|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 8, 2012 23:49:57 GMT -5
Clearly I was misled by your saying the scum wouldn't do anything that would endanger Ed. You may have been misled, but not by me...since I didn't say that. What I said was "the Scum would have wanted to avoid, or at the very least not aid" Pleo's promised kill of Ed. That's not even close to saying they "wouldn't do anything to endanger Ed".
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Mar 8, 2012 23:50:45 GMT -5
Meeko is also still with us, may haggle bless us greatly. so is Pizza. this is could be a record-breaking game. neta: and if you have a number between 1 and 5 that is not 3 it could get comical. Blue diego hunts wisely. and this means is that gad and i are town. now i won't post my full power here but that's the skinny. and since gad has wisely chosen not to share more than he has any town power roles can leave us off the screen. unless there is a watcher type. so dick/doc/vig/whadthfugever go elsewhere. i don't mind dying to get a free run for my power folks. and scummy scummy scummy let's go out and play. i'm not ready to clear either of you. i am willing to look elsewhere for now. I'm curious about that as well, given that in his own mystery mafia game, he had players broadcasting their alignments (supposedly!) at other players. What makes him so sure he's not the victim of a similar ploy? I think my response to Dirx should answer this, but let me know if it doesn't. (And I love that you remembered that aspect of my game this many months afterward! That makes me happy.) Mystery mafia was awesome. how could we forget? great concept. i was able to find my fellow mason ( texcat) on N1 and had a killing power. to top it off, peeker was the Lightning Rod. how ironic was that? What did we learn today? Proboards does not support the spoiler tag. But my stomach supports beer. *hic* i keep thinking that we all could meet IRL someday and have some beers together. --------------------------------- Chronos, that post was fantastic. that was a great thing to do. i enjoy playing with people i never have before. this game sure has brought back a number of older players. Dirx, if you're town you have a chance to extend your streak over Ed.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 8, 2012 23:52:54 GMT -5
Looking back, I do see that texcat voted Pleonast long before Pleo announced his intention to kill Ed, so it's entirely possible that a Scum texcat could have voted for Pleo at that point.
But I do think it's unlikely that the Scum would have allowed the bandwagon on texcat to have proceeded as it did, with practically no opposition and not even a token attempt at a counter-wagon, if texcat were Scum.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 8, 2012 23:57:05 GMT -5
What I said was "the Scum would have wanted to avoid, or at the very least not aid" Pleo's promised kill of Ed. That's not even close to saying they "wouldn't do anything to endanger Ed". I asked why a scum texcat wouldn't have voted for pleo. You responded with your line about aiding Pleo's killing Ed. I replied to your response with reasoning as to why scum would, knowing ed was risking death, still vote for pleo. Then you took issue. Where am I misinterpreting you? Ed being in danger and Pleo's DK were basically synonymous. At the time nothing else was threatening him.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 9, 2012 0:32:54 GMT -5
No, we still have peeker. He can crack 10 pages before breakfast. ahemOh, and yeah, I'm getting caught up. I will post more once I have. I bet that's the last time Ed Drunk posts. EVER.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 9, 2012 1:05:43 GMT -5
.....He's not like you... or me...... /Rod Stewart
|
|
|
Post by Chronos on Mar 9, 2012 1:27:47 GMT -5
I didn't actually take all of those notes just to be friendly-- I do it primarily for my own sake. Frankly, I can't imagine how anyone keeps track of things in these games without doing that. But I figure since I'm doing it anyway, I might as well do it in a format that can be easily shared with others.
Ah, good point. I missed that being significant at the time, but in retrospect, it certainly was. I've added it to my file.
And I think this business about none of the Scum being on the Pleo bandwagon, or a disproportionate number of them on TexCat, is a very dangerous line of reasoning. Remember, the Scum don't need their leader alive to win. They don't need any more than one of them alive. And if there was even one Scum on that huge wagon, and we accept that Scum Wouldn't Do ThatTM, then we're guaranteeing that we'll lose.
