|
Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment.
|
On October 30 2010 09:41 Fishball wrote: As for people bringing up the idea of having the circle come forward, I've put some thought into it.
If the circle remains hidden to the public, the Mafia can try to remain within and get as much intel as possible, while we'll be trying to do the same thing as well. If the circle comes public, the Mafia might as well off these members one by one. Keep in mind, there is a chance that there are no Mafia members in the circle (though very not likely), but regardless of this possibility, Mafia can plant confusion among the remaining members, and mislead the town.
Also, if the circle comes forward and god forbids, gets eliminated, it would defeat the entire purpose.
I'm not exactly against this idea, but I just want everyone else to think it through a bit more and provide more input, possibility a better alternative. At the end, this would not be my decision, but the other players'.
PS. A correction I have to make. I said I've came in contact with 4 other players earlier, this was a mistake. I've only came in contact with 3. The remaining 2 have not contacted me. This does not mean they haven't contacted each other, which I would not know.
As far as I see it if Mafia start killing off town aligned members of the circle, they incriminate themselves really in the end. This puts a lot of pressure on mafia as to how they choose their kills and they have to very carefully consider their activity within the circle.
|
On October 30 2010 09:40 Hyperbola wrote: It's really pointless for me to vote for myself at this point so I guess I'll vote for Pandain. The other two prime candidates are all discussing secret societies and whatnot, and even though I'm all for those types of roles, I believe the mayor should really be a figurehead for the whole town. 1. It would be really difficult, and not to mention disadvantageous, for the mayor to prove they are a free mason or something along those lines 2. The mayor keeps the rest of the town out of the loop (because there wouldn't be a way to transfer secret data) and therefore causes confusion which can lead to unwarranted bandwagoning. 3. If the mayor dies, how will the circle prove itself to town afterward? After losing all leadership, the town will flop and scum will have it's way with the remains. And as for Pandain, I have seen his play style from the previous game and think he would make a good mayor. If he turns out to be mafia, and unless he has flawlessly acted out the role, people would notice and he'd be gone in a blink of an eye.
Actually, if not obvious enough, I never intended to "maintain" a group of secrecy for a long period of time. This is simply not possible, unless you can confirm everyone's alignment in that group.
Quoting myself on page 18, I even suggested the following.
On October 30 2010 03:40 Fishball wrote: If town wants to play it safe, a quick alternate scenario I can think of is to let me roll and try to gather as much information as I can for a few cycles. I then may or may not announce the remaining members, and release whatever information I can (depending on situation), and have myself lynched to prove my role and alignment.
|
On October 30 2010 09:45 Infundibulum wrote: Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment.
I can prove my role is what I say it is without having to be rolechecked and if anyone tries to fake a rolecheck on me they'll be incriminated when I prove them otherwise.
|
Vatican City State1650 Posts
On October 30 2010 09:39 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:36 orgolove wrote:On October 30 2010 09:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On October 30 2010 09:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:24 kitaman27 wrote: Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but if the Mayor can be role checked, why would a mafia even want to be elected? I suppose there is the possibility of a Godfather or something, but even that role seems like it could be used in better ways. Artanis said something like the mayor will return the role "Mayor" if rolechecked. I'd like it if he confirmed this. The mayor will show up as the role he has next to being Mayor, unless tampered with by outside sources which may or may not be in the game. I also do not recall ever having made such a statement. It'll do you well to not to blatantly lie about rules that can be easily clarified by a single PM for the coming game -_- I really do not know where I supposedly lied regarding this. If you could quote that message I can apologize for it, but I am currently unaware of it.
Sorry, that was directed to DrH, not you.
|
I'm voting for Bumatlarge. Honestly I'm not very impressed by how any of the other candidates have been conducting themselves.
Bum has been honest, helpful, and has some experience behind him. I know he hasn't posted in like 30 minutes (ie. 45 pages omfg), but we shouldn't forget about his candidacy and bandwagon onto Doc.H, and certainly not Pandain.
