|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 10:50:33 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 3, 2009 10:50:33 GMT -5
There are a couple of things about role speculation:
I don't know if it will be beneficial to speculate "aloud" what roles people might have asked for (I think it's inevitable that people will be speculating about this topic on their own, however). Mostly, this is because we don't know if sign-up order affected Pleo's assignment of roles, or if Pleo assigned roles based on who he thought might make the "best" of a particular role...
...in fact, the whole thing hinges on anticipating mod behavior and while I'm not necessarily opposed to metagamey discussions I think that anticipating player behavior is enough to do for one game!
Julie, based on my reading of the Rules thread, Zombies don't have any particular Night powers. You might want to watch out for the brain eating, though.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 11:05:02 GMT -5
Post by julie on Sept 3, 2009 11:05:02 GMT -5
If you want another data point: I sent a list of (I think) four choices. I received my third choice.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 11:07:40 GMT -5
Post by julie on Sept 3, 2009 11:07:40 GMT -5
Julie, based on my reading of the Rules thread, Zombies don't have any particular Night powers. You might want to watch out for the brain eating, though. They'll starve to death if they target me!
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 12:22:38 GMT -5
Post by special on Sept 3, 2009 12:22:38 GMT -5
Here is my question and Pleo's answer:
So, it appears that there will be a Night thread for out of game things like avatar discussion.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 12:25:52 GMT -5
Post by special on Sept 3, 2009 12:25:52 GMT -5
But in Conspiracy, a weird thing happens. The Town goal here is actually to hide from all the other factions who is Town, in order to generate a suitable number of cross-kills to have a chance at winning. It is the Town that wants to conceal, as much as possible, the identities of its members. Weird. That's interesting. In order to avoid making mistakes and searching through the old games, Does anyone who played remember how the 2 previous games broke down role wise? How many were in each faction? Are the spoiler boards for the old games still available somewhere?
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 12:30:00 GMT -5
Post by special on Sept 3, 2009 12:30:00 GMT -5
Here's a thought on the different voting process.
I checked the vote count thread. We need 13 votes on one person to have a lynch. Would it benefit us to have everyone vote for everyone and then unvote the people we don't want lynched?
I'm not sure how that's different, and, of course, I'm currently tied for the vote lead, but still 9 votes short of being lynched.
A potential benefit is that we would be much more likely to have a lynch.
Drawbacks include what I imagine would be insanely difficult to understand voting records and a huge shift in how we look at voting.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 12:51:01 GMT -5
Post by bufftabby on Sept 3, 2009 12:51:01 GMT -5
That sounds ridiculously cumbersome, Ed. I think voting early and often is more of a viable strategy. See here:
Vote: Vote Ed Vote Boozahol Squid Vote Meeko
I don't like the whole business over Meeko's posting. As someone mentioned upthread, contriving a spectacle such as that on Day One would take some metallic balls, but I know Ed and boozy have 'em. I don't know you meeko, so forgive me for not opining on the state of your balls. But all those balls leave a bad taste in my mouth, I tell ya what.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 12:55:57 GMT -5
Post by special on Sept 3, 2009 12:55:57 GMT -5
That sounds ridiculously cumbersome, Ed. I think voting early and often is more of a viable strategy. See here: Yes, it does seem cumbersome. After some thought, I agree that it's not the way to go. What I'm afraid will happen though, is that as people vote early, the votes on myself and Meeko will continue to grow, and we'll become the only choices that many people consider. That could limit how much effort some people put into actual Scum hunting. I know many people will still continue to look and be pro-active, but many times when a few people jump ahead early, some players become more reactive. I'm still hoping for a bit more discussion on the metagamey aspect of pondering who might have requested what.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 13:16:00 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Sept 3, 2009 13:16:00 GMT -5
On Meeko and Ed, I can understand where he is coming from and totally agree that some remarks by Meeko are totally out there. For example like Ed pointed out: How do we define lurker, once we throw " Meeko " into the mix? It seems on-topic but on a closer look it makes no sense at all. Also Meeko himself makes no effort at answering him own question. A lurker is some one who reads but doesn't post - she is there but we don't see it, she is literally lurking. A 'Meeko' or any specific play style doesn't change that. Meeko does continue though: Again an odd first sentence: apparently Meeko thinks he is lurking himself and doesn't want to be seen as doing it. So while he hooks in on the Lynch The Lurker topic, he doesn't actually make a statement for or against. However he does explain his main point ('why the mass claim talk?') further: This part is quite useful: Meeko finds it odd we're already talking about mass-claiming, waves the Specter of Recruitment* around and is generally against a mass claim: too early and the moderator said it would be neutral. And then he gives an example where an early mass claim would have worked, however I think he is right in that it is not applicable here: more experienced moderator and no color to abuse. I snipped the rest of Meeko's post here as it's no longer relevant to the game. I think I made the same mistake in Weird Wild West as special ed does here: tacking on the parts of Meeko's post which aren't that relevant to the game but are minor reasons to poke him about, except they will provoke the big reaction from him. And since it not the most relevant, it becomes a distraction. To clarify: Meeko responded almost exclusively to the 'avatar talk == vote' point, which resulted in the more relevant accusation (the vague statement about lurking) to be lost in the noise. *) Specter of Recruitment This is based on my experience with it in Dr. Horrible where town tried to lynch Pleonast three times for a big part because he thought he could be recruited (and was unkillable except by the scum who of course didn't kill him since he was a good distraction). I don't see how it would effect a mass-claim though - whether someone has claimed or not they could be recruited. In checking out the previous game**, the recruits worked as recruit-instead-kill one shot recruitment for the wolves and curse-kill-comes-back as-vampire for the vampire. The latter is kinda obvious when someone comes back to life (it could be the result of the Witchdoctor though), thus more a 'get an extra undead to win' move then to make us second guess (semi-)confirmed players. The wolf recruit was a standard recruit though IIRC. **) Past result offer no guarantee for the future.