But if we don't go that far, how far can we take the reasoning at all? If there was even one single Scum on the Pleo wagon, that person could have switched to TexCat, to swing it the other way. Which means that if the Scum wanted to switch the lynch away from Pleo, they would have. So we're left concluding that, if there were even one Scum voting Pleo (which is very likely), that they weren't actually trying to influence the lynch. Which, frankly, makes sense: It's bad play for Scum to try to influence the lynch so blatantly, so early in the game, since that's exactly the sort of thing that gets them caught. It wouldn't do any good for them to save one of their number (temporarily, anyway) to give away the rest of them. In the early game, the wise Scum will play exactly as if they were Town.
And, of course, if we're looking at TexCat specifically, where else would she have put her vote? If she were Scum and trying to save Pleo to save Ed, what could she do, vote for Pleo's closest competitor? No, wait, that's her. And yet, here she is trying to argue that her behavior proves her to be town.
Speaking of TexCat, we still have to come to a decision about her kill. It might not work too well to try to tell her specifically who to kill, since that's too open to Scum interference via roleblockers or the like. But we should at least be thinking of candidates for her to choose from. And if she's honest, then she should really have been leading that discussion to begin with.
At the very least, I think we should expect her to post who she's killing right before Dawn. If that person survives, then she's got some 'splaining to do. If that person dies, then she'll have to explain why she chose that person. And it'd also be a good idea if any other Town killers we might have don't kill anyone toNight, if possible: That way, if TexCat is Scum and tries to use the Scum Night-kill to mimic her claimed power, we'll have some clue from the lack of other bodies.
|
|
|
Post by Dirx on Mar 9, 2012 2:04:00 GMT -5
I don't feel that Pleo's death reveal has any bearing on Texcat's alignment. She can be still be a SK, scum, or exactly what she claims to be. I think you can assume that I am not scum. If I were scum, I would not have voted Pleo. Sorry; not only have I seen scum bus eachother on Day 1 (both accidentally and deliberately), I've even done it myself. It gains you some cred, but not enough to rule out the possibility at all. I am more undecided on you than I was when I voted you, though, if that counts for anything.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Mar 9, 2012 2:11:20 GMT -5
Wow, that was something nice to wake up to. When I saw that Ed was scum my jaw dropped and then I just burst out laughing. I really thought he was Town and that Pleo was threatening to kill a Townie, maybe Pleo thought he was too.
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on Mar 9, 2012 2:45:51 GMT -5
and i guess i would ask the rest of the crowd, especially those that questioned hal in "powering" up pleo as being the worst ever idea of the world. how do you reconcile that with the events of this afternoon? just kind of curious. I still think it was a bad idea to power up Pleo and I feel that it was just luck that Ed turned out to be scum.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 9, 2012 9:21:20 GMT -5
In the colour it states that there was only one honest man in the room ( Pleo/Ed/Hal) Pleo was telling the truth ( or was he entirely honest? we don't know) But if he was then the mod is telling us that Hal was not? I don't think that washes either but it is food for thought. No, the narrative was telling us that The Joker considered himself to be the only honest one in the room -- as in "embracing his psychopathic side" rather than thinking "I'm killing people and causing all this supervillain mayhem for a noble reason". He's a fucking nutcase and he makes no excuses for it. Looking back, I do see that texcat voted Pleonast long before Pleo announced his intention to kill Ed, so it's entirely possible that a Scum texcat could have voted for Pleo at that point. But I do think it's unlikely that the Scum would have allowed the bandwagon on texcat to have proceeded as it did, with practically no opposition and not even a token attempt at a counter-wagon, if texcat were Scum. I noticed that (the early vote) myself. As for the no-opposition thing, that might not really be the case if, as has been theorized, all the scum are Batman. Sure, it would suck for them to lose any scum team member, but if this theory holds up, then it's not like they'd have lost their most important member. And stellar work, Chronos!