Again, Bum has my vote.
|
On October 30 2010 09:45 Infundibulum wrote: Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment.
i think it's beyond silly to say they can be assuredly confirmed in any way. There is got to be a high chance of having some kind of framer role, and what better choice than a mayor that's trying to say hey guyz i can be verified
|
On October 30 2010 09:42 Coagulation wrote:DocH Anyone that doesn't fucking vote for you must be scum? Are you fucking serious ? no because I never said that. that's a great way to start off by making me look really radical though.i voted for Pandain because it was a choice between Him And Fishball at the time (bum withdrew his candidacy before i voted or I would have voted him for my placeholder instead of pandain) I posted many reasons why i chose pandain over fishball MANY Logical reasons. i will repost them for you ****This was before you had decided to run for mayor This was the same reason I voted for Pandain, that's satisfying.Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 01:55 Coagulation wrote:On October 30 2010 01:44 Fishball wrote:On October 30 2010 00:07 Coagulation wrote: How about instead of blowing up about imaginary references to your CIRCLE in my post you answer the question that you completely avoided.
why would we want to risk a chance of 7 people possibly being scum manipulating town with mayor when we can go with the much safer odds of only 1 person possibly being scum.
I'm at work. I answer what I can given the time that I have, but I have always come back and address the rest. This is not dodging. People who have played with me in previous games will know. I think you meant 6 people, as I said there are only 6 people in this group. Now why would Mafia include 6 of their 9 buddies in this circle? Why 6? Not 3, not 4, but 6? Assume what you say is true, all 6 of us are Mafia, how exactly would we "manipulate" town? What stops the other solo Mayor and his "non-circle" buddies to manipulate town? Different scenario, but the outcome can very well be the same. Everyone can debate about the "truth", but no one can argue about that fact that I did offer information, and I want/need protection. With me being Mayor, doesn't make me a dictator. I still need the help of the town to provide valuable input. I would rather have a mayor that has transparency.. any communications he makes will be public so we can keep an eye on him. Is that not a reasonable reason considering the two choices?? maybe not the greatest reason but I FEEL CONFIDENT we are not getting FUCKED BEHIND OUR BACKS. Well in retrospect and considering what fishball has now said, no I don't think it's reasonable. If he lies he has put himself in an extremely precarious position that could blow up in the mafias face too easily. In fact I think if he were mafia this play, most likely, will end up benefiting the town. whereas the potential payoff of fishball as a townie mayor vs pandain as a townie mayor are much higher. fishball also won't be as easily manipulated by poor mafia bandwagoning.Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 00:26 Coagulation wrote: We need someone who is good at mafia but terrible at manipulation.
pandain is probably the best candidate under these parameters. he is an extremely organized and tactical scum hunter his analyses skills are good and he has a good level head about what needs to be done.
i have also noticed that he is a terrible lier and his posting style makes his motives extremely transparent. this would make it much easier for us to spot a slip up if he is mafia. and greatly increases the chances that he would fail at getting away with scum moves if it turns out he is a red.
Is that not a reasonable reason?? YOU SAID THE SAME THING EARLIER.Now i am sticking with pandain because he is most likely not a red trying to gain control of town based on the fact that he is not campaigning relentlessly. yet he seems to be doing pretty well in the polls despite this. he's bringing little suspicion onto himself and staying out of the heat of the argument while attracting voters who are too afraid to take a real position. good scum play if anything.Pandain is more then capable of using what tools he has at his disposal to help coordinate a good town strategy and i doubt he would run for mayor if he thought his role wasnt capable of contributing greatly as mayor.. and I FEEL HE is the most TRUSTWORTHY candidate so far BASED ON HIS ACTIONS IN THIS GAME. I Dont get the same feeling from you when your Threatening "FOS" On anyone that doesnt vote you.. I'm threatening FOS on people who come off as scummy, like you, or NB. You ignore the fact that I can prove I'm town if I'm elected, which Pandain cannot, so it is ridiculous that you would trust him over me. If I lie, I die, in this case. Don't forget that fact.IM NOT VOTING on WHOS PROMISING SOME BULLSHIT IF THEY GET MAYOR (town circle?? where??) IM VOTING ON WHO I TRUST THE MOST IN MY GUT IS THAT REASON ENOUGH? No gut feelings are the opposite of reason so I can't say it's reason enough. I would also say please stop using caps lock and getting so emotionally invested in this.
responses in red
|
On October 30 2010 09:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:45 Infundibulum wrote: Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment. I can prove my role is what I say it is without having to be rolechecked and if anyone tries to fake a rolecheck on me they'll be incriminated when I prove them otherwise.
read my last sentence
role != alignment
not even "standard roles" are 100%, due to the possibility of things like mafia medics or mafia detectives.
|
On October 30 2010 09:47 orgolove wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:39 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On October 30 2010 09:36 orgolove wrote:On October 30 2010 09:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On October 30 2010 09:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:24 kitaman27 wrote: Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but if the Mayor can be role checked, why would a mafia even want to be elected? I suppose there is the possibility of a Godfather or something, but even that role seems like it could be used in better ways. Artanis said something like the mayor will return the role "Mayor" if rolechecked. I'd like it if he confirmed this. The mayor will show up as the role he has next to being Mayor, unless tampered with by outside sources which may or may not be in the game. I also do not recall ever having made such a statement. It'll do you well to not to blatantly lie about rules that can be easily clarified by a single PM for the coming game -_- I really do not know where I supposedly lied regarding this. If you could quote that message I can apologize for it, but I am currently unaware of it. Sorry, that was directed to DrH, not you.
