|
|
|
|
| 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 |
Undercover Monk
Professor Chaos
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:28 am Post subject: 41 |
 |
|
I see where some of you are coming from but I think that those who actually make it through should recieve some recognition for surviving as opposed to just being under the blanket heading of a town win. Thats how the party version works anyway if you are scared to die you probably shouldn't play the game as it is about risking it all to win. Why should I coddle the players just because they will feel bad to lose. I may lose 90% of the games I play because I die but that makes the games I do win feel that much better.
Anyway heres a vote count:
3 Endgame: MNOWAX, Kad Drol, Courk
1 Courk: DP
1 Isautekisa: Thok
1 The Great Crep'er: Wall-E
1 Thok: Isautekisa
1 MNOWAX: Irgy
Not Voting: Silverfire, Spindrift, Wall-E
With 11 alive it takes 6 to lynch
_________________
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 |
|
 |
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:12 am Post subject: 42 |
|
|
| Undercover Monk wrote: |
| I see where some of you are coming from but I think that those who actually make it through should recieve some recognition for surviving as opposed to just being under the blanket heading of a town win. |
Surviving isn't a skill that should be rewarded. I can see rewarding not being lynched, but mafia tend to night-kill the members of town who are actually playing well.
Everybody voting endgame better hope there aren't three mafia outside of the group asking for an endgame vote. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Undercover Monk
Professor Chaos
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:23 am Post subject: 43 |
|
|
all right ill compramise I will give a team win and an individual win status how about that. all members of the winning team will share the accomplishment with extra Kudos and recognition going to the survivors
I hope that makes you all happy 
_________________
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 |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:36 am Post subject: 44 |
|
|
| KradDrol wrote: |
Guys, this is Twilight Zone mafia....what better twist than to find out that there were NEVER ANY MAFIA. Instead, we're all town and being pitted against each other, letting our fear and baser instincts take over rational judgement? |
Then what is the point of @#$!ing playing!? (excuse my french) Why should this game be any different than any other? Why are we all letting crazy paranoia sink in the idea that Monk has something else up his sleeve when we are all clear, rational thinkers? Especially letting the idea that something as crazy as voting the endgame is possible.
Why are you letting yourselves think that when a) We are only a few posts into the game, b) we have not even seen a night go by yet, c) In this post* it says that there are such things as 'bugs to be worked out', which would imply that the setup is fair to all and it would seem that if it were that, we can do a first lynch NORMALLY and still continue playing or else it would simply be unbalanced and therefore 'bug-riddled'. And with a normal lynch we can actually learn something about the roles and therefore get a grasp on the game, instead of attempting to do things which we don't know if we can do and insist that we do do or else the game goes south.
And d) we are still uninformed, and instead of trying to get discussion going to move the game forward and actually help us make some educated guesses on who we should lynch for the good-guy's benefit, you are going off in wacky directions for the weak reason of 'it's twilight zone mafia and therefore is not what you think it to normally be'. Which can easily turn into a WIFOM situation, except this time it has to do with the game mechanics itself and not a certain player's actions. You can assume that every game is unpredictable, and yet you clearly show no withstanding proof that this one is because we haven't been shown any evidence because the game has hardly started.
Please stop trying to be loony and wacky and inconsistent and irrational, that is my job, do not steal my thunder. And if this is just some attempt constructed by the mafia to distract us from lynching them, then it was a really poor one on your part, as it is clearly visible, that you are voting the endgame for hardly any reason at all. I see through it.
