|
|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Did you like the endgame mechanic? |
| Yes I loved it and hope to see it in future games |
|
14% |
[ 1 ] |
| Yes, but it need some adjusting |
|
28% |
[ 2 ] |
| No I thought it was dumb and detracted from the game |
|
57% |
[ 4 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 7 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:39 pm Post subject: 121 |
 |
|
If we lynch someone to get to night 1, then the point of voting end game on day one is gone, and the game shouldn't be ended until only two players are left.
If we don't vote end game, then I'll assume there are mafia, and will hunt them accordingly.
By post 53 I was already beginning to be suspicious of TGC and was leaning just a smidge in the direction of killing him at night, if need be. I wasn't sure on this point, but I wasn't 100% against killing someone who was sufficiently suspicious, and evidence was beginning to form against someone. If day had ended at that point, it wouldn't have been enough to kill, but day wasn't ending.
Plus, there's the opposite. I say nothing at that point and do decide to kill night 1, and there's only 1 death. Everyone says "Oh, a death -- see there are mafia." It'd be a bit suspicious if, as the vig, I hadn't said anything up to that point about a kill potentially coming from a vig, yet then try to claim the kill. People would assume I was mafia.
My vig role is why I didn't immediately vote for TGC despite, in my mind, increasing suspicion against him. I plan on killing him tonight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:42 pm Post subject: 122 |
|
|
I mostly play in real life with friends.
It's... a bit scarier irl.
I sometimes frequent a channel on IRC on the esper.net server called #icywolf. We play 2 minute (or so) vanilla werewolf (20% wolves, 1 seer, 1 doctor)
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:05 pm Post subject: 123 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
| My vig role is why I didn't immediately vote for TGC despite, in my mind, increasing suspicion against him. I plan on killing him tonight. |
If wolves target Courk tonight and Courk targets TGC tonight do both targets die?
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:09 pm Post subject: 124 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
| Courk wrote: |
| My vig role is why I didn't immediately vote for TGC despite, in my mind, increasing suspicion against him. I plan on killing him tonight. |
If wolves target Courk tonight and Courk targets TGC tonight do both targets die? |
Killing roles generally happen at the same time.
This question strongly suggests that if you are scum, then Courk is protown (I can't see you thinking to ask this question if your and Courk were hyposcum together and you hypothetically knew that Courk was lying about her claim. I guess you could be in different scum groups.) I can't decide if it says anything about you being scum or town. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: 125 |
|
|
Thanks again Thok.
Assuming Courk is protown the scum will kill him tonight.
The scum are laughing to themselves over all this conjecture.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:55 am Post subject: 126 |
|
|
Courk: Ok, so that's the crux of my question. Why would you think it all that likely that another role would have a name if yours doesn't, given that as vigilante you have a unique role with no name? Do you have a descriptive title even or are you just Courk the Vigilante? If I was giving out role names I'd give them to all the people with unique roles at the very least. It might just mean you don't think like me though I guess.
Still, I think the rule is that we should give people who've claimed on day 1 the benefit of the doubt at least for day 1, so:
Unvote Courk
Especially since vigilante is so easy to prove/disprove with a night action or two under our belts.
Which leaves me wth:
Vote Wall-E
I am glad you weren't just mod-killed, but it's still all a bit suspicious to me. I do believe you that it was an honest mistake - even if you are scum I think you're story is probably mostly straight. But like I said, it's still suspicious behavior and frankly it's day 1 so we don't have a lot else to go on yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:07 am Post subject: 127 |
|
|
Yeah I realized as I posted that last post I was basically leaving everyone with: "...so that leaves me, really."
Actually, I just had a brilliant idea.
Vote for TGC today. Let Courk kill me tonight. I cannot say my reason for wanting to do things this way at this time. I will reveal it if pressured with votes because I always reveal my role when bandwagons form on me, but if you trust me we'll get a slightly larger (though still tiny) advantage now rather than later.