If you could do the same and point out where I lied that would be great thanks
|
On October 30 2010 09:28 infinitestory wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 08:58 NB wrote: so far we have 3 people who most likely to be mayor: Pandain, fishball, Dr.h
Panda: i think he would be the most reasonable choice since his first election post looks really clean o.O or as Dr.H said: "transparent"
Fishy: i dont know about this guy... he claimed that he has some sort of mason going on... and i dont trust any group of towny... there is always important information in there being shared and there always could be a spy.... really fishy
Dr.H: lots of people voting for him since he has some great posts on what he would do once he become a mayor. Let me tell you: He has never been a towny b4 in the history of mafia => he is a Veteran mafia and a shitty towny (no offends). Those people who did bandwagon and vote for him could easily be a group of mafia just voting for their leader... Dr.H will be my Last choice what so ever.
for now, i will keep my vote on my self and consider to change it on to the most reasonable person in the end! Your logic for electing Pandain is pretty flimsy. We want a mayor who: 1) Is a good analyzer and an experienced town player 2) Can be scrutinized or somehow confirmed as a townie. 3) Has a role that requires protection Now, ideally we get a mayor who is strongly all three (and ends up being townie under scrutiny). DrH, according to his posts, satisfies 2 and 3, especially 2, and I feel like he can carry out 1 as well. Fishball claims to satisfy 3, but his circle hasn't materialized, which makes me suspect him. Last in my book is Pandain, who claims SOFTLY to satisfy all 3. Emphasis on softly, because he only said he had a "valuable blue role" and could give "indirect confirmation." No real plan for action, unlike the other two candidates, as far as I saw. On top of that, you claim that DrH's bandwagon is suspect, but Pandain had an even larger bandwagon before DrH... why does that not trigger your red flag? It feels almost like you're fabricating reasons to put Pandain first and everyone else last. Odd, to say the least. I want to hear a bit more explanation on these points, NB. i did not make that post while im thinking about the situation. i thought about it first and fishy + Dr.H are the 2 people that i cant trust. For pandain: he is the "left over" so i cant touch him since there is nothing clear against him. I should have analyze mr.fish and Dr.H b4 mentioning panda but what ever.... As you see im still voting for myself but anyone above so dont take that post as im accusing anybody
|
On October 30 2010 09:51 Infundibulum wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:45 Infundibulum wrote: Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment. I can prove my role is what I say it is without having to be rolechecked and if anyone tries to fake a rolecheck on me they'll be incriminated when I prove them otherwise. read my last sentence role != alignment not even "standard roles" are 100%, due to the possibility of things like mafia medics or mafia detectives.
I am positive I can reliably prove my role is not a mafia aligned role since half the point of it is to stifle the mafia agenda. Why would mafia have a role designed to fuck over the mafia?
|
On October 30 2010 09:42 Coagulation wrote:+ Show Spoiler [RAGE] +DocH Anyone that doesn't fucking vote for you must be scum? Are you fucking serious ? i voted for Pandain because it was a choice between Him And Fishball at the time (bum withdrew his candidacy before i voted or I would have voted him for my placeholder instead of pandain) I posted many reasons why i chose pandain over fishball MANY Logical reasons. i will repost them for you ****This was before you had decided to run for mayor On October 30 2010 01:55 Coagulation wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 01:44 Fishball wrote:On October 30 2010 00:07 Coagulation wrote: How about instead of blowing up about imaginary references to your CIRCLE in my post you answer the question that you completely avoided.