Unvote, Vote: Courk
FOS: MNOWAX |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:42 am Post subject: 45 |
|
|
| DAMNIT!! Someone was hogging the computer, I had to wait to post that, it was conveniently after Undercover Monk posted the endgame votes. Still, I think you should catch some Z's before posting here, and crazily voting the 'endgame'. Assumptions about how this game works are bad, UM could be running a whole different show behind the desk, we know nothing, I say we start with a normal lynch and take our way from there, examining their role if they should die, and get a further scope of the environment based on what they can do and what happens from here on out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:43 am Post subject: 46 |
|
|
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| Which can easily turn into a WIFOM situation |
But I like the wine in front of me *and* the wine in front of you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:43 am Post subject: 47 |
|
|
*
| Undercover Monk wrote: |
Twilight Zone Mafia
# of Players: 8-12
status: working the last few bugs out
description: see the sign-up thread |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:48 am Post subject: 48 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| Which can easily turn into a WIFOM situation |
But I like the wine in front of me *and* the wine in front of you. |
Really? Because you seem to only want to go in one stoned direction. Voting crazily and seeing if something happens.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:06 am Post subject: 49 |
|
|
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| Really? Because you seem to only want to go in one stoned direction. |
How can you form that sort of opinion at this point in the game. I was more-or-less OMGUS voting to start with, not horrible on day 1, then voted to end the game. I haven't staunchly refused to change that vote. I haven't encouraged others to join me in that vote. In fact, this is only my second post after that vote. At no point have I acted in a way that fits the opinion that I "want to go in one stoned direction." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragon Phoenix
Judge Doom
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:57 am Post subject: 50 |
|
|
| Thok wrote: |
| Undercover Monk wrote: |
| *In my games if you are dead you lose, only the survivors win. |
This is really stupid. I mean incredibly totally stupid. It encourages people to be passive as they want to avoid being night killed or lynched, and a game of mafia with everybody being passive is impossible to play.
Plus, you didn't include this condition in the sign-up thread, or in your post making the rules. If that part of the win condition had been known, people might not have signed up for the game. |
I second that emotion.
| Quote: |
| Not Voting: Silverfire, Spindrift, Wall-E |
We can't have that. Chip in with a vote.
Unvote Courk
Vote Silverfire
_________________
My photography:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artrock2006/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KradDrol
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:32 am Post subject: 51 |
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
The above link is the reason I think that there may not actually be any mafia in this game. The setup for today, with the ability to vote to end the game at any time and the inherent paranoia in wondering who would still be mafia at any given time, it all fits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isauteikisa
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:45 pm Post subject: 52 |
|
|
Y'know, I would laugh my ass off if the twist was that there is no mafia. But I severely doubt the game is a direct reference to that episode. Anyone trying to get an edge (or just a fan of the show) would have found//known this information and then it turns the mafia game into just a game of "how can we convince people that there is no mafia"?
Hm. I say we lynch one today and see if a night kill happens. As I said, it would be funny, but I doubt it.
Unvote: Vote: MNOWAX, just to get some pressure on multiple people.[/b]
_________________
[VXCL] 075-1DR
I'm male, people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:51 pm Post subject: 53 |
|
|
| A night kill could happen if there is a vigilante. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:06 pm Post subject: 54 |
|
|
| unvote, vote Courk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:11 pm Post subject: 55 |
|
|
Anyone voting endgame is very suspicious. It seems to me like a mafia plot to try and get people to assume that this whole game is just a plot without any evidence to support that theory.
vote MNOWAX
FOS all other Endgame voters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isauteikisa
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:27 pm Post subject: 56 |
|
|
@Courk - you're right. Which means that, unfortunately, nightkills don't give us any definate info. I still hold that ending the game immediately isn't a great idea. Give it a full phase... more twists may be coming that give us more info. We are playing Twilight Zone mafia, right?
_________________
[VXCL] 075-1DR
I'm male, people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silverfire
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:28 pm Post subject: 57 |
|
|
The Wikipedia link that KradDrol brought up certainly seems to be strong evidence that there is no mafia. Also, the idea of 'practical joke mafia,' without scum, is well-known.
| Chuck, in the Mafia Roles thread, wrote: |
| Make all the roles fake. Call it Insane Asylum Mafia. Everyone thinks they're the inhabitants of a Mafia infested town but none of it's real. Their decisions mean nothing. Results of police investigations are decided by coin toss. Everyone else fails to do anything. Lynching victims always escape. The first player to complain about the game is the winner. |
Additionally, (I have no idea what the show is like) I haven't seen references to characters or situations from the show, just a warning that this game would have 'twists.' So it would make some sense if the connection to the Twilight Zone was that the game was a fake.
