role cops to use their analytic abilities, but at the same time you want to direct detectives because you do not trust in their analytic abilities? You also actively want town to use breadcrumbing. This is not going to work, it will only help scum. Breadcrumbing is very much harder than it sounds and I think only scum will pick up on it because they can discuss and hunt possible crumbs with 15 other players, while a detective or a role cop would have to detect the breadcrumb him or herself.
|
@BC
All your points are essentially correct. And hopefully because we all agree that LAL is a good policy it won't come to it!
And yes, I have no problem with getting vigilantes to deal with killing off liars. It's much better than having them randomly shoot people, especially if the vigilantes are new. You are also correct that no newer player would make the distinction you made, which is why the simple solution is:
Don't lie
|
hey guys, first game of mafia ever 
i think palmar is right about us having to do the first step/taking the first risk, if we just wait or dont trust anyone scum will win for sure, ignoring all posts he is 80% town, so if our chances of winning with palmar as town and everbody trusting him are better than 5:3 we're ok even if he wins everytime he is mafia, would that be realistic ?
especially in the beginning i think you can never be 100% sure about someone but the worst thing for town is to get stuck in only accusations flying around because someone could be mafia.
yeah everybody could be, that's the essence of this game but at some points in the game a rational portion of trust is required for town to win in my opinion, i read some games and saw a lot of townies ripping each other apart over semantics etc 
so im voting palmar, he seems to be pretty active and operates on logic, not spouting too much nonsense :D
you should probably not rely on my analysis since it could be majorly flawed xD
|
On November 24 2011 23:00 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 21:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Detectives
Regardless of if I win this election or not I will post three names during night 1 (hopefully near the start). EVERY single one of you will investigate one of these names. The reason for this is for sanity clarification process. All of you will be sitting on the information of one specific person. It will all be different. Sane people will have the person flip the natural alignment. Paranoid will have it flip scum always, insane flip in reverse (anti town as town and town as anti town) and naive always town. But mr. BC with this a mafia framer can easily fuck everything all up! This could almost be true. Except this is where the rolecop comes in. All rolecops will also check into this list. IF a rolecop spots a red in this list we lynch that person, medics now have a medic target to protect for further nights. In the event multiple reds are caught via this process we have night 2 vig targets as well. Oh snap, I didn't even notice that the sanity mechanic was part of this game. But wouldn't the blues need 3 days to get all the information needed to properly judge which cops are sane or insane or something, since they would all have to scan the same 3 people and the rolecop would have to scan all 3 too right? Or am I misunderstanding something? By the way, I'm hesitant on voting Palmar since he's a puppetmaster. That's not to say I want him to die, since if he is town he'll be very useful in actually putting the vote on scum, but if he's mafia making him mayor means mafia has incredible power to lead lynches. But on the other hand, if he is town mafia are probably gonna pop a cap in his ass night 1. I dunno, gimme some arguments pro and con.
rolecops are only required to check the same day 1 target. Reasoning is that way someone can be outed for instance for being a miller. It also potentially gives a rolecop (if insanely lucky) a instant confirmed town in a dt/hatter or red in a framer.
past night 1 I would suggest compiling a larger list (10-15 scummyish suspects) for dts to continue on, whereas rolecops check as they want.
A rolecop in this setup is a spreadsheet man. Everytime someone is checked a role is slotted beside that name. You then have to analyze. Is x performing as they should based on that role, etc.... and then they can push their results that way.
as for if palmar does not get elected? Chances are mafia would have to stack him to kill him. Typically bigger names in a mafia game draw medic protection night 1 so are more likely to die days 2-4 if they die to mafia shots at all.
|
Having every DT/rolecop check the same few people doesn't appear that advantageous. What exactly is the plan; to kill all three of them? Mafia certainly will be reluctant to do that even if all three are townies. Furthermore, with framers being a possibility and there being an unknown number of DTs and of unknown sanities, one flip doesn't necessarily help much. Doesn't seem like a worthwhile tradeoff, especially since I would guess there aren't many non-sane DTs in a huge "newbie game"; perhaps some naive ones but those are less likely to be a problem.