why would we want to risk a chance of 7 people possibly being scum manipulating town with mayor when we can go with the much safer odds of only 1 person possibly being scum. I'm at work. I answer what I can given the time that I have, but I have always come back and address the rest. This is not dodging. People who have played with me in previous games will know. I think you meant 6 people, as I said there are only 6 people in this group. Now why would Mafia include 6 of their 9 buddies in this circle? Why 6? Not 3, not 4, but 6? Assume what you say is true, all 6 of us are Mafia, how exactly would we "manipulate" town? What stops the other solo Mayor and his "non-circle" buddies to manipulate town? Different scenario, but the outcome can very well be the same. Everyone can debate about the "truth", but no one can argue about that fact that I did offer information, and I want/need protection. With me being Mayor, doesn't make me a dictator. I still need the help of the town to provide valuable input. I would rather have a mayor that has transparency.. any communications he makes will be public so we can keep an eye on him. Is that not a reasonable reason considering the two choices?? maybe not the greatest reason but I FEEL CONFIDENT we are not getting FUCKED BEHIND OUR BACKS. On October 30 2010 00:26 Coagulation wrote: We need someone who is good at mafia but terrible at manipulation.
pandain is probably the best candidate under these parameters. he is an extremely organized and tactical scum hunter his analyses skills are good and he has a good level head about what needs to be done.
i have also noticed that he is a terrible lier and his posting style makes his motives extremely transparent. this would make it much easier for us to spot a slip up if he is mafia. and greatly increases the chances that he would fail at getting away with scum moves if it turns out he is a red. Is that not a reasonable reason?? YOU SAID THE SAME THING EARLIER.Now i am sticking with pandain because he is most likely not a red trying to gain control of town based on the fact that he is not campaigning relentlessly. Pandain is more then capable of using what tools he has at his disposal to help coordinate a good town strategy and i doubt he would run for mayor if he thought his role wasnt capable of contributing greatly as mayor.. and I FEEL HE is the most TRUSTWORTHY candidate so far BASED ON HIS ACTIONS IN THIS GAME. I Dont get the same feeling from you when your Threatening "FOS" On anyone that doesnt vote you.. IM NOT VOTING on WHOS PROMISING SOME BULLSHIT IF THEY GET MAYOR (town circle?? where??) IM VOTING ON WHO I TRUST THE MOST IN MY GUT IS THAT REASON ENOUGH?
Calm down, man. Tensions are expected to run high in a game based on lies and deception, but you don't need to blow your stack like that. People take you more seriously if you post with a more even-tempered tone.
|
On October 30 2010 09:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:45 Infundibulum wrote: Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment. I can prove my role is what I say it is without having to be rolechecked and if anyone tries to fake a rolecheck on me they'll be incriminated when I prove them otherwise.
I can't fathom any way you can do this that doesn't involve the possibility of you just getting your mafia buddies to help you do whatever it is you say you can do
I dont like the idea of just picking someone for what they say they are able to be or capable of. I'm more inclined to go with someone who has shown they can actually be useful instead of spewing confirmability.
Whatever it is you say you can do to confirm yourself i have no doubt the host put in something to make it possible to compromise the integrity of your claim. It's silly that you could try to be concrete on something so unknown to anyone.
I would rather have someone leading with clearly good intentions and capable of doing something instead of saying well guys i can be confirmed, cause once someone gets elected the spot lights so heavy it's ridiculous anyway
|
Vatican City State1650 Posts
On October 30 2010 09:51 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:47 orgolove wrote:On October 30 2010 09:39 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On October 30 2010 09:36 orgolove wrote:On October 30 2010 09:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On October 30 2010 09:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:24 kitaman27 wrote: Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but if the Mayor can be role checked, why would a mafia even want to be elected? I suppose there is the possibility of a Godfather or something, but even that role seems like it could be used in better ways. Artanis said something like the mayor will return the role "Mayor" if rolechecked. I'd like it if he confirmed this. The mayor will show up as the role he has next to being Mayor, unless tampered with by outside sources which may or may not be in the game. I also do not recall ever having made such a statement. It'll do you well to not to blatantly lie about rules that can be easily clarified by a single PM for the coming game -_- I really do not know where I supposedly lied regarding this. If you could quote that message I can apologize for it, but I am currently unaware of it. Sorry, that was directed to DrH, not you. If you could do the same and point out where I lied that would be great thanks
On October 30 2010 09:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Artanis said something like the mayor will return the role "Mayor" if rolechecked. I'd like it if he confirmed this. On October 30 2010 09:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote: The mayor will show up as the role he has next to being Mayor, unless tampered with by outside sources which may or may not be in the game. I also do not recall ever having made such a statement. I can't trust someone who's so "free" with his supposed" facts."
|
On October 30 2010 09:45 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:41 Fishball wrote: As for people bringing up the idea of having the circle come forward, I've put some thought into it.