However, Crep'er makes a good point that at one point UM was 'working the bugs out.' And most importantly, if this is a 'joke' game, the town can't really lose. Even if a person dies, it's hardly a point against his record that he lost in a practical joke game. On the other hand, if we vote endgame and this is indeed a real game, we lose.
FOS:MNOWAX, KradDrol, and Courk, just because it is in the interest of the mafia to end the game. I won't vote you because I can understand how the town would want to 'beat the mod' if this is a 'joke' game.
Instead I will vote: Wall-E because he hasn't made a single post, and that's not helping. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:54 pm Post subject: 58 |
|
|
| Silverfire wrote: |
| Additionally, (I have no idea what the show is like) I haven't seen references to characters or situations from the show, just a warning that this game would have 'twists.' So it would make some sense if the connection to the Twilight Zone was that the game was a fake. |
The Twilight Zone was an anthology. Every episode told a brand new story with a brand new situation. There were no repeated characters. The only thing that you could really expect was that something unusual would be happening -- such as there being no aliens, or the Earth isn't moving closer to the sun, it's moving further away. The show was full of twist endings. The Shelter is less fitting than Maple Street, but still lends some weight to the idea that there are no mafia.
The fact that no one else has jumped on the end the game bandwagon indicates to me that there are no mafia, as well. It'd be easy for a 3 person group to end the game, and a 2 person group would come incredibly close. I doubt either of the first two are mafia, since that was a big risk. I know I'm not mafia, but being the third on I can see how you'd be more suspicious of me.
Working out the bugs could be balancing out cops and vigs so that everything wasn't given away after one night. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:30 pm Post subject: 59 |
|
|
| If we actually want to test the idea of whether or not there is scum, we can ask all vigs/roleblockers not to use their powers. Yes, scum can choose not to kill, but the threat that a cop exists should be enough to force them into submitting a night kill. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:32 pm Post subject: 60 |
|
|
So your saying that we should end the game on the assumption that UM based this game off of two episodes of the 157 twilight zone episodes. That seems a little scummy to me.
Even if this was just a practical joke mafia game, we might as well gather some evidence for that and not just end the game on some assumption.
FOS Courk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragon Phoenix
Judge Doom
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silverfire
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:15 am Post subject: 62 |
|
|
How about we all vote no lynch until we have a nightkill?
vote: no lynch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:12 am Post subject: 63 |
|
|
| Why would we do that? The mafia could easily just decide not to kill someone to try to get more townies to vote Endgame. If we dont lynch anyone today, then on day two we will be in the same situation we are now, arguing over if this is a practical joke or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:06 am Post subject: 64 |
|
|
| spindrift wrote: |
| Why would we do that? The mafia could easily just decide not to kill someone to try to get more townies to vote Endgame. If we dont lynch anyone today, then on day two we will be in the same situation we are now, arguing over if this is a practical joke or not. |
If there is a mafia, then are they really going to let a night pass without a night kill? If they do, we can no lynch repeatedly, letting any cops get lots of investigations for free.
I don't think going no lynch immediately is the right play, but I think it's a better play than ending the game immediately. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silverfire
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:07 am Post subject: 65 |
|
|
Back to the question of what constitutes 'winning,' I agree that mafia is a team game. Therefore, if there are no mafia and we kill one of our own, we really haven't won (this is, of course, just my opinion). So, if there are no mafia, I would prefer to end the game in a state when we still have all our townies.
If we don't lynch anyone...
...and there are no mafia,
we go into day 2 with a little bit more information. We can repeat this process until the cops can tell us for sure whether there are mafia or not.
...and there are mafia,
the mafia, knowing that we won't start lynching until they start killing, and that every night that passes just gives the cops more info, will probably decide to make a kill anyway. We give the scum a one-townie advantage, but we eliminate all risk of them jumping on an early endgame wagon.
The mafia might decide to lie low the first night, but then we are in the same situation as if there were no mafia: all we have to do is wait for the cops to tell us whether there are mafia or not.
The only problem with this method is the possibility that there might not be a cop, but other than that I see no flaw in it. I have no idea what we can do if there's no cop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject: 66 |
|
|
Well if there is no mafia I doubt that UM would give a cop. And if he did give us a cop then iI would think there would be multiple of them with different (random, paranoid, naive).