Scum beware 
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Undercover Monk
Professor Chaos
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:58 am Post subject: 128 |
|
|
Hey guys I will be gone till Saturday afternoon when I will get the replacement in. Have fun and play nice while I am gone.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:22 pm Post subject: 129 |
|
|
| The fact that I don't have a name as a pro-town player with a major power makes me think that anyone pro-town doesn't have one. TGC implied he has a name. The only way I can imagine a person having a name when a major power townie doesn't is if that person is scum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:27 am Post subject: 130 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
Vote for TGC today. Let Courk kill me tonight. I cannot say my reason for wanting to do things this way at this time. I will reveal it if pressured with votes because I always reveal my role when bandwagons form on me, but if you trust me we'll get a slightly larger (though still tiny) advantage now rather than later.
Scum beware |
I don't see why we should vote for TGC. Why would scum want to have us not vote endgame? While the rolename theory makes complete sense, I think that him not wanted to vote Endgame or no Lynch means he is not scum. I would much rather see Kraddoal (sp) lynched for his early endgame propoganda and then lurking.
Unvote, Vote Krad |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thedragon'sprincess
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:43 am Post subject: 131 |
|
|
| I'm replacing mnowax.... I'll try and get a readthrouigh tonight but in case I fall asleep I'll definately get one tomorrow |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thedragon'sprincess
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 2:46 pm Post subject: 132 |
|
|
ok readthrough is done and I'm not really sure about the no mafia situation.... its possible since after all this is the twilight zone, but I think having all townies might be too much. I definately disagree with ending the day this earlier which mnowax had his vote on so unvote. No one has screamed scum to me yet- still trying to read between the lines. I think it's actually a halfway decent idea to go no lynch for today so that the possibility of getting more information beginning day two is there. I'm not sure if I like the idea of doing it everyday until the mafia finally night kill someone- seems like the game might get rather boring plus the fact that the mafia very well may never night kill and let us keep thinking that we're in a game of zero mafia. So with that said
vote no lynch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:01 pm Post subject: 133 |
|
|
You know what, I want to hear the downside to voting no lynch.
Until I do: Unvote. Vote: no lynch.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 9:46 pm Post subject: 134 |
|
|
The downside is that we gain no information. Through a lynch we can see if whoever we deem most suspicious is mafia. If so, then the actions of others may seem suspicious. Did another player defend the lynchee to the end? Might be scum, too. Did another player get in an argument with the lynchee? Might be mafia trying to be clever.
Similar trains of thought if the lynchee comes up innocent.
If we don't lynch anyone, we have nothing to go on. If no one dies in the night, then come the next day we're right where we started. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:45 am Post subject: 135 |
|
|
Sorry I haven't been posting a lot, damn you guys can sure talk up a storm!
I want to adress one thing and then two random quotes because I feel like it and haven't had much time to post nowadays, what with summer work swamping me, projects I'm working on, managing my current game and of course planting the beginning seedlings of MM of course. I also have to read through Time Travel 2 which I can't until morning, but I figure it proper to adress this first.
I want to say something about me saying that vigilantes and Serial Killers are the same things, there was some strange thing I was thinking that vigs can only exist if there is a town side, which I refuse to think there is if there is no mafia to fight against. And I was thinking that if there were any killers, they would be serial, well, I guess it just comes across to me as something Monk would put in there, but I suppose pro-town power can come anyways even if there is no mafia to fight against, just disregard the statement.
Now two current quotes...
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:15 am Post subject: 136 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
Yeah I realized as I posted that last post I was basically leaving everyone with: "...so that leaves me, really."
Actually, I just had a brilliant idea.
Vote for TGC today. Let Courk kill me tonight. I cannot say my reason for wanting to do things this way at this time. I will reveal it if pressured with votes because I always reveal my role when bandwagons form on me, but if you trust me we'll get a slightly larger (though still tiny) advantage now rather than later.
Scum beware |
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
What?
As to your strategy, I have no idea of the reasons you want to do such things, so I can't really say that I agree we should do this (doy) or see any thought behind why you would want to do this since these are reasons only you know and is of no informed help to the town. When you say 'just trust me on this', it's really vague, confusing, honestly, if you weren't scum, and they saw this post, they might think on it to kill you in the night rounds anyways since they see possibility of you being a threat. I know there's a chance they won't, but seeing as how they have nothing else to go on at this point on how to make a logical kill, you'll just die anyways and won't be of any use to the town anymore. My advice: just reveal if you think it will be a benefit to the town, better to clear yourself and assure the players that they are making thr ight move by lynching me rather than hiding in the dark and letting them have a doubt in their minds to follow you.