If the circle remains hidden to the public, the Mafia can try to remain within and get as much intel as possible, while we'll be trying to do the same thing as well. If the circle comes public, the Mafia might as well off these members one by one. Keep in mind, there is a chance that there are no Mafia members in the circle (though very not likely), but regardless of this possibility, Mafia can plant confusion among the remaining members, and mislead the town.
Also, if the circle comes forward and god forbids, gets eliminated, it would defeat the entire purpose.
I'm not exactly against this idea, but I just want everyone else to think it through a bit more and provide more input, possibility a better alternative. At the end, this would not be my decision, but the other players'.
PS. A correction I have to make. I said I've came in contact with 4 other players earlier, this was a mistake. I've only came in contact with 3. The remaining 2 have not contacted me. This does not mean they haven't contacted each other, which I would not know. As far as I see it if Mafia start killing off town aligned members of the circle, they incriminate themselves really in the end. This puts a lot of pressure on mafia as to how they choose their kills and they have to very carefully consider their activity within the circle.
Let's assume one of the likely scenarios. There are 6 of us, 1 of them is red. Mafia starts killing a couple, 4 remaining, 1 of them is red. At this point, it cannot be helped that town will divert some of it's attention here and try to hunt for that 1 red. If down decides to lynch one of the most "suspicious" one and get lucky enough, they'll lynch the red, but if not, Mafia just got a free kill and the situation drags on. At the very end Mafia will only 1 member, but eliminates the circle entirely as well as any coordination within, as well as causing chaos, confusion, and waste town lynches if used. If town does not use their lynches at all, the Mafia call still eliminate the circle at a different pace.
|
On October 30 2010 09:52 NB wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:28 infinitestory wrote:On October 30 2010 08:58 NB wrote: so far we have 3 people who most likely to be mayor: Pandain, fishball, Dr.h
Panda: i think he would be the most reasonable choice since his first election post looks really clean o.O or as Dr.H said: "transparent"
Fishy: i dont know about this guy... he claimed that he has some sort of mason going on... and i dont trust any group of towny... there is always important information in there being shared and there always could be a spy.... really fishy
Dr.H: lots of people voting for him since he has some great posts on what he would do once he become a mayor. Let me tell you: He has never been a towny b4 in the history of mafia => he is a Veteran mafia and a shitty towny (no offends). Those people who did bandwagon and vote for him could easily be a group of mafia just voting for their leader... Dr.H will be my Last choice what so ever.
for now, i will keep my vote on my self and consider to change it on to the most reasonable person in the end! Your logic for electing Pandain is pretty flimsy. We want a mayor who: 1) Is a good analyzer and an experienced town player 2) Can be scrutinized or somehow confirmed as a townie. 3) Has a role that requires protection Now, ideally we get a mayor who is strongly all three (and ends up being townie under scrutiny). DrH, according to his posts, satisfies 2 and 3, especially 2, and I feel like he can carry out 1 as well. Fishball claims to satisfy 3, but his circle hasn't materialized, which makes me suspect him. Last in my book is Pandain, who claims SOFTLY to satisfy all 3. Emphasis on softly, because he only said he had a "valuable blue role" and could give "indirect confirmation." No real plan for action, unlike the other two candidates, as far as I saw. On top of that, you claim that DrH's bandwagon is suspect, but Pandain had an even larger bandwagon before DrH... why does that not trigger your red flag? It feels almost like you're fabricating reasons to put Pandain first and everyone else last. Odd, to say the least. I want to hear a bit more explanation on these points, NB. i did not make that post while im thinking about the situation. i thought about it first and fishy + Dr.H are the 2 people that i cant trust. For pandain: he is the "left over" so i cant touch him since there is nothing clear against him. I should have analyze mr.fish and Dr.H b4 mentioning panda but what ever.... As you see im still voting for myself but anyone above so dont take that post as im accusing anybody also about the pandain bandwagon: i have no clue what happen back then, i was having sc2 practice at that time so i didnt follow the thread AT ALL. im still reading backward atm T_T... My assumption is even though there was a bandwagon for pandain. The early bandwagon should not be weighted much as the later ones since people obviously have no clue whats going on and randomly vote. I will keep my eyes on the voting process from now till night1...
i think keep track on the voting thread is much more usefull than this thread since there is no mind fuck going on around there
|
United States4053 Posts
On October 30 2010 09:51 Infundibulum wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:45 Infundibulum wrote: Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment. I can prove my role is what I say it is without having to be rolechecked and if anyone tries to fake a rolecheck on me they'll be incriminated when I prove them otherwise. read my last sentence role != alignment not even "standard roles" are 100%, due to the possibility of things like mafia medics or mafia detectives. I've asked Artanis about this, and rolechecks return role name and alignment only. Does not include the details of the role pm, but critically does include alignment. If possible, I hope he can confirm this in thread.
|
On October 30 2010 09:53 Divinek wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:45 Infundibulum wrote: Also anybody running on the platform of "I will roleclaim if I am Mayor" needs to reconsider their platform in light of the fact that the mayor can be rolechecked.