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Mar 9, 2012 10:31:27 GMT -5
And, of course, if we're looking at TexCat specifically, where else would she have put her vote? If she were Scum and trying to save Pleo to save Ed, what could she do, vote for Pleo's closest competitor? No, wait, that's her. And yet, here she is trying to argue that her behavior proves her to be town. I could easily have moved my vote much earlier in the Day. It would have been easy to OMGUS vote one of my voters. I didn't need to wait for the bandwagon on me to grow, I could have just moved my vote. And I am town, but I am not arguing that the Pleo voters are town, only non-scum. And I also recognized Pollux's many reasons why they might be scum. (But still willing to bet that they aren't ) As far as I know now, I will be available at Dawn, and should be able to post. And as I said in my first post of the night: I plan on doing a re-read before I submit my night action, but I am thinking of looking at those who argued strongly against a Pleo lynch. I will certainly read and consider all suggestions for targets, if anyone has anything helpful to give me.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 9, 2012 10:44:58 GMT -5
I don't remember being this...... ok fine, I'll use the word..... Paranoid in other games before.
I have a few things I want to revisit, but I don't want to revisit them, given that there is at least Night Kill order going out, you know? It's like you say the wrong thing, and you just give scum a reason to off you.
Then again, ""Scum wouldn't do that"", because it would be too easy to play cause and effect, right?
Then again, again, You play with ""Scum wouldn't do that"" too much, you get to a point where you aren't sure what Scum WOULD do.
The implication is that while we can strategize at nights, not much strategy gets done. Am I off base here?
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Mar 9, 2012 11:27:25 GMT -5
@ Meeko
I tend to agree with you about the night chat. You* may have a brilliant idea, or maybe you think you saw something note worthy but you hesitate to bring it up til the next day dawns . Of course if you did bring it up here and woke up dead odds are we would follow the lead ( but who wants to wake up dead? * generic You used throughout
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 9, 2012 11:34:40 GMT -5
to meeko and lightfoot. while Night strategy is generally a little slower i at times find it to be much more informative since folks have a tendency to "let their guard down" since it is Night.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Mar 9, 2012 11:38:50 GMT -5
to meeko and lightfoot. while Night strategy is generally a little slower i at times find it to be much more informative since folks have a tendency to "let their guard down" since it is Night. I don't know if that would really be the case. Maybe I'll bring it up to the rest of my scumbuddies and see what they think. Oh. Fuck.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 9, 2012 11:45:00 GMT -5
At the very least, I think we should expect her to post who she's killing right before Dawn. If that person survives, then she's got some 'splaining to do. If that person dies, then she'll have to explain why she chose that person. And it'd also be a good idea if any other Town killers we might have don't kill anyone toNight, if possible: That way, if TexCat is Scum and tries to use the Scum Night-kill to mimic her claimed power, we'll have some clue from the lack of other bodies. I think that's a terrible idea. Any number of factors could go into that. Texcat could be redirected or roleblocked, she could attack the person a Doctor is protecting. Numerous other powers could affect what she does. It only makes it easier for the others if she announces it, and it still won't help us at all with her alignment.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Mar 9, 2012 11:53:57 GMT -5
Holy post count batman! What an end of day!!
Time for another re-read in light of Ed's flip.
|
|
|
Post by Dirx on Mar 9, 2012 11:57:32 GMT -5
@ Meeko I tend to agree with you about the night chat. You* may have a brilliant idea, or maybe you think you saw something note worthy but you hesitate to bring it up til the next day dawns . Of course if you did bring it up here and woke up dead odds are we would follow the lead ( but who wants to wake up dead? * generic You used throughout I don't really care about that risk. About once a game, I'll have some kind of epiphany and go ahead and post it, without hesitation. Sometimes it even leads to catching scum, other times it just helps clear the air of obfuscating nonsense or whatever. And I've predicted my death at the hands of scum with near-100% accuracy every time this happens. I don't care about dying at any point in the game, as long as I feel I've contributed something useful. So, yeah, if you see something you think should be pointed out, more often than not you really should do so. Keeping mum because you're afraid of getting offed is not usually a pro-town motivation.