I still don't like the idea of us no-lynching because we give up a chance to kill a mafia and basicly give the mafia one extra kill. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:37 pm Post subject: 67 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| Really? Because you seem to only want to go in one stoned direction. |
How can you form that sort of opinion at this point in the game. I was more-or-less OMGUS voting to start with, not horrible on day 1, then voted to end the game. I haven't staunchly refused to change that vote. I haven't encouraged others to join me in that vote. In fact, this is only my second post after that vote. At no point have I acted in a way that fits the opinion that I "want to go in one stoned direction." |
1. I form that opinion based on the fact that it was just out of nowhere and there was no reason to try to bandwagon some nonenscial option. That you put the third vote onto it with little to know reason when you know very well that a bandwagon with three votes has some sort of potential of focus in an 11 person game. Which could get us off track of trying to actually strike up some conversation to out some possible scum, which is generally something mafia do to avoid death, and therefore, if you do something that helps the mafia more than town, it is generally 'scummy' or 'stoned'. I'd like to think that's more of a decision based on poor judgment than a blatant screw up by the scum who have little to no idea of how to stay out of focus.
2. I was not addressing the OMGUS vote at DP at all, there was no mention of it in my posts in reply to your endgame votes at first. Secondly, you have no explanation on why you had voted the endgame in the first place, other than 'its a bit tempting', so is it a temptation to do something good or bad?
3. Yes I am aware of both these factors, but it is generally a good idea to not have your words twisted about and to not put an agreeing third vote on the notion when you seem to not take it seriously anyways. I only ask that when some joke voting has been done enough anyways, to not take it into the field of view of the general discussion which get us absolutely nowhere as opposed to voting actual people which does take us on somewhat of a path to making educated guesses on who is scum. Something you seemed to not be too interested in doing, and instead taking a creative look at the situation when we don't even know if such actions are possible, and you seeming like you do as if you had some inside scope on the action. And what may be worst of all, is throwing the chance away to actually learn some roles in this game via Lynching and nightkilling to find a little out about some of the game. This is what makes me think this is a crazy pathway, that has absolutely not even a shred of a reason as to why we should take it.
I know there have been many posts after this one, but I just felt the need to address the arguments towards mine, early in the game.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:07 pm Post subject: 68 |
|
|
| Dragon Phoenix wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Not Voting: Silverfire, Spindrift, Wall-E |
We can't have that. Chip in with a vote.
Unvote Courk
Vote Silverfire |
You unvote courk and put the vote on someone else just because someone hasn't had the time to post in this game within 3-4 days? Isn't that just a bit jumping the gun on the GL's lurking policy?
| KradDrol wrote: |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
The above link is the reason I think that there may not actually be any mafia in this game. The setup for today, with the ability to vote to end the game at any time and the inherent paranoia in wondering who would still be mafia at any given time, it all fits. |
Uhhh, I beg to differ, under the condition that if Twilight Zone (a television series with a lot more notable episodes than Maple Street) mafia were based on one single episode, it would be disconnected from the supposable reputation with Monk's games. Given that he already referred to some past modships he has fulfilled wherein the only ones alive would win the game, it may very well be possible that traits for other games he's modded might overflow into this one. Take for example 'Heroes 2 Mafia', where he took characters from the entire season to make roleplayers, in order to have more material to work with, also take in consideration that he is modding a Redwall mafia*, a fictional series of yet an immensely complex universe, thus, there would be a lot of characters to work with. Working with a single episode with not that many significant characters to be roleplayers would be difficult I imagine. Charlie could be a vig perhaps.
Just a possiblilty though, just saying that if Monk puts characters as roleplayers for this game, its more likely he takes them from the scope of the entire series. Ah well, off to more deliberation I suppose.