|
On November 24 2011 23:02 prplhz wrote:On the other CampaignssandrobaOne of the best players in this game. He hasn't campaigned very hard yet so it is hard to say anything about him than he is among the top3 players playing in this game, both town and scum wise. I think he is wrong when he says that veterans will be able to tell very easily whether he is town or not. In PYP:I he was one of the last scum standing, and he easily played better than any other scum in that game. You can read the post game where some of the best mafia players chime in a agree with me on this. He is also misleading people when he says that because of his sparse profile he will be very easy to point out from clues; mafia can just pick another person to perform the night kills and sandroba will not be clued at all. sinani206I guess he's also running. sinani206 has a reputation for being lurky, emotional and notoriously hard to read. He has not provided any incentive for us to vote for him other than listing past games. The first game is an example of how he apparently single handedly saved the mafia from losing. The second game is a game where he was able to abuse role mechanics to secure a town win. I have not read the other games but as you can probably read from the thread, sinani206 would be a terrible candidate for mayor. We would most likely have to lynch him day2 no matter what his alignment is. PalmarPalmar is also one of the best players in this game. As town, he often gets shot night1 because scum are afraid of his abilities as a scum hunter. I don't get why he started his campaign with a huge rhetorical flavor post, clearly inspired by a famous British prime minister. I am worried about how he is downplaying his scumplay abilities. Palmar is not a bad scum at all. These are the games that Palmar has participated in where he was mafia, and the end result, graciously taken from his very own profile: SNMMII - Mafia Goon - Mafia Wins SNMMV - Mafia Goon - Mafia Wins PTP2 - Mafia Traitor - Town Wins Personality - Flamewheel - Mafia Wins SMG - Mafia Goon - Mafia Wins XLV - Red Pyro - Mafia Wins He has an 83% win rate with mafia, the only game lost was one where he was a traitor. In some of these games he was figured out and lynched, but that doesn't change the fact that when Palmar is scum, scum is very likely to win. I think youngminii is absolutely right when he says that Palmar is down playing his scum but I don't blame him, this is good to do as either alignment. It is just important that people actually know the truth. Palmar is also one of those guys who are insanely hard to lynch, I don't want to see a scum Palmar who is unkillable and almost impossible to lynch. xtfftcHas a very interesting campaign and he points out some of the same things as I have done about transparency and experienced scum in office. xtfftc points out that he is a complete newbie. I wouldn't agree with this, but he doesn't seem like he is even intending to live up to the responsibilities that come with being elected. He is already trying to downplay expectations and saying "if I do bad, then just lynch me" instead of actually thinking he'll do good. This indicates that he will not be putting a lot of effort into the game and that he doesn't care if he gets lynched, and this is very unsettling. His pledge to vote for Palmar is weird. Palmar does not fit the platform that xtfftc himself is running on. It seems like xtfftc wants you to vote for him for some reasons, and then he himself will vote for Palmar for some other reasons. Supporting someone else in your campaign post also indicates that he doesn't even want the office, I doubt he will push it any further.
supersoftsupersoft has already posted a lot in this thread and has been very vocal about the campaigns which is great. He is his usual town self where he is very aggressive. Unfortunately, he is also very emotional. He said he wouldn't vote for redFF because of an argument he had with him in a past game, like he is bearing a grudge. He is very loud in his support for Palmar and sandroba, and I agree with him that these two in office would be great if they were town. We absolutely cannot know this on day1 and I don't know why he isn't more skeptical. Instead he is voting Palmar based on just one single post. His criticism of me does not make any sense. I am appealing to townies who not want to get lynched, and I am saying that I will do everything I can to prevent you from being lynched. This is a very clear promise and you can trust me to uphold that. Scum absolutely will try to jump you if you say something scummy. Some townies will try to make a distinction between "bad townie" and "scum" but not all. Very often this can lead to mislynches, and I am going to fight to prevent those. This is not appealing to emotion, it is only rational that townies do not want to get lynched, a mislynch is the worst thing for town in this game. It is also hypocritical that he is saying that other people have slim reasonable for voting for me, when he himself has no reasonable for voting Palmar other than "he is good as town", straight up ignoring the fact that he just as good as scum. CiryandorI don't know what you are referring to in LotR mafia. I voted for Erandorr on day1, but so did mostly everybody because he was a good lynch. On day2 I voted for scum who didn't get lynched, and then on day3 I voted for the same scum again, finally getting him lynched.
BloodyC0bbler's Detective PlanPalmar has already dissected this plan. An unmentioned issue I have with it is how you want to rely on role cops to use their analytic abilities, but at the same time you want to direct detectives because you do not trust in their analytic abilities? You also actively want town to use breadcrumbing. This is not going to work, it will only help scum. Breadcrumbing is very much harder than it sounds and I think only scum will pick up on it because they can discuss and hunt possible crumbs with 15 other players, while a detective or a role cop would have to detect the breadcrumb him or herself.
You ignore me as a fellow campaigner but you discuss my dt plan? As for not trusting a dt's analytical abilities is not fair. Their role to a degree can clash with what they honestly believe. If you are a paranoid dt you always see red. Until you know your sanity you might think you are insane, This can completely clash with your own leanings based on what your mind is saying. So either they trust purely their analysis or they trust their role. Until they know their sanity they cannot easily follow both.
|
I voted errandor just to have a vote atm. Probably will change.
|
Ok guys this is a serious question and as there are no coaches I'm going to ask this here. I'm aware that probably a bunch of vets are mafia and some are not so I'd like to have a couple of guys answer this (or argree on what someone else said/answered) to make sure I'm not only going to answeres from one pile (for example scumm).
What should I be looking for in a game with elections on day1? Most times I'm trying to figure out who's scummy on day1 by looking into what people are saying. fosing around a little and check out their reactions on foses. However this turned out to be a massive "who looks more town to you" thing with all those campaigns and judging townie based on day1 is really hard as it is very easy for a mafia to look townie on day1. So what should I be looking for? Completely ignore mafia-issue for day1 to make sure to get a good mayor? Because that's what it looks like to me what people are doing right now.
Also just a sidenote. Bombing this thread with huges campaigns is not exactly going to make it easier for newbies imo as noone will read 3 pages of bullshit in a row if those are just some fancy talking and I'm not talking about french here.
Finally another question for a host/cohost but perhaps players can answer this as well:
Voting for mayor is done just like voting for a lynch is done I presume?
That means you type in your vote, you are able (!) to unvote and vote someone new and in generel it works like lynching just that the player with most votes gets to be mayor instead of being lynched?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