And what's the difference of a benefit now than later? So long as its useful. I'd rather ignore your unknown and mysterious benefit if I were in the rest of the town's shoes (that could just as well be scum fakeclaiming to make a horrible attempt at avoiding the noose) and just play the game normally than just let someone else have my fate in their hands, not even having the slightest hint of what they'll do.
| Courk wrote: |
| The fact that I don't have a name as a pro-town player with a major power makes me think that anyone pro-town doesn't have one. TGC implied he has a name. The only way I can imagine a person having a name when a major power townie doesn't is if that person is scum. |
When did I ever imply it? I merely said you could be lying or not about whether or not you have a character name and so could I, it would all just be based on someone's sole word. I'm not trying to find any 'vibes' or 'implications' or 'feelings' on what someone says and try to pull off a clairvoyant that has just as much chance of it being reliable and just as much chance that it's not, maybe even more.
Major FOS Wall-E
I am keeping my vote on Courk based on the fact that all of a sudden she goes about the endgame bandwagon with a strong passion when just a few posts ago she took it as a joke. I see it as a diversion from the real game saught after by none other than scum.
More to come.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:31 pm Post subject: 137 |
|
|
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| I am keeping my vote on Courk based on the fact that all of a sudden she goes about the endgame bandwagon with a strong passion when just a few posts ago she took it as a joke. I see it as a diversion from the real game saught after by none other than scum. |
I think, while mostly true and valid, this seems a smidge misrepresentive. The way it's worded makes it sound like I'm still going after endgame when, in fact, I'm voting for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:42 pm Post subject: 138 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| I am keeping my vote on Courk based on the fact that all of a sudden she goes about the endgame bandwagon with a strong passion when just a few posts ago she took it as a joke. I see it as a diversion from the real game saught after by none other than scum. |
I think, while mostly true and valid, this seems a smidge misrepresentive. The way it's worded makes it sound like I'm still going after endgame when, in fact, I'm voting for you. |
I really do not see how this argument makes your case better, yes it makes me see how my point is invalid, when it does not change the fact that it still happened. A few words changed will not make any difference. The reasons you seem to be throwing at me of why you want to vote me seem to be easily flimsy and not really have that much ground at all.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:46 pm Post subject: 139 |
|
|
What? I didn't say your vote post was invalid. Nor did I say this was another point in my favor -- just like if you had said I was voting for Undercover Monk and I pointed out that I wasn't. I was clarifying my current stance, not adding to it.
Can you explain how my reasons for voting for you are flimsy and all that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MNOWAX
0.999... of a Troll
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:48 pm Post subject: 140 |
|
|
why haven't we ended the game yet?
_________________
The Man The Myth The Legend
MNOWAX |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:33 pm Post subject: 141 |
|
|
| MNOWAX wrote: |
| why haven't we ended the game yet? |
Did you miss my argument that no lynch is strictly better than end game, because any situation where we can end game we can also no lynch multiple turns in a row and then end game?
MNOWAX, stop being so MNOWAX. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MNOWAX
0.999... of a Troll
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 7:42 pm Post subject: 142 |
|
|
uhhh....um....sounds a little prisoner's duilemma to me. im happy with my vote to end this.
_________________
The Man The Myth The Legend
MNOWAX |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:04 pm Post subject: 143 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
| What? I didn't say your vote post was invalid. |
That should be "What? I didn't say your post was invalid." No idea where "vote" came from. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:08 pm Post subject: 144 |
|
|
Oy, MNOWAX, do you even know what the prisoner's dilemma is?
Scenario 1: No Scum
Scenario 2: Scum
In scenario 1 if we vote to end we all win.
In scenario 2 if we vote to end roughly 2 of us win.
Now we have to suppose the odds that Undercover Monk did indeed decide to put no scum in this game. The original idea seems to have been generated in some other game and was not Undercover Monk's idea to begin with. Given human ego as a factor I'd say the odds are slim that we are in Scenario 1. To be generous, let's presuppose 50% odds.