|
|
Natlaw
Snark
Natlaw is a Modron short and stout.
Posts: 740
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 13:32:00 GMT -5
Post by Natlaw on Sept 3, 2009 13:32:00 GMT -5
On meta gaming preferences: -Do you mean discussion in general special ed or the specific one you posted about Meeko? -On one hand it's metagaming, on the other hand it is already out in the open so we can't put it back in the box. I prefer to look for in-game reasons first though. -I didn't PM any to the moderator. On Lynch the Lurker: -a true lurker who for example makes only a 'me too' vote post once a day: if there is no better it might be OK, except for the fact that it won't provide any leads either. -a non-participant: since there are no mod-kills it's tempting - but again it gives everyone a stock reasons to vote. I would prefer a vigilante kill, except the vigilante is remorseful here. So rather not as lynch, but spreading out some investigations among them to keep some tabs on them is a good idea I think. Spreading out the information among all players is good in general. On Lynch All Liars: -I agree with the argument that we can give scum leeway to do it as well if we let it go unpunished. You can lie, but except to get scrutiny when caught in them.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 13:53:50 GMT -5
Post by julie on Sept 3, 2009 13:53:50 GMT -5
This is the first game I've been in with multiple votes, so I'm a bit leery about how to go about voting. Do people then put a vote on everyone they find suspicious and end up with five or six votes a day, or is the standard to still have one?
If the contretemps between Meeko and Ed continues, I'll be slapping a vote on one or both, but for right now it feels more like a standard squabble than a planned diversion.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:02:56 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Sept 3, 2009 14:02:56 GMT -5
Considering that we have multiple votes available I realize I (and everyone else) should probably be a little more free with my voting.
So I look at what's going on in here, and I have to say that there seems to be some grudge holding going on in here. Not the he killed me the last game kind, but still some grudge holding.
I'm definitely seeing the distraction and Ed seems to be at the root of it, so if I'm going to have a vote down on someone who's play style seems to be harmful I'm going to Vote Special Ed
It's not like I can't vote for someone else later.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:13:28 GMT -5
Post by bufftabby on Sept 3, 2009 14:13:28 GMT -5
What I'm afraid will happen though, is that as people vote early, the votes on myself and Meeko will continue to grow, and we'll become the only choices that many people consider. That could limit how much effort some people put into actual Scum hunting. I know many people will still continue to look and be pro-active, but many times when a few people jump ahead early, some players become more reactive. I think that with the multiple votes, that will be less of a problem. With one vote, there's a strong urge to have one's vote count. With multiple votes, it seems like that problem is circumvented* somewhat, as every vote does count. We can put out as many suspicions as we need to, and have it count for serious, instead of an FoS of negligible value. * [OOG @ FCoD: is it just me, or don't you now always want to pronounce this as "cirsumvent" and giggle hysterically?]
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:14:55 GMT -5
Post by julie on Sept 3, 2009 14:14:55 GMT -5
It's not like I can't vote for someone else later. Would you add a vote or unvote and then vote?
