|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:11:24 GMT -5
Post by special on Jul 17, 2009 20:11:24 GMT -5
If we don't want her alive, it's probably better to allow her to suicide toNight rather that waste a lynch on her. But we also might want to use her as a second lynch. Go for the #2 target. As long as we had that plan in place long enough to allow defenses and/or claims. Or we could have a secondary vote for who we'd like to be NK'd Don't even think about going down this road. Before you do, you are required to read the second Mafia game, colloquially M2. My objections are, in the main, twofold. Firstly what you propose grants a voice in the argument about who to kill to the Rebels - and don't think they'll remain silent. Thus, if HM agrees to go along with the Town wish, you're risking letting the Rebels have an extra Nightkill. My second problem is that none of us have executive oversight of the PM that HM sends to Hawk. She can write anything, and we wouldn't know. My other worry is that the Rebels have a redirector. That would be a disaster that keeps on hitting, at least until we hang Hockey Monkey. You should remember that from Alpha Centauri. HM, you probably missed that game, on the Giraffe boards. Sister Coyote was a Remorseful Vig - a Nightkiller who would target themselves if they killed a Townsperson. SHe killed Night 2, then confessed in Day 3. She had to target herself, but the Mafia had a redirector, so they turned her self-targeted kill on another Townsperson. We had to lynch her in order for the Town not to lose in a Day or two. I wish you hadn't claimed now, since if the Rebels have a redirector you've just handed them a second directable kill every Night. But hte cact's out of the bag and we'll just have to deal with it. Yeah, um, I'm an idiot
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:22:48 GMT -5
Post by special on Jul 17, 2009 20:22:48 GMT -5
I have an ethical problem with all of the alleged handshakers, not just you NAF. You all had a brief opportunity to redeem yourselves by dropping the topic once Hawk had posted the Vanilla Town PM, and not one of you took it. Not a single one of you adjusted your trajectory even after you were confronted with the undeniable fact that rules of the game were designed to prevent such things, even though the Mod wasn't able to tie up all of the loose ends prior to the game starting. That might bring some of you (assuming Town alignment) some sort of satisfaction that you might have been able to steal an advantage for your faction, but not everyone finds satisfaction in such things. Some people find such things actually have the inverse effect and take satisfaction away from the experience of playing on the same side as people who play like that. I'm one of those people. Normally, I would just rail at such play from my metagame ethical ivory tower, but in this case I happened to have information that casts not just ethical doubt on the handshaking, but doubt as it relates to the Town's risks in game. Pleo's play is particularly rubbing me the wrong way on multiple levels. In one post he asks me to elaborate on my 2 PMs, then suggests that I PM the mod if I have any doubts as to staying within the confines of the rules. Yet when I refuse to budge on any more information about the first PM (the one I have already stated that the mod specifically asked me to ignore, not to mention the fact, again, that we have all been advised to consider our role PMs to have self-destructed upon reading) he smears me as being evasive and then goes on to slap a vote on me for keeping things to myself, not speaking clearly and not subscribing to reason. What if I have followed your (Pleo's) suggestion and asked the Mod and he said that further elaboration would be in violate the rules? Why would you take my word on that while you have pissed on everything else I've said since I claimed? I have, in fact, exchanged a single round of PMs with Hawk since receiving my correct role, but I didn't need his opinion to know that I have already said enough on the subject. So you have ethical problems with people doing things that weren't forbidden like trying to handshake, but you have no problems with your behaviors that were expressly forbidden? You didn't ignore the first PM, and you brought up the topic of PMs. I suppose you can say it was to serve a better end, that you were 'breaking the letter of the mod instructions' to negate other people 'breaking the spirit of the mod instructions' but I'm not sure if I buy that.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:24:20 GMT -5
Post by special on Jul 17, 2009 20:24:20 GMT -5
I've been waffling back and forth on whether or not to do this, especially with cookies casting doubt on its efficacy, however more to gain/lose may influence decisions. Also in retrospect my instinctive sneakiness may have made this more questionable than it needed to be. Sadly if you know me the most telling detail is that it's an a there and not an an, like I would normally write. It actually hurt to write that incorrectly. That was posted before the vanilla pm had been posted. oh and once more Hey mod, can we successfully bid to have the merc do an action that doesn't involve killing, such as sitting on his hands or monologuing? Vote: Mr. Blockey [/color] It looks to me like you're attempting to stretch a fortuitous coincidence into a 'breadcrumb'. Your words are spaced, at random, it appears. Other than the word 'threat' (a not uncommon word), there is nothing telling about the sentence, nothing significantly indicative. But you struck gold without realizing it and are attempting to spin it into a townie tell, I think.[/quote] you're kidding, right? Even with the error of using 'a' instead of 'an'?