Scenario 1: 10/10 players win. 50% odds of a given player winning.
Scenario 2: 2/10 players win. 12% odds of a given player winning.
Overall: 31% chance of any given player winning.
That being the case, MNOWAX's assertion that he is preventing a prisoner's dilemma is a factual untruth, and intentional or not, he is wrong. He is, in fact, proposing suicide.
If anything it would be a Pareto improvement for us to vote no lynch. Nobody loses (the scum are either going to kill or not and while we may inluence their decision we are not responsible for it) and one person wins: The person we didn't lynch.
Voting no lynch is estimably a better option than voting end game before the seer even has a chance to cry wolf, as it were.
...OR I'M A SCUMMY WOLFY MAFIA WHO'S JUST TRYING TO SCREW WITH YOU... YOU DECIDE.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject: 145 |
|
|
After re-reading that (hooray fucking doo no editing) I've made a mistake. My math was wrong.
Scenario 1: 10/10 players win.
Scenario 2: 2/10 players win.
Total: 60% chance of a given player winning. MNOWAX is, I think, right.
Somebody check my math for me.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:51 pm Post subject: 146 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
After re-reading that (hooray fucking doo no editing) I've made a mistake. My math was wrong.
Scenario 1: 10/10 players win.
Scenario 2: 2/10 players win.
Total: 60% chance of a given player winning. MNOWAX is, I think, right.
Somebody check my math for me. |
If we have no scum, then for any individual person it doesn't matter whether we no lynch or end game, as long as any vigs don't do anything stupid.
If we have scum, no lynch is clearly better for town than end game.
Moreover your calculation ignores the fact that in Scenario 2, the 2/10 people are not random. Either you know that you win in situation 2 or you know that you lose in situation 2.
The only people for whom end game is better than no lynch are scum. The only people who should be voting for end game are scum, idiots, or people who haven't thought the situation out carefully. I don't know how many of those three choices covers MNOWAX. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:13 pm Post subject: 147 |
|
|
Wall-E: The maths you've given is over-simplified. There's 4 situations really:
1a: End game and no scum. Everyone wins. Yay
1b: End game and scum. Scum win. Boo (unless you're scum)
2a: Play on and no scum. X people win. Worst case scenario, lets say that's 2 people
2b: Play on and scum. We have a fun game, and probably 2 people win in the end.
What to do depends on the relative probability of 'a' or 'b' (i.e. whether there's scum). In situation 2 you can probably say that you have about a 2/11 chance of winning either way, so if you're not scum and you're going to lose in situation 1b, then it boils down to whether you think there's a better or worse than 2/11 chance of there being no scum.
Assuming a 50% chance of either is really completely unjustified in this sort of situation. It's better to work out what odds you want and compare what you think they are to that. What you've done is effectively pick a completely arbitrary number (the 50% chance of either) and then compare it to another completely arbitrary number (whether the odds of winning are > 50%).
What my logic above doesn't account for is the fact that winning in either 2a or 2b will feel like a genuine achievement, whereas winning in situation 1a will feel totally lame, and losing in situation 1b you'll feel like a complete chump. That's probably the main reason why I'm basing my vote on the assumption that there is scum.
I think overall no-lynch is definitely better than end game, but both are worse than voting someone off and making some progress. I think the majority of people are against no-lynch as a strategy too, we just haven't, between us, settled on who to actually lynch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:17 pm Post subject: 148 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
| What? I didn't say your post was invalid. Nor did I say this was another point in my favor -- just like if you had said I was voting for Undercover Monk and I pointed out that I wasn't. I was clarifying my current stance, not adding to it. |
You ask me to change the wording, to me it seems like you want to change any 'implications' that were made upon your image when you clealry know that a) I cannot edit my post to say so and b) even if I were to bind to your sense of it sending the wrong message the people can see for themselves that you are clearly not on this platform anymore. It just seems like there's no point to bringing it up when the wording should be of no one's concern, as long as you present your posts in a clear and acceptable matter, that's the only thing the ten others should be looking at when deciding whether or not to cast a vote on you. I just don't see how my posts should be what represents you when you yourself clearly also have a voice. I just saw no point in bringing it up.