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 9, 2012 12:40:56 GMT -5
That was an awesome day one! Luck or not, it's still pretty awesome what just happened there! And I'm geeking out a lil' bit because it's like the perfect end from Arkham 1 to Arkham 2. (In the comic books world a few years ago- Batman was killed off). So all of the more recent comics have had Batman dead, and Nightwing (the original robin) and Damien (Batman's Son via Talia Al'Ghul) taking over the cowl as the new Batman and Robin. That's sorta what I imagine (in my head) could be going for Arkham 2, this is the "new" comics now Though, eventually, Batman DID return from death, but only by fighting his way through the timestream, and so we had Cave-Bat, PilgrimBatman, PirateBat, CowboyBats, and then like AristocraticBats all culminating in him coming back and creating Batman Inc! I doubt storyteller planned it out like that, but it's still pretty cool And to have the Joker take out Batman- ~TOTAL FANGIRL SQUEEEING!~ That's like the ultimate ending sorta if Frank Miller had done it- where the Joker kills himself to spite batman. ^__^ Content to follow in the next post.
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 9, 2012 12:48:30 GMT -5
So thoughts- I don't know if Night strategist talk is good and all, if anything I'd feel extra paranoid at night, knowing what If i'm on the right track? Scum could just kill me dead, and then I couldn't play anymore! But at the same time, if I just kept my awesome ideas to myself- and then died anyways, then the Town gets nothing either. So I'll share my thoughts, but maybe be a lil more cautious about just flinging around accusations and stuff? I Dunno. -Special Ed- I thought he was wierd early on, but I remember alot of people saying "hey, that's his usual posting style and all." I wonder if any of those people defending him were scum? I think I'd have to go back to their voting records and all- because there were like more than 4-5 people who said that's Ed being Ed, which might be valid, but I'm sure one of those probably had an ulterior motive for wanting people not to get suspicious of Ed, ya know? -Announcing the Vig kill: This idea, I agree with Pollux, I don't like it. Because, didn't story say you could do "If X then Y, but if Z then A happens"? What's to prevent someone from going "If the Vig annouces any scummy player as his NK, then our blocker or doctor will protect/block said target; but if he chooses not a scum, then we target Y." That whole being able to set actions like that seems really powerful, and that's why I'd be hesitant for announcing things BEFORE they happen....
|
|
|
Post by Chronos on Mar 9, 2012 13:29:41 GMT -5
That's true, I had forgotten about contingent actions when I had posted that. That makes actions announced at the end of Night mostly equivalent to actions announced at any other time, unless they're completely unexpected (which this wouldn't be). We'd still ask TexCat to announce immediately after Dawn, of course, but that's of considerably less value, since (if she's lying) it'd give her the chance to choose which death she wants to take credit for.
And I never worry about Scum killing me for coming up with good ideas. The way I see it, they're going to kill someone (or at least, try to) every Night anyway, and it's almost certain to be someone on my team. If, out of those people, they choose me, that's a sign that they think I was doing a good job of helping Town. This is especially true of someone killed without being confirmed or having a power, since that means that person was playing so well, they were helping Town even more than the power roles.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Mar 9, 2012 13:42:07 GMT -5
Announcing the Vig kill: This idea, I agree with Pollux, I don't like it. Because, didn't story say you could do "If X then Y, but if Z then A happens"? What's to prevent someone from going "If the Vig annouces any scummy player as his NK, then our blocker or doctor will protect/block said target; but if he chooses not a scum, then we target Y." That whole being able to set actions like that seems really powerful, and that's why I'd be hesitant for announcing things BEFORE they happen.... I was thinking of trying to post at exactly dawn -- say 4:59 or so. Hopefully without enough time for anyone to change their night actions. Storyteller, can you confirm whether or not SBrOwn's above conditional action would be acceptable?