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:24:40 GMT -5
Post by special on Jul 17, 2009 20:24:40 GMT -5
Unvote Pollux Oil. Sorry, guys, seriously. Helpful hint: if you use [vote ] NOTAREALVOTE [/b][/color] and remove the space between the e and the ], it will come out as Vote: NOTAREALVOTE [/color][/quote] or you can use {vote} blah {/vote}
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:40:15 GMT -5
Post by hockeyguy8435 on Jul 17, 2009 20:40:15 GMT -5
I believe Cookies. I think too much is being made of the supposed handshake. I am Establishment and I have a slightly differently worded win condition. Mine says that all the Rebels must be dead. So I've told you that I'm not Vanilla. I've been contemplating going ahead and claiming. I feel like I should based on the type of role that I have. I am the Minister of War. I have a mandatory night kill. If I don't specify someone to kill, it will be me. I've played in plenty of other games to know that this role can be detrimental to the town and I don't want to do that. I am not the mercenary, so there is someone else out there who may be a killer tonight other than scum. I'll let the town decide what to do with me, but if I don't get lynched I will have to kill someone tonight. Now you all have something to discuss on Day One. Three kills toNight is not something we need to see happening. And while I don't want to just lynch you based on your role, I really don't see what else we can do. Any other ideas? If the Scum do have a Redirector, your role surviving will give them a second NK. Regardless of if you suicide, which you said you wouldn't, and I highly respect that. I wouldn't suicide myself either. No point signing up to play just to suicide. I'd do my best to help. As for right now I'm not voting for you HM, though I'm really thinking about it. We can't risk the Scum getting a chance to use your role against us. I have one idea, but I don't know how well it'd work, and just posting it may render it useless. But holding it back could hurt us anyway if there are no other options. It involved not lynching you, and then you could tell us if your target was killed. That way we'd know if the Scum redirected your role or not. Yeah, by saying this they could potentially let you go for the first Night and then use you the next Night, but maybe we'd luck out and you'd hit one of them? Or you'd hit one of us ad we'd be at square one again. Or if we had a Town Roleblocker, they could block you? But then they couldn't block the Scum... Sigh. I don't know if you find any of that useful, but if I think of anything else I'll let you know.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:45:19 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Jul 17, 2009 20:45:19 GMT -5
Well it does preclude almost all PFK type win conditions. If the town wins when the Rebels are no longer a threat then as long as town eliminates rebles it doesn't have to worry about traditional SKs and whatnot. Unless the mafialike group and the SK are both labelled rebels. I'm thinking of a similar time when it was just Town vs. Third Part, more or less, and the town won when all threats were eliminated. Given that we are the Establishment, any seditious movement is a rebellion, ain't it? That's actually a fantastic point and something I hadn't thought of. I guess we'll have to see how the first scum and third party deaths are reported before we can call the matter officially closed.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:47:36 GMT -5
Post by hockeyguy8435 on Jul 17, 2009 20:47:36 GMT -5
By the way, that's in no way asking for the Roleblocker (assuming we have one) to come out and claim.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 20:56:12 GMT -5
Post by hockeyguy8435 on Jul 17, 2009 20:56:12 GMT -5
Maybe it's my lack of sleep but I don't know how I didn't realize this when I made my post. If we don't lynch HM toDay, regardless of if the Scum Redirect her or not, if they do have one, and attempt to use it on her, we'll have to lynch her the following Day. No matter what, just to keep the Scum from using her. So my first idea doesn't work, except to prove the existence of a Scum Redirector. Sorry to waste your time with that.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 21:23:27 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Jul 17, 2009 21:23:27 GMT -5
Three kills toNight is not something we need to see happening. And while I don't want to just lynch you based on your role, I really don't see what else we can do. Any other ideas? If the Scum do have a Redirector, your role surviving will give them a second NK. Regardless of if you suicide, which you said you wouldn't, and I highly respect that. I wouldn't suicide myself either. No point signing up to play just to suicide. I'd do my best to help. Wait...are you seriously suggesting that we lynch HM because it's possible that the scum have a redirector? Or did I misinterpret you?