*Pearls of Lutra mafia was ran once before, I think.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 11:16 pm Post subject: 69 |
|
|
| spindrift wrote: |
Anyone voting endgame is very suspicious. It seems to me like a mafia plot to try and get people to assume that this whole game is just a plot without any evidence to support that theory.
vote MNOWAX
FOS all other Endgame voters. |
Pretend I said this so i look good, k? QFT. As I said before, a major distraction from the real game, an opportunity for the mafia (if there are any, which is highly likely) to safe-claim no matter what, don't give them that chance.
| Courk wrote: |
| A night kill could happen if there is a vigilante. |
Though if there's no mafia it just turns the vig into an SK. Kinda defeating arguments saying that there is no reason to continue on with the game to kill people, an argument you are hesitant to stray from. Hmmm.
| isauteikisa wrote: |
| @Courk - you're right. Which means that, unfortunately, nightkills don't give us any definate info. I still hold that ending the game immediately isn't a great idea. Give it a full phase... more twists may be coming that give us more info. We are playing Twilight Zone mafia, right? |
Again, I cannot say this enough, the whole point of a vig to be called one, is to be a killer that is sided with the town. And if there is no opposing side, than there is no vig, there's an SK that thinks he's a vig and therefore we do have to lynch actual people in order to win, this whole endgame trip is simply a detour. I will however, agree with you on the fact that UM may have a card up his sleeve, given that he has enacted one or two twists in the past.
| Courk wrote: |
The fact that no one else has jumped on the end the game bandwagon indicates to me that there are no mafia, as well. I doubt either of the first two are mafia, since that was a big risk. I know I'm not mafia, but being the third on I can see how you'd be more suspicious of me.
Working out the bugs could be balancing out cops and vigs so that everything wasn't given away after one night. |
1. This absolutely makes no sense, the mafia could be just hiding in the bushes, a bandwagonnish vote to end the game would mean an instant lynch for them. The fact that you automatically want to clear the other two just because they 'took a big risk' is also a bit hypocritical. What distinguishes the first voter on the bandwagon from the last? Is there some reason you hold them higher than anyone else who might vote on the bandwagon? Doesn't that just instruct mafia to not vote with the three and make themselves look innocent? These are all just variables, and the sheer fact that you let yourself form opinions based on that is just too scummy for me. And if you know how you will act in a game will make you look scummy and has absolutely no progress or benefit value for the game, then why initiate these actions in the first place?
2. You know what would be an even better way to balance out the game if there were no mafia? Having no power roles at all! Just all townies, but still insist that there are enemies, therefore the game never loses its mystique.
It's nice how you scum try to make it so that any opposing argument from the good guys sounds like diarrhea of the mouth. But considering that you are trying to base whole-hearted arguments of 'there's no scum in this game' off of 'assumptions' from supposedly 'joking' notions basically means that no one in their right mind is going to give a @#$% about what you say. Seeing as how we've not even had a night pass by, there is no cold hard evidence to possibly support the 'no scum' theory, and just looking at the attempt that you are trying to pull off some BS action on Day 1 when new actions to the game like this need really convincing arguments for others to go along with. No one spews these kinds of theories on just page 2 of a game unless they've had a couple of beers. I'm surprised scum is still trying.
| Thok wrote: |
| If we actually want to test the idea of whether or not there is scum, we can ask all vigs/roleblockers not to use their powers. Yes, scum can choose not to kill, but the threat that a cop exists should be enough to force them into submitting a night kill. |
But the chance that a cop doesn't exist is the same as scum not existing in this game, its completely unknown, a total variable, I'd like a more fool-proof plan if possible. I'd also like to hear the non-believers explain themselves on why its so possible for a scum not to exist but not possible for cops, vigs, etc. to NOT exist.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:23 am Post subject: 70 |
|
|
| spindrift wrote: |
Well if there is no mafia I doubt that UM would give a cop. And if he did give us a cop then iI would think there would be multiple of them with different (random, paranoid, naive).
I still don't like the idea of us no-lynching because we give up a chance to kill a mafia and basicly give the mafia one extra kill. |
But then again, you simply never know. If we consider the fact that the game is all for nothing but a joke, why don't we consider other options as well? I mean, the idea of thinking outside the box with this game is appealing, but its when you don't think of all scenarios, is what makes me suspicious.