I do apologize for the Run-on sentences, it's just a habit I can't break. 
What I meant by that was your arguments for why you would want to lynch me before that barage of posts came in, give me a minute to scan yours and I will get right back to you on that.
Like me saying vigs were SKs, and trying to bring that as offense, when it should've been blatantly clear that I was loopy when I posted that and simply an error on my part.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:19 pm Post subject: 149 |
|
|
| Thok wrote: |
| If we have no scum, then for any individual person it doesn't matter whether we no lynch or end game, as long as any vigs don't do anything stupid. |
Define a stupid action for a vig. If we go to night and TGC is still alive, I will target him. I find him enormously more suspicious than other players, and I feel that's the point of a vig -- kill people who seem very suspicious, even if it's early in the game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject: 150 |
|
|
| TGC wrote: |
| that's the only thing the ten others should be looking at when deciding whether or not to cast a vote on you |
That should be the only thing, but even I have become suspicious of a person because of someone else's posts, only to find later that the original poster had made a mistake. It's not how a game should be played, but it's easy to do things like that.
I didn't ask you to edit any of your posts, I don't know where you're getting that from. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:43 pm Post subject: 151 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
| Thok wrote: |
| If we have no scum, then for any individual person it doesn't matter whether we no lynch or end game, as long as any vigs don't do anything stupid. |
Define a stupid action for a vig. If we go to night and TGC is still alive, I will target him. I find him enormously more suspicious than other players, and I feel that's the point of a vig -- kill people who seem very suspicious, even if it's early in the game. |
This worries me as well, intnet on killing someone with two reasons that I already argued against, it just seems to me that you want to preform drastic decisions without even thinking of the consequences. Voting the endgame, killing off a townie. (Yes I claimed, if I hadn't, I might not have fought off chances to be killed when I want to bring the numbers to the town on the offchance that there are scum in this game) A bit reckless, shouldn't there be a little bit more consideration of every one of the players? Not killing just for reasons based solely on gut feelings when your gut could just as well be one that's wrong?
Me saying vigs were SKs was obviously a mistake, the game mechanic got screwed up in my head and I thought there was a certain something that made a vig a vig. Though it is possible that SKs can act like vigilantes (originally stated by spindrift if I'm not mistaken) which makes me think more that you could be an SK based on your vigilante claim and your kills based on uninformed guesses. As to get a safe claim.
Presupposing that I do have implications in that post when I said there wouldn't be enough characters from one episode is also a bit far reaching. I merely mentioned the possibility that some could have character names considering it is a big factor in most themed games on what distinguishes itself from others. I never meant to imply anything, but you sound as if you want there to be something based on the fact that you don't have a character name and it is possible that I do, it's also possible that I don't and that you are the only one who 'knows' you have a charcater name, when you could be just as well scum trying to play a certain situation off. It could go either way. But I wouldn't say it's so pushed in one direction that its sturdy enough to base a vote on or a vig kill on. That's crazy talk!
Also, how do you always post when I make posts???  Seriously, freaky.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:48 pm Post subject: 152 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
I didn't ask you to edit any of your posts, I don't know where you're getting that from. |
I never meant to say you did. I just brought that up as a possible product of your post, of why you would want to bring it up. But its not, so I was merely pointing out that I thought the post was non-productive.
Also, playing how you want to see the other contestants through their fellows eyes is a bit putting your eggs in one basket. If you overdo it, you're letting their bias cloud your judgement when you are the one actually playing the game. View the player as how Courk would view it, not anyone else, those people could be scum for all you know. 
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:49 pm Post subject: 153 |
|
|
TGC: do you have a name for your character (or just the role townie)?
| Courk wrote: |
| Thok wrote: |
| If we have no scum, then for any individual person it doesn't matter whether we no lynch or end game, as long as any vigs don't do anything stupid. |
Define a stupid action for a vig. If we go to night and TGC is still alive, I will target him. I find him enormously more suspicious than other players, and I feel that's the point of a vig -- kill people who seem very suspicious, even if it's early in the game. |
I'm assuming that if we are no-lynching, then we are no-lynching with the purpose of trying to force any scum into revealing their existence by submitting a night kill, and that we'd explicitly ask a vig not to submit a kill so that if wouldn't influence our decision-making about whether or not scum exists. In that situation, a vig kill would be stupid, since we'd explicitly ask the vig not to kill.