Additionally, Artanis alluded to the possible existence of elements that can tamper with role check results - e.g. a framer or insane DT - meaning that a rolecheck on the mayor night 1 is possibly useless, as any rolecheck-tampering would almost certainly be directed the mayors' way.
Finally, remember confirming a players role ability != confirming a players alignment. I can prove my role is what I say it is without having to be rolechecked and if anyone tries to fake a rolecheck on me they'll be incriminated when I prove them otherwise. I can't fathom any way you can do this that doesn't involve the possibility of you just getting your mafia buddies to help you do whatever it is you say you can do I dont like the idea of just picking someone for what they say they are able to be or capable of. I'm more inclined to go with someone who has shown they can actually be useful instead of spewing confirmability. Whatever it is you say you can do to confirm yourself i have no doubt the host put in something to make it possible to compromise the integrity of your claim. It's silly that you could try to be concrete on something so unknown to anyone. I would rather have someone leading with clearly good intentions and capable of doing something instead of saying well guys i can be confirmed, cause once someone gets elected the spot lights so heavy it's ridiculous anyway
My role has two basic abilities: -to confirm itself to another player at night. basically I can send a signal to another player once per night that confirms I am the role I say I am. -to assist in stopping the spread of the plague. i will use this role to reliably coordinate the night actions of plague doctors and the results will show in the murrayitis counts.
Both of these actions can be proven, they have results that cannot be faked.
Secondly, (more like the hundred time I've said this and people don't listen)
If I were mafia using mafia to fake my confirmation ability. This means I have to consistently out scumbuddies for the entirety of the game just to stay alive. And for what? Immunity to nightkills that won't happen since I'd be mafia in the first place?
Mafia benefit from being mayor isn't big enough in a normal game to do a play like this, much less in a game like this where the mayors power is severely reduced.
What am I offering beyond my role? Simply put the town can trust me. I've put myself in a do or die situation and I'm more than prepared to back up what I'm offering. I can offer immense coordination that is OPEN to the town. I won't jump on poor mafia bandwagons. I'm not running on the basis of being a mayor that will do whatever the town (i.e mafia) tells him to do. I'll try my best to cut through the bullshit and use my votes the right way.
|
On October 30 2010 09:54 orgolove wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:51 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:47 orgolove wrote:On October 30 2010 09:39 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On October 30 2010 09:36 orgolove wrote:On October 30 2010 09:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On October 30 2010 09:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On October 30 2010 09:24 kitaman27 wrote: Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but if the Mayor can be role checked, why would a mafia even want to be elected? I suppose there is the possibility of a Godfather or something, but even that role seems like it could be used in better ways. Artanis said something like the mayor will return the role "Mayor" if rolechecked. I'd like it if he confirmed this. The mayor will show up as the role he has next to being Mayor, unless tampered with by outside sources which may or may not be in the game. I also do not recall ever having made such a statement. It'll do you well to not to blatantly lie about rules that can be easily clarified by a single PM for the coming game -_- I really do not know where I supposedly lied regarding this. If you could quote that message I can apologize for it, but I am currently unaware of it. Sorry, that was directed to DrH, not you. If you could do the same and point out where I lied that would be great thanks Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Artanis said something like the mayor will return the role "Mayor" if rolechecked. I'd like it if he confirmed this. Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 09:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote: The mayor will show up as the role he has next to being Mayor, unless tampered with by outside sources which may or may not be in the game. I also do not recall ever having made such a statement. I can't trust someone who's so "free" with his supposed" facts."
You're bad
He said that after I posted and asked him to confirm it. Why would I "lie" and then ask the mod to confirm my lie as being false immediately afterward. I even went as far as to qualify what I was saying.
I remembered wrong. Good thing I had the good sense to ask artanis to confirm it and qualify my statement before I tried to pass it off as a fact huh?
|
|
|
|