Right now, my brain kind of hurts.  And I doubt that UM would put that many dimensions to the game or else he would surely be out of comission as well. And I know 'doubt' is a very limiting word, but the point of mafia game is to find the crossroads between finding the best gameplan and comitting ourselves to one.
To make a long story short: We need to formulate a path of strategy and stick with it. No turning back.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Crep'er
2% Spambot
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:25 am Post subject: 71 |
|
|
| Silverfire wrote: |
How about we all vote no lynch until we have a nightkill?
vote: no lynch |
Again, this is just a diversion from the main stream of discussion. For once, can we all be on the same page? If we're all spewing our own ideas and no one is listening to one another, things will never get done.
But if we were to no lynch, I think it be more of a risky move than one beneficial to the town, NL is usually used in cases when there seems to be no trace of scumminess and the town feels with another night passing by, they will gain more information. At this point however, I feel we have gotten a read on most of the players here, and say that its better that we just move forward with a lynch of one of the more suspicious players and give it our best shot. If it doesn't work out then we always have the next day, in all seriousness though, I question that post, seeing as how NL is rarely used and when used, is only a last resort. And seeing as we've got a lot to work with I just don't see the need for it.
| Thok wrote: |
| spindrift wrote: |
| Why would we do that? The mafia could easily just decide not to kill someone to try to get more townies to vote Endgame. If we dont lynch anyone today, then on day two we will be in the same situation we are now, arguing over if this is a practical joke or not. |
If there is a mafia, then are they really going to let a night pass without a night kill? If they do, we can no lynch repeatedly, letting any cops get lots of investigations for free.
I don't think going no lynch immediately is the right play, but I think it's a better play than ending the game immediately. |
Once again, there is the possibility (just like with no mafia) for there to be no cops, but even if there are, there could be mafia, and if so, its really just more likely that there's more than one of them. So if one fails because the cop outed them, it can always be sacrifical, one being hanged to their death while the remaining are always aware, and in the dead's own head, they can be the winner.
I have to fully agree with your statement, but still keeping in mind the two options for later days, when we have to rely on them most when things don't quite work out with lynching. But on the first day, I'd like to see what would happen if we just approach this game normally...and lynch Courk. heheh.
| Silverfire wrote: |
Back to the question of what constitutes 'winning,' I agree that mafia is a team game. Therefore, if there are no mafia and we kill one of our own, we really haven't won (this is, of course, just my opinion). So, if there are no mafia, I would prefer to end the game in a state when we still have all our townies.
If we don't lynch anyone...
...and there are no mafia,
we go into day 2 with a little bit more information. We can repeat this process until the cops can tell us for sure whether there are mafia or not.
...and there are mafia,
the mafia, knowing that we won't start lynching until they start killing, and that every night that passes just gives the cops more info, will probably decide to make a kill anyway. We give the scum a one-townie advantage, but we eliminate all risk of them jumping on an early endgame wagon.
The mafia might decide to lie low the first night, but then we are in the same situation as if there were no mafia: all we have to do is wait for the cops to tell us whether there are mafia or not.
The only problem with this method is the possibility that there might not be a cop, but other than that I see no flaw in it. I have no idea what we can do if there's no cop. |
1. But we never know for sure, and 'tis better to try to strive for the benefit of the greater good than simply the good of one. Plus, the sacrificed to see if there are mafia or not will go down as one who helped us get further in the game a saint. If someone's really gonna throw a fit if they don't exactly make it to the finish line, then maybe they should've thought twice before singing up. In my opinion, one player's welfare, gamewise, is meaningless, the town as a whole is what matters.
2. Don't get me wrong, it seems like a good idea, but in this plan, your ideals to keep all townies alive hinge on the very aspect of there being mafia or not. And we just don't know for sure, and if there are mafia, we need to take every chance we get to take out mafia, as apparently, we're never sure if we're going to get another chance. I'd just rather go down fighting than knowing we lost because we didn't take the chance to lynch. Like I said before, there's just too many scumtells with the posts we have now to leave the option of lynching behind.