If we lynch Wall-E and he comes up scum, would you still vig TGC, given that TGC was heavily attacked by Wall-E? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:01 pm Post subject: 154 |
|
|
| Thok wrote: |
TGC: do you have a name for your character (or just the role townie)?
If we lynch Wall-E and he comes up scum, would you still vig TGC, given that TGC was heavily attacked by Wall-E? |
1. If you must know I have no character for my role. But I fail to see how the information is useful throughout the entire game, no one is confirmed by their claims, just hunches to go on, we could easily be throwing those ideals out the window. Hopefully this holds up, but I wouldn't be surprised if I was still killed by possible vigilantes or lynched, I haven't been using the best choice of words and that's all you have in these day rounds unfortunately.
2. This should not influence Courk's 'decision', Wall-E could just as well be a scumbuddy of mine trying to sell me out. It's an assholish gambit but it's worked before in previous games of mafia here, and Wall-E seems to know enough about mafia to have done it once or twice himself, or at least have that experience. So we don't want to throw away the possibility I might be scum based on a sole fact as what a person's role is. Scum have various tactics in MG, it's what makes them versatile. Expect the unexpected, at least for the town's sake.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:14 pm Post subject: 155 |
|
|
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| 1. If you must know I have no character for my role. But I fail to see how the information is useful throughout the entire game, no one is confirmed by their claims, just hunches to go on, we could easily be throwing those ideals out the window. Hopefully this holds up, but I wouldn't be surprised if I was still killed by possible vigilantes or lynched, I haven't been using the best choice of words and that's all you have in these day rounds unfortunately. |
I'm not asking you the information to confirm you, but rather because almost all of Courk's attack on you is on the basis that you seemed to imply that you had a role name.
FOS Irgy, because his reaction to the name discussion suggests that he has a name (also he's been jumping around a lot with his vote, but always onto a popular bandwagon.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:02 am Post subject: 156 |
|
|
| Thok wrote: |
I'm not asking you the information to confirm you, but rather because almost all of Courk's attack on you is on the basis that you seemed to imply that you had a role name. |
OIC.
I'm actually in consideration of voting Wall-E, considering his hard campaign to get me lynched for strange and vague reasons. Even if he was cop and I was scum, we haven't even had a night yet, unless he knows other information through a more powerful role that should somehow 'incriminate' me.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thedragon'sprincess
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:14 am Post subject: 157 |
|
|
| MNOWAX wrote: |
| why haven't we ended the game yet? |
didn't he asked to be replaced in all games? cuz I'm pretty sure I replaced him |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MNOWAX
0.999... of a Troll
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:48 am Post subject: 158 |
|
|
im sorry i didnt see the preplacemnt in this gaem yet sorry 
_________________
The Man The Myth The Legend
MNOWAX |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragon Phoenix
Judge Doom
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:57 am Post subject: 159 |
|
|
Ending the game is IMO a stupid gamble.
Voting no lynch has its charms, but gives the scum a free kill.
Lynching Wall-E would be good.
_________________
My photography:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artrock2006/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:39 pm Post subject: 160 |
|
|
| Dragon Phoenix wrote: |
Ending the game is IMO a stupid gamble.
Voting no lynch has its charms, but gives the scum a free kill.
Lynching Wall-E would be good. |
Obvious, although it might be somewhat of an option if we keep turning up townies. To consider the option there might not be mafia.
I'd just think a gamble with a certain person (considering all the scumtells) would be a much better option considering the chances we hit scum, if we don't, at least we'd try, but I'd like to at least get some sort of edge on scum before throwing a lynch away.
Currently second on my list with his negligence to be completely concise, yet it just seemed the endgame voters in the beginning were kind of fishy. I dunno, I would vote him, its just something doesn't add up. Newbs generally tend to be rarely scum in their first game and almost always act as if they were. Take it from my experiences.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