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 21:24:02 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Jul 17, 2009 21:24:02 GMT -5
[/color] It looks to me like you're attempting to stretch a fortuitous coincidence into a 'breadcrumb'. Your words are spaced, at random, it appears. Other than the word 'threat' (a not uncommon word), there is nothing telling about the sentence, nothing significantly indicative. But you struck gold without realizing it and are attempting to spin it into a townie tell, I think.[/quote] you're kidding, right? Even with the error of using 'a' instead of 'an'?[/quote] You make a fair point. Just how grammatically accurate has Mr. Blockey been previously?
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 21:30:02 GMT -5
Post by julie on Jul 17, 2009 21:30:02 GMT -5
Are redirectors that common? I've never played in a game with one.
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 21:40:28 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jul 17, 2009 21:40:28 GMT -5
Unless the mafialike group and the SK are both labelled rebels. I'm thinking of a similar time when it was just Town vs. Third Part, more or less, and the town won when all threats were eliminated. Given that we are the Establishment, any seditious movement is a rebellion, ain't it? That's actually a fantastic point and something I hadn't thought of. I guess we'll have to see how the first scum and third party deaths are reported before we can call the matter officially closed. Considering my win condition says all rebels must be dead and the vanilla town condition says that they must no longer be a threat, I'd say it's reasonable that the theif and merc are labeled as rebels but aren't able to kill (and/or have no actual contact with the main scum group).
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 21:45:08 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jul 17, 2009 21:45:08 GMT -5
I'll amend what I said about the merc. We know he can kill if hired to do it.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:17:44 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Jul 17, 2009 22:17:44 GMT -5
I believe Cookies. I think too much is being made of the supposed handshake. I am Establishment and I have a slightly differently worded win condition. Mine says that all the Rebels must be dead. So I've told you that I'm not Vanilla. I've been contemplating going ahead and claiming. I feel like I should based on the type of role that I have. I am the Minister of War. I have a mandatory night kill. If I don't specify someone to kill, it will be me. I've played in plenty of other games to know that this role can be detrimental to the town and I don't want to do that. I am not the mercenary, so there is someone else out there who may be a killer tonight other than scum. I'll let the town decide what to do with me, but if I don't get lynched I will have to kill someone tonight. Now you all have something to discuss on Day One. Fuck. Unvote: Special Ed Vote: HockeyMonkey I have no particular reason to think you're scum. In fact, I believe you. Which is why you've got to go. If scum have a watcher, and a Doc tries to protect you from yourself, that'd suck a lot. And if they've got a redirector, this could be disastrous. I dig why you're nervous about your role, a mandatory vig can be bad for Town. An outed mandatory vig can be worse.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:18:06 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Jul 17, 2009 22:18:06 GMT -5
Are redirectors that common? I've never played in a game with one. Not really, and the idea of a scum redirector is rarer still, only appearing in two games* so far, if my recollection is correct. Sorta makes me wonder if the scum redirector thing is PIS. *Alpha Centauri and SSBM
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:30:40 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Jul 17, 2009 22:30:40 GMT -5
Three kills toNight is not something we need to see happening. And while I don't want to just lynch you based on your role, I really don't see what else we can do. Any other ideas? If the Scum do have a Redirector, your role surviving will give them a second NK. Regardless of if you suicide, which you said you wouldn't, and I highly respect that. I wouldn't suicide myself either. No point signing up to play just to suicide. I'd do my best to help. Wait...are you seriously suggesting that we lynch HM because it's possible that the scum have a redirector? Or did I misinterpret you? Dunno about Hockeyguy, but that's a big reason I'm for lynching her. 1) She's mandatory, and thus more likely to do more damage to Town than Scum. 2) If Scum have a redirector, we're up shit creek.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:31:39 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Jul 17, 2009 22:31:39 GMT -5
Are redirectors that common? I've never played in a game with one. Not really, and the idea of a scum redirector is rarer still, only appearing in two games* so far, if my recollection is correct. Sorta makes me wonder if the scum redirector thing is PIS. *Alpha Centauri and SSBM How the hell would that be PIS? By like, what, 6 players now?