3. Here's the thing about that, everyone has a posting ability, and the scum have just as much opportunity to claim cop as the real cop does, and you never know which claim is true. Unless you base it on the reputation they have in the game, which means we might as well lynch them anyways for acting scummy. And if theres no plan if theres no cop, it leaves it all up in the air, which means we could've used the lynches to our advantage but never could.
Again, I like the fact that you are considering all options, but we're overthinking it, we're barely on page 2 and already we're considering NL. I just think it would be safer if we play it out but keep those options in mind for the future, I mean, UM can't be that twisted to never give us that chance, right? 
Sorry, forgot to include this argument before my previous one.
_________________
Potato. Belgium. Eight. Random Lynch # Mafia awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:13 am Post subject: 72 |
|
|
| TGC wrote: |
| Working with a single episode with not that many significant characters to be roleplayers would be difficult I imagine. Charlie could be a vig perhaps. |
My role didn't come with a character name. Did yours?
Also, a vigilante is not the same as an SK. If end game had a townie and a vigilante, and they voted to end the game, the town would win. A vigilante is pro-town.
| Quote: |
| Though if there's no mafia it just turns the vig into an SK. Kinda defeating arguments saying that there is no reason to continue on with the game to kill people, an argument you are hesitant to stray from. Hmmm. |
I don't understand what you're saying here.
| Quote: |
| Courk wrote: |
The fact that no one else has jumped on the end the game bandwagon indicates to me that there are no mafia, as well. I doubt either of the first two are mafia, since that was a big risk. I know I'm not mafia, but being the third on I can see how you'd be more suspicious of me.
Working out the bugs could be balancing out cops and vigs so that everything wasn't given away after one night. |
1. This absolutely makes no sense, the mafia could be just hiding in the bushes, a bandwagonnish vote to end the game would mean an instant lynch for them. The fact that you automatically want to clear the other two just because they 'took a big risk' is also a bit hypocritical. What distinguishes the first voter on the bandwagon from the last? |
If the mafia jumped on the bandwagon, yes, others would be saying "Gee, it's suspicious that A, B, and C jumped on the end game bandwagon" -- but the mafia would not care about that, they'd have won by that point. They haven't done that, which can mean there are no mafia, or the people on the bandwagon are mafia.
Now, I said that I doubt the first two on are mafia -- that's not automatically clearing them. I'm not saying there's no way they can possibly be mafia, I'm saying I doubt they are. The first couple on a bandwagon tend to draw more attention, especially when it's one so out of the ordinary. As a whole, we could haev very easily said "You're voting end game? That's incredibly suspicious" yadda yadda, much like what you're doing. Mafia don't tend to draw attention to themselves like that. Also, the mafia don't need to really end the game today, so they wouldn't be taking that risk drawing attention to themselves. Mafia would be perfectly content picking people off over the course of the game. But, given the situation where they could end the game and win, I think they'd take it -- but they haven't.
Now, why is the third on more suspicious than the first two? The third starts giving the bandwagon some steam. I could very easily be mafia trying to take advantage of a bandwagon starting up to end the game.
I don't choose my actions based on what makes me seem the least scummy, I choose actions based on what I think will help the town win. Because I have a hard time not coming across as scummy, when I am mafia I am comparatively quiet because I am afraid I'll give myself away. When I'm pro-town I don't care since I figure, basically, the truth will set me free.
Did I get everything addressed to me? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragon Phoenix
Judge Doom
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:06 am Post subject: 73 |
|
|
| The Great Crep'er wrote: |
| Dragon Phoenix wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Not Voting: Silverfire, Spindrift, Wall-E |
We can't have that. Chip in with a vote.
Unvote Courk
Vote Silverfire |
You unvote courk and put the vote on someone else just because someone hasn't had the time to post in this game within 3-4 days? Isn't that just a bit jumping the gun on the GL's lurking policy? |
No. pefectly valid reason for a day one vote and far superior to most. YMMV.
_________________
My photography:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artrock2006/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:00 pm Post subject: 74 |
|
|
Hi guys.
My perspective: Vote: The Great Crep'er is trying way too hard to look not scummy.