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 9, 2012 13:50:15 GMT -5
I rather think that something like "The Scum are going to kill Chronos, but if texcat announces he's going to kill a Scum, then we're going to block him instead" would not fly as a 'conditional action'. Conditional actions are more like "Tomorrow Night I'm going to Vig Chronos, but if he's already dead by then I'm going to Vig Cookies instead"...they need to be based upon actions that have already been resolved by the time your action would be taken.
I'd think the only real risk to texcat announcing his target before the end of the Night is if someone else is waiting with fingers on keyboard to change their action as soon as texcat makes his reveal.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 9, 2012 14:10:47 GMT -5
I may have missed it, but I don't think I did...has there been any reply to this semi-claim by Total? This seems like nemesis. After Ragnarok I deserve this. I have to trust you to tell me we have two sets if masons in this game? And since we do, why couldn't I be on the same team as you? Now I have to trust you on this as well Anyway - I'll wait to say more before my "teambuddy" seems okay with a claim. Till then I'll go to sleep IRL and dream sweet dreams of mafia and you all
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 9, 2012 14:19:06 GMT -5
I posted in the 'Going to be away' thread, but since not everybody reads it, I'll mention it here as well.
I'm on vacation for 10 days beginning tomorrow, and as it now turns out will only have my phone for checking the boards. I'll be around, reading and posting as my schedule permits, but my participation will be much, much lighter than it was on Day 1.
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 9, 2012 14:19:19 GMT -5
Conditional actions are more like "Tomorrow Night I'm going to Vig Chronos, but if he's already dead by then I'm going to Vig Cookies instead"...they need to be based upon actions that have already been resolved by the time your action would be taken. But Story said, the conditions have to be based on something that's would be known to everyone basically. So someone posting something in public, is "General information", while something like the Night action orders/killing order seems like something we wouldn't know until the morning when we see the dead. I think it'd be unfair to have your condition as above- because that removes the possibility of double kills (if two roles target the same person), because that then really hurts town if serial killers and Mafia always get a chance to pick diff. targets.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Mar 9, 2012 14:37:43 GMT -5
Conditional actions are not accepted to give an opportunity for anyone to game the system; this is in recognition of the fact that Mafia is not a real-time game and that no advantage should be associated with when a player happens to be on- or offline. Conditional actions will be accepted as a way to avoid any side or player gaining an advantage of this type, and, again, will be at the discretion of the moderator and the increasingly large pool of advisors to same.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Mar 9, 2012 14:40:13 GMT -5
Storyteller, can you confirm whether or not SBrOwn's above conditional action would be acceptable? In this specific case, I rather think I would reject such a request. "If Player A says X, Y, or Z" is too vague and insubstantial to be enforceable.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 9, 2012 14:59:00 GMT -5
Conditional actions are more like "Tomorrow Night I'm going to Vig Chronos, but if he's already dead by then I'm going to Vig Cookies instead"...they need to be based upon actions that have already been resolved by the time your action would be taken. But Story said, the conditions have to be based on something that's would be known to everyone basically. So someone posting something in public, is "General information", while something like the Night action orders/killing order seems like something we wouldn't know until the morning when we see the dead. I think it'd be unfair to have your condition as above- because that removes the possibility of double kills (if two roles target the same person), because that then really hurts town if serial killers and Mafia always get a chance to pick diff. targets. As I understand things, the conditional target would only be chosen if the original target was already dead before the Night (or Day) in question started. So, to use my example, only if Chronos had been killed during the Day (and so was already dead come Nightfall) would the Vig target for the Night would be changed to Cookies. So in that context, we agree; the conditional action is taken only based upon information that is publicly available before the action is scheduled to take place. And generally they are based only on publicly known actions, not public statements, which is why, as story has stated, something like "If Player A says X, Y, or Z" is not valid
|
|