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:37:40 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jul 17, 2009 22:37:40 GMT -5
I have an ethical problem with all of the alleged handshakers, not just you NAF. You all had a brief opportunity to redeem yourselves by dropping the topic once Hawk had posted the Vanilla Town PM, and not one of you took it. Not a single one of you adjusted your trajectory even after you were confronted with the undeniable fact that rules of the game were designed to prevent such things, even though the Mod wasn't able to tie up all of the loose ends prior to the game starting. That might bring some of you (assuming Town alignment) some sort of satisfaction that you might have been able to steal an advantage for your faction, but not everyone finds satisfaction in such things. Some people find such things actually have the inverse effect and take satisfaction away from the experience of playing on the same side as people who play like that. I'm one of those people. Normally, I would just rail at such play from my metagame ethical ivory tower, but in this case I happened to have information that casts not just ethical doubt on the handshaking, but doubt as it relates to the Town's risks in game. Pleo's play is particularly rubbing me the wrong way on multiple levels. In one post he asks me to elaborate on my 2 PMs, then suggests that I PM the mod if I have any doubts as to staying within the confines of the rules. Yet when I refuse to budge on any more information about the first PM (the one I have already stated that the mod specifically asked me to ignore, not to mention the fact, again, that we have all been advised to consider our role PMs to have self-destructed upon reading) he smears me as being evasive and then goes on to slap a vote on me for keeping things to myself, not speaking clearly and not subscribing to reason. What if I have followed your (Pleo's) suggestion and asked the Mod and he said that further elaboration would be in violate the rules? Why would you take my word on that while you have pissed on everything else I've said since I claimed? I have, in fact, exchanged a single round of PMs with Hawk since receiving my correct role, but I didn't need his opinion to know that I have already said enough on the subject. So you have ethical problems with people doing things that weren't forbidden like trying to handshake, but you have no problems with your behaviors that were expressly forbidden? You didn't ignore the first PM, and you brought up the topic of PMs. I suppose you can say it was to serve a better end, that you were 'breaking the letter of the mod instructions' to negate other people 'breaking the spirit of the mod instructions' but I'm not sure if I buy that. How can you say handshakes weren't forbidden when quoting of PMs is forbidden and the Mod posted the Vanilla PM? And I freely admit that my dislike of the handshake contributed to my decision to claim as I did, but looking at the motivation behind my actions and that of the handshakers speaks volumes. The handshakers' play potentially tilts the playing field one way and/or is infected with scum/PFK manipulation. My play levels the playing field and mitigates the potential risk to Town of putting faith in potentially scum/PFK infected handshaking.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:47:57 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jul 17, 2009 22:47:57 GMT -5
Rephrasing...
How can you say that handshakes (specifically Vanilla Town handshakes or Town win condition handshakes) weren't forbidden when quoting of PMs is forbidden and the Mod posted the Vanilla PM?
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:54:23 GMT -5
Post by special on Jul 17, 2009 22:54:23 GMT -5
So you have ethical problems with people doing things that weren't forbidden like trying to handshake, but you have no problems with your behaviors that were expressly forbidden? You didn't ignore the first PM, and you brought up the topic of PMs. I suppose you can say it was to serve a better end, that you were 'breaking the letter of the mod instructions' to negate other people 'breaking the spirit of the mod instructions' but I'm not sure if I buy that. How can you say handshakes weren't forbidden when quoting of PMs is forbidden and the Mod posted the Vanilla PM? And I freely admit that my dislike of the handshake contributed to my decision to claim as I did, but looking at the motivation behind my actions and that of the handshakers speaks volumes. The handshakers' play potentially tilts the playing field one way and/or is infected with scum/PFK manipulation. My play levels the playing field and mitigates the potential risk to Town of putting faith in potentially scum/PFK infected handshaking. Maybe I'm a mistaken idiot (again) but it seems like you're arguing both sides. 1) If the handshaking players were town, you think they were cheating. Though they never did quote their PM, they were only paraphrasing their win condition, which does seem to be allowed by the Moderator. They were supposed to forget the PMs, but no where did it say we should forget what was in them or our win condition. But you considered it cheating because they violated the spirit of what the moderator intended. So to stop this cheating, you cheated (by your definition) by referencing your PM, including the PM that the moderator directly told you to ignore. Ignore, not bring into play in the game. 2) If the handshaking players include Scum, they still weren't cheating but were using great skill to make themselves appear Town, the goal of most Scum. So, to stop that....you cheated (by your definition)....