It's redonkulous to vote to end the game day 1. Puhleez. Let's get some mafia nice and dead first.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:12 pm Post subject: 75 |
|
|
To all those voting end game: do you have any reason to vote that rather than no lynch? If there is scum in the game, no lynch is strictly better than end game, and if there isn't scum in the game, then they are equal. We can always no lynch and then vote end game if you really want to end game. (No lynch is probably the wrong play also, but its clearly better than end game.)
@TGC:
1. Dragon Phoenix is playing in a Dragon Phoenix manner. I'd be more surprised if he wasn't going after lurkers.
2. You've misunderstood my argument about how no lynch would work. It's not the existence of cops that would help us, but the threat of existence of cops. If mafia want to no-kill multiple times on the off-chance that there are no cops in this game, then they're bigger risk takers than I am. It's not a foolproof plan (I can think of at least two scenarios where it fails) but nothing in mafia is risk free.
@Courk, could you answer my question in post 40 about why you decided to change your mind? You went from not supporting an end game lynch in your first vote to vehemently defending your vote for end game, and I'm not really sure I've seen an explanation for that switch. (I've seen post-facto justifications for keping your vote where it is, but nothing that explains your vote in the first place.)
| Wall-E wrote: |
| My perspective: Vote: The Great Crep'er is trying way too hard to look not scummy. |
Huh? Could you explain why you think TGC is trying "too hard to look not scummy"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: 76 |
|
|
Certainly, sorry I missed that question.
Voting end game was far too tempting and amusing. It really doesn't go deeper than that. I didn't really intend it to stay there for long, but what's happened since I did place it there, as I've explained, has made me think there may not be any mafia.
On a best play for the town level, you're right, no lynch is better than ending the game. And, as someone said earlier, ending the game when only two people are left is the wisest move. I got caught up in how amusing it'd be if there were no mafia and we correctly pinned that day 1 so that everyone could win by UM's only-those-living-win rule.
Ending the game is clearly going nowhere, and I've explained everything behind my vote for it. Keeping my vote there will only lead to further questioning and further repetition, making the game stall.
I do want to vote for TGC. If there is mafia, he's my prime suspect. His string of posts was just off enough to make me suspicious of him, especially when he said that vigilantes were like SKs.
But, best for the town if there's no mafia and all that, Unvote, Vote: no lynch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:23 pm Post subject: 77 |
|
|
Certainly, since you asked. He posted enormous amounts of text on the subject of how to proceed on day 1. It's just not that big a decision to me. I usually vote for extremely quiet folk or extremely noisy folk. Just my style. Feel free to ignore me or not or whatever.
Since I've been given some floor space: It really is quite rediculous to assume there's no mafia. We have an unknown here, the correct option is NOT to just assume one or the other. I would get behind a NO LYNCH vote if it came up strongly.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:57 pm Post subject: 78 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
| Certainly, since you asked. He posted enormous amounts of text on the subject of how to proceed on day 1. It's just not that big a decision to me. I usually vote for extremely quiet folk or extremely noisy folk. Just my style. Feel free to ignore me or not or whatever. |
Simply posting lots of material can't really be a scum tell. At best it's an attempt at a "Too Townie" type argument, which is flawed because it ignores the fact that TGC could be posting all of that material because he actually is a townie with stuff the say. You may not find stuff interesting enough to comment on, but that doesn't mean others don't find stuff interesting either.
Now, if you see contradictions or scummy actions in TGC's posts, then that should be brought up (that's how you can determine whether .) But I don't see anything in TGC's posts that look particularly scummy and opposed to merely weird. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:00 pm Post subject: 79 |
|
|
| I think we need to clear what we think is winning and losing. That will help us decide if we should vote No lynch or vote a person. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:23 pm Post subject: 80 |
|
|
I don't play this game for an iwin button. No offense to Undercover Monk, but he can tell me I'm the Grand High Poobah of the Naked Bacon Fry and I won't really give an elegant fuck.
If I contribute to the team I play on winning, even if I die as a result, I will consider it a victory.
Unvote. Vote Thok. Happy?
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing!
Last edited by Wall-E on Tue Jul 01, 2008 2:13 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
| 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