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:18:12 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Sept 3, 2009 14:18:12 GMT -5
* [OOG @ FCoD: is it just me, or don't you now always want to pronounce this as "cirsumvent" and giggle hysterically?] I don't understand the question and I won't respond to it. --FCOD
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:18:26 GMT -5
Post by special on Sept 3, 2009 14:18:26 GMT -5
Considering that we have multiple votes available I realize I (and everyone else) should probably be a little more free with my voting. So I look at what's going on in here, and I have to say that there seems to be some grudge holding going on in here. Not the he killed me the last game kind, but still some grudge holding. I'm definitely seeing the distraction and Ed seems to be at the root of it, so if I'm going to have a vote down on someone who's play style seems to be harmful I'm going to Vote Special EdIt's not like I can't vote for someone else later. This is exactly what I was concerned about. (and I'm not directing it at you specifically, blockey, it's just an example of what I fear happening) What's happened is a typical Day 1 interaction at the beginning. (And yes, I'm often involved because I am antagonistic and aggressive at the start of games) And what I fear happening, people are going to come in, comment on it, vote. And soon, before you know it, it seems as if the conclusion is foregone, and we stop actually playing mafia. Not that I'm trying to stifle conversation about what's happened, but I don't want it to be the main focus of our conversation. We must remember that we have a lot of anti-Town elements who would just love us to waste our Day without getting any useful information
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:20:46 GMT -5
Post by special on Sept 3, 2009 14:20:46 GMT -5
On meta gaming preferences: -Do you mean discussion in general special ed or the specific one you posted about Meeko? -On one hand it's metagaming, on the other hand it is already out in the open so we can't put it back in the box. I prefer to look for in-game reasons first though. -I didn't PM any to the moderator. My questions were in general. We know each other to varying degrees, so we might be able to make educated guesses as to how anyone might have decided to pick. And, to be honest, I thought about this before making my request to Pleo. I actually wondered if people might think I would prefer certain roles.alignments to others. I'm not sure that did me any good or even if I was accurate in thinking what others might think.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:21:01 GMT -5
Post by julie on Sept 3, 2009 14:21:01 GMT -5
We must remember that we have a lot of anti-Town elements who would just love us to waste our Day without getting any useful information I don't think anyone is forgetting that. That's why they're voting for you.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:23:09 GMT -5
Post by julie on Sept 3, 2009 14:23:09 GMT -5
We should have a side bet. People should try to guess who picked what role (not necessarily who ended up with what role) and send their guesses to a third party who holds them until after the game is over. The person with the most (or any) guesses right, wins.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:43:35 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 3, 2009 14:43:35 GMT -5
It's not like I can't vote for someone else later. Would you add a vote or unvote and then vote? If I still think the original vote is on someone not-Town, I would leave my first vote where it is. If I'm voting for someone else because I think that my original vote was misguidedly placed on Town, then I would unvote the Townie before voting for the person I now think is Scum. Clear as mud?
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:44:08 GMT -5
Post by Boozahol Squid, P.I. on Sept 3, 2009 14:44:08 GMT -5
I don't know how to reconcile that Boozy. Shades of OMGUS from you. I might not have voted you, but you are calling me out for similar reasons. There's no way to reconcile it. I realize it's a shitty way to vote, but after having played this game a dozen or so times online and probably a hundred times in person, I still don't know the best way to pick someone out on Day One. A new player laying the third vote on is one way, but it doesn't look like we've got that going on here, so it's just a choice based on playstyle. That's not OMGUS, because I don't think you've attacked me, and I don't feel threatened.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:46:41 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Sept 3, 2009 14:46:41 GMT -5
My questions were in general. We know each other to varying degrees, so we might be able to make educated guesses as to how anyone might have decided to pick. And, to be honest, I thought about this before making my request to Pleo. I actually wondered if people might think I would prefer certain roles.alignments to others. I'm not sure that did me any good or even if I was accurate in thinking what others might think. You know, it would never have occurred to me to think about what the rest of all y'all might expect me to pick before I sent my request to Pleo. (Which I'm not saying I did or didn't just yet.) I would have picked roles based on which I thought would be most interesting to play.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:48:32 GMT -5
Post by Boozahol Squid, P.I. on Sept 3, 2009 14:48:32 GMT -5
i thought the cabal could only block? That's their power, but this game has always involved players having an extra treat in their bag when they open up their role pm. In the first Conspiracy, I was a Witch who could also do an extra protection. I forget what my extra role was in C2. My role in this game also has an extra power not included in the role description. Doesn't yours?