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 22:58:26 GMT -5
Post by special on Jul 17, 2009 22:58:26 GMT -5
Rephrasing... How can you say that handshakes (specifically Vanilla Town handshakes or Town win condition handshakes) weren't forbidden when quoting of PMs is forbidden and the Mod posted the Vanilla PM? because no one appeared to quote their PMs. The moderator did not say to forget your PM. the rule states: I think that's different from avoiding all discussion of what was contained in those PMs. If that was the intention, then yes, we wouldn't be allowed to discuss our win condition, but additionally, we wouldn't be able to discuss our roles or any information gained through our roles. I mean, if I'm an investigator and I get a result in a PM, can I not share that result? That's ridiculous. If I'm a protector, am I not allowed to claim? Of course we can discuss the content.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 23:09:47 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jul 17, 2009 23:09:47 GMT -5
I'm allowing for both sides because I don't know which one, if not both, are at play. I'd consider any scum handshakers just as unethical as any townies. I want a fair and balanced game more than I want to win, and I think the majority of players on both sides would agree with me.
Do you not consider it a Mod error to post the Vanilla PM after the game had already started? The fact that the Vanilla PM hadn't yet been posted is the only reason why the handshaking was even attempted, by any of the factions who attempted it. Call me Jr. Mod if you want, but throwing my first role PM into the equation made it two Mod errors that could be largely diffused of impact to either side if I claimed as I have, and the possibility that the scum could be in there exploiting one of the errors that my error could mitigate is what settled it for me.
When Hawk didn't indicate that he thought I should sub out based on what was in my first PM, I was relieved. I wanted to play, and I don't think we even have a sub bench to draw from and it took us forever and I day to just fill up the game.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 23:13:16 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jul 17, 2009 23:13:16 GMT -5
Rephrasing... How can you say that handshakes (specifically Vanilla Town handshakes or Town win condition handshakes) weren't forbidden when quoting of PMs is forbidden and the Mod posted the Vanilla PM? because no one appeared to quote their PMs. The moderator did not say to forget your PM. the rule states: I think that's different from avoiding all discussion of what was contained in those PMs. If that was the intention, then yes, we wouldn't be allowed to discuss our win condition, but additionally, we wouldn't be able to discuss our roles or any information gained through our roles. I mean, if I'm an investigator and I get a result in a PM, can I not share that result? That's ridiculous. If I'm a protector, am I not allowed to claim? Of course we can discuss the content. Show me something that was used in the handshaking that doesn't appear in the posted Vanilla PM and I'll concede.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 23:21:19 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Jul 17, 2009 23:21:19 GMT -5
Wait...are you seriously suggesting that we lynch HM because it's possible that the scum have a redirector? Or did I misinterpret you? Dunno about Hockeyguy, but that's a big reason I'm for lynching her. 1) She's mandatory, and thus more likely to do more damage to Town than Scum. 2) If Scum have a redirector, we're up shit creek. No! That is completlyf*ingridiculous! You would be willing to just throw away a potentially valuable town asset...and waste one of our precious lynches, just on the off-chance that the scum happen to have a redirector--which, let me remind you, has only appeared in a total of two out of, like, 30 games so far--despite the fact that we could just as easily pursue scum today, and, if they do have a redirector, just lynch HM tomorrow after she TELLS US THAT!!! It's not that hard. You people act like a mandatory vig is automatically bad. It's not. Such vigs have proven helpful, useful in the past. Hell, even if they bag 2 townies for every scum they kill, they're still helping the cause. You...that...it's just so stupid! I don't even know what to say. :huff:huff: Sorry for yelling like that, but it had to be said. On the other hand, I don't think that's a scum tell. I'm not sure scum would be so worried about a mandatory vig--though, if you or MHaye (the first person to bring up the redirector theory) are scum, then the scum probably don't have a redirector. Anyway, pending further thought, I'm going to Unvote: misterblockey Vote: Pleo for being all over the place on the PM debate. Not too confident about that, but it's the best evidence I've seen so far.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 23:22:47 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Jul 17, 2009 23:22:47 GMT -5
Not really, and the idea of a scum redirector is rarer still, only appearing in two games* so far, if my recollection is correct. Sorta makes me wonder if the scum redirector thing is PIS. *Alpha Centauri and SSBM How the hell would that be PIS? By like, what, 6 players now? I meant MHaye specifically. But, thinking more about, that's stupid, since if the scum do have a redirector, none of them would be going after HockeyMonkey.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 23:39:17 GMT -5
Post by texcat on Jul 17, 2009 23:39:17 GMT -5
I've come to the conclusion that either Cookies is a jester of some sort, or else she earns gold for everytime the word handshake appears in a post. I'm with Julie, really bored with it.
Re: HockeyMonkey I would not have thought that a vig was bad for the town, tho I can see how a claimed vig might be bad. I'd like HM to take her best shot on night 1 and see what happens. She can tell us if it was redirected -- that would certainly give us some info. If she ends up dead in the morning, we haven't really lost much. If she is redirected and a cit ends up dead in the morning, we've lost another cit, but we still have learned something.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 23:45:40 GMT -5
Post by KidVermicious on Jul 17, 2009 23:45:40 GMT -5
Ped, I don't like the rudeness. I'm going to do my best not to reply in kind, but you (and a couple others in this game, I might add) need to chill the fuck out and start addressing other players with a modicum of respect. We all know mafia can get heated, but Today is getting ugly, and I for one am not afraid to start voting players off just for being dicks. I'm here to have fun, dammit.
1) A mandatory Vig is a net liability for Town. The role verges on gastardy, and I hate it. There's not a player around that I'd consider good enough to make that role a net benefit. Nobody, and I mean nobody, is good enough to have even a 1/3 chance of hitting scum on Day One. Odds are incredibly high that if Hockeymonkey is forced to use her power tonight, she's going to kill Town. The optimal play is for a mandatory Vig to target themselves, but HM has already said that's not going to happen.
2) Odds are also incredibly high that we're going to lynch Town today. It makes sense to bite that bullet, and remove an anti-Town element (HM's role, not HM).
3) It's not likely that scum have a redirector, but it's possible. If they do, and HM is forced to use her power, you can fucking well erase any possible chance of a pro-Town result.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 17, 2009 23:49:34 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Jul 17, 2009 23:49:34 GMT -5
I'm beyond bored with it too, but I'm not a jester so if you really think I'm the problem go ahead and throw your vote in with the others and I'll be out of your hair and the WiFoM will be gone, but so will a Townie.
A mandatory vig can be very bad for Town depending on things like skill level of the scum players, lack of skill level of the Town players, blindspots/biases/bad scumdar/bad luck on the part of the Vig. They have to kill every night and even if the odds didn't favor hitting a Townie (even if selecting by random because there are more Townies in the population to hit) Townies taken as a whole have a tendancy to often just eat their own.
|
|
|
Day 1
Jul 18, 2009 0:21:03 GMT -5
Post by julie on Jul 18, 2009 0:21:03 GMT -5
They have to kill every night and even if the odds didn't favor hitting a Townie (even if selecting by random because there are more Townies in the population to hit) Townies taken as a whole have a tendancy to often just eat their own. Of course you get eaten. You're made of COOKIES.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Jul 18, 2009 0:49:10 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Jul 18, 2009 0:49:10 GMT -5
Ped, I don't like the rudeness. I'm going to do my best not to reply in kind, but you (and a couple others in this game, I might add) need to chill the fuck out and start addressing other players with a modicum of respect. We all know mafia can get heated, but Today is getting ugly, and I for one am not afraid to start voting players off just for being dicks. I'm here to have fun, dammit. Yeah, I know, I'm sorry. Won't happen again. I bolded the important part. A vig--even a mandatory vig--is like a lynch +. Yes, the vig will probably hit town Night 1, just like we will probably hit town Day 1. But as time goes on, and HM starts to get a feeling for who's who*, her value increases considerably. Now, since she's claimed, you're right, she isn't nearly as useful, since the scum can pick her off Night 3 or so, and there will be tons of pressure besides on who she should target. But I think deliberatly lynching someone you think is town because you think they will be anti-town early on is incredibly foolish. It's only anti-town early on, or if the scum have a redirector/roleblocker that makes it to the late game unscathed. I get where you're coming from here, but playing this way is just too cautious, the way I see it. If we play in fear that the scum have all the cards, we'll never be able to take the chances we need to actually get them. *Assuming she's telling the truth, of course. But at this point, I think she is.
|
|