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 14:57:35 GMT -5
Post by Boozahol Squid, P.I. on Sept 3, 2009 14:57:35 GMT -5
You know, upon rereading Cookies and MHaye's (and someone else's) comments, I'm going to give up the ghost on the Meeko lynch. I am assuming past play indicates current performance, which may not be the case, and I know that the continuation of this discussion isn't going to be fruitful. Sorry if this makes you think my balls are a little less shiny, Buff. Unvote: Meeko
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 15:09:26 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Sept 3, 2009 15:09:26 GMT -5
It's not like I can't vote for someone else later. Would you add a vote or unvote and then vote? I generally on day one have a safe vote. That's someone whose play is seeming detrimental to town, no matter what side they're actually on. This is the vote I'll fall back on if I can find nothing scummy to enough to vote for elsewhere. In a normal voting system I probably wouldn't throw a real vote straight out for that though, I would wait as a last resort. In this voting system I can leave it there and not be worried, as everyone can vote for multiples, and you need to get half the people to agree before someone's really even in danger of a lynch. This is actually more than a safe vote as I find it kind of scummy that Ed is going out guns blazing on Meeko for a past game and seemingly deliberately provoking Meeko into being a distraction. Either way at this point, with this voting system there are only two ways my vote would come off of Ed toDay. Either he role claims something and he's likely to die, and he's semi-confirmable, or I really feel like someone else has done something terribly scummy and I want to make sure that person is the one lynched, and Ed is close enough I feel like I need to remove my vote to ensure the margin. TaDa, my thought process
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 15:31:15 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Sept 3, 2009 15:31:15 GMT -5
Ok... let me try to explain this MEEKO... We have other areas of Idlemafia.com dedicated to talking about non-mafia related things. We also have times built into games were non-game related topic (fluff) are meant to be discussed. Those times are usually Night. So including information about your avatar and geocaching in a post... in this thread... during the Day cycle.... is unnecessary and nothing other than distracting from the game. idlemafia.com/index.cgi?board=stuffs is a better place to post about your GPS toting Raccoon.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 15:34:28 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Sept 3, 2009 15:34:28 GMT -5
These votes make no sense to me. This is my first game with Meeko (I think), but at least he's here, which is way way WAY more desirable than not participating at all, no matter what his alignment is. Nothing he has said so far seems anti-town to me. Fluffy with a crunchy recruitment conjecture center covered in weird, but otherwise unremarkable. Y'all wouldn't be dragging little duffle bags full or grudges along with you, would you? Same here. I wonder if Ed and Boozahol are reading a different thread than I am. Now that's a smudge if I've ever seen one.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 15:40:17 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Sept 3, 2009 15:40:17 GMT -5
Same here. I wonder if Ed and Boozahol are reading a different thread than I am. Now that's a smudge if I've ever seen one. Actually I agree with them, if it's a smudge it's a deserved one.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 15:42:11 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Sept 3, 2009 15:42:11 GMT -5
Wow, a lot of catching up to do here.
I have read a few of the earlier posts, enough to make a comment, but I need to finish reading the rest of the activity of they day, before I can add more.
Look, I am sorry for bringing OOG into G. Certainly didn't think it would bring this much heat. There is nothing more I can add, or take away from that now, what is done, is done.
Related, I feel that I am forced to lurk, or rather, move closer to lurking. Everyone seems to be attacking everything I say, with cause, and without. I feel, that If I post less, I give you guys less things to misinterpret.
Therefore, I just want to let you all know, that I am still here, and if I end up posting less, it is from a constant barrage of attacks, not from Meeko being a lurker.
|
|
|
Day One
Sept 3, 2009 15:45:46 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 3, 2009 15:45:46 GMT -5
This is the first game I've been in with multiple votes, so I'm a bit leery about how to go about voting. Do people then put a vote on everyone they find suspicious and end up with five or six votes a day, or is the standard to still have one? If the contretemps between Meeko and Ed continues, I'll be slapping a vote on one or both, but for right now it feels more like a standard squabble than a planned diversion. Thinking of the extra votes as heavily weighted FOS's seems a reasonable approach. Ideally, it should be avoided unless you have justification to provide. Ideally, it shouldn't be done at the last minute. Ideally, people won't pollute the voting record by voting and unvoting everywhere all over the place. I share Ed's concern about people getting fixated on these early votes and not fully engaging in other data points. I'm not too keen on how he phrased his fear that it will keep us all from "actual scum hunting". He should know better than to think that there is anything about his play so far that has given him the credibility to make such statements. So why try? And isn't his vote on Meeko because he thinks he's scum? If not, how is his vote for Meeko "actual scum hunting"? Ed has made his own early-voting-and-distracting bed, and now he's gotta lay in it, even if the finger he's pointing at distractions being bad for town comes back around to poke him in a hypocritical eyeball. I'm this close to voting for you Ed. The only things stopping me, ironically, are that you seem to be playing quite sloppy from what I know of you, which makes me think that Meeko managed to strike a nerve some time else and somewhere else and it has really biased your play here (and potentially Boozy's though he has backed off his vote), plus I'd really rather be voting based on something other than this meta-game-tainted discussion.
|
|