|
Day One
May 20, 2010 11:10:38 GMT -5
Post by Mahaloth on May 20, 2010 11:10:38 GMT -5
God, this game is both brilliant and devious. I love it.
Yeah, luv is not looking so good and that was a lame ass explanation. Having said that, I'm not even sure regular Mafia strategy is going to help.
I'm casuallly interested in any clan offers. I agree with peeker's early statement. I'm interested especially in any powers that can combine to be useful. PM me if you are interested.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 11:15:43 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 20, 2010 11:15:43 GMT -5
Seeing as you can only win with your clan, forming a clan with people who you have to get rid of in order to win seems counter-productive. Actually, there's no inherent reason you can't form a clan with someone you must kill in order to win. For example, let's say there's a 4-person clan "The Greeks" with members Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta. Delta is a member of the House of Chains, while the others have the standard win condition. Let's say the game is reduced to this clan plus two other players not in the House of Chains. If Delta was not in the House of Chains, the game would be over in favor of the Greeks. However, the Greeks, including Delta, can still win by lynching Delta. After they do so, it will be the three living Greeks against the last two players, with no HoC members left. So the Greeks win, and Delta wins too, because his clan has won.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 11:17:04 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on May 20, 2010 11:17:04 GMT -5
Seeing as you can only win with your clan, forming a clan with people who you have to get rid of in order to win seems counter-productive. I think what he is claiming is that he was trying to lure the Chainies out by pretending to be one of them. Note; you can be in more than one clan at a time, but you can only have one Primary clan at a given time that you win with. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the rules of the game and it's early in the Day so I'm not voting yet, but I find his claimed reasoning very suspicious.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 11:17:21 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on May 20, 2010 11:17:21 GMT -5
Seeing as you can only win with your clan, forming a clan with people who you have to get rid of in order to win seems counter-productive. Actually, there's no inherent reason you can't form a clan with someone you must kill in order to win. For example, let's say there's a 4-person clan "The Greeks" with members Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta. Delta is a member of the House of Chains, while the others have the standard win condition. Let's say the game is reduced to this clan plus two other players not in the House of Chains. If Delta was not in the House of Chains, the game would be over in favor of the Greeks. However, the Greeks, including Delta, can still win by lynching Delta. After they do so, it will be the three living Greeks against the last two players, with no HoC members left. So the Greeks win, and Delta wins too, because his clan has won. Does the entirety of the above rest on an assumption regarding the House of Chains win condition?
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 11:41:46 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on May 20, 2010 11:41:46 GMT -5
Because it's still early in the game, and because keeping track of clans is hard enough on us as it is, I would like to post this reminder about clan formation. From the Clan FAQ: 2. How can I form a clan?A clan is formed when two to four living players agree to form a clan and tell the Authors about that decision in a PM. Each player must PM the Authors separately. The PM should give an agreed name for a clan, and list all the players in the clan. Once the Authors have received all the PMs and verified them, the clan is entered into the Clan Roll. Please be sure that everyone is PMing author when you join a clan. Also, when you PM to setup a clan, put a little something in the title to help that PM stand out. We have gotten a little over 200 PMs since the game started and would hate to miss a clan formation accidentally because the PM had the very very very common title of "Clans". Thank you. Depending on how things go we may have you start emailing us with clan formations instead of PMing, just so we are sure not to miss anything. If anyone hates that idea let us know. The Author's email address is in the Rules post, in case you decide that you would rather email than PM. Anything you might want to do by PM we are happy to take by email instead. Ok that's it.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 11:53:51 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 20, 2010 11:53:51 GMT -5
Actually, there's no inherent reason you can't form a clan with someone you must kill in order to win. For example, let's say there's a 4-person clan "The Greeks" with members Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta. Delta is a member of the House of Chains, while the others have the standard win condition. Let's say the game is reduced to this clan plus two other players not in the House of Chains. If Delta was not in the House of Chains, the game would be over in favor of the Greeks. However, the Greeks, including Delta, can still win by lynching Delta. After they do so, it will be the three living Greeks against the last two players, with no HoC members left. So the Greeks win, and Delta wins too, because his clan has won. Does the entirety of the above rest on an assumption regarding the House of Chains win condition? It assumes their win condition has a similar "win with your clan" provision.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 12:05:49 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on May 20, 2010 12:05:49 GMT -5
God, this game is both brilliant and devious. I love it. Yeah, luv is not looking so good and that was a lame ass explanation. Having said that, I'm not even sure regular Mafia strategy is going to help. I'm casuallly interested in any clan offers. I agree with peeker's early statement. I'm interested especially in any powers that can combine to be useful. PM me if you are interested. and i said that kind of tongue in cheekish. because apparantly we can join as many clans as we want. so if i join a number of clans and everyone is honest (a huge assumption with this crowd) what's to keep from going from clan a to clan b and telling clan b that a is a b, c is a d and e is an f if i think that clan b has a better chance of winning. plus, apparantly we will get knowledge of the names of clans and their numbers as well as the number of folks that have primary allegiance to that clan. so if joe's crab shack has three members and only two have primary allegiance to that clan that creates a whole hell of a lot of uncertainty within the clan. who is the non committed or worse, who is the spy/traitor. yeh, this could be fun.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 12:25:30 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 20, 2010 12:25:30 GMT -5
peeker, I was actually thinking about taking it all the way: everyone forms a clan with everyone else. With 25 players, there's 12,650 4-player clans, 2300 3-player clans and 300 2-player clans. Just create all the clans (we can use a simple naming scheme like "Peek-Pleo-Red-Sin", or even use the default "let the Authors choose") and then let everyone change their primary clan as they see fit. Of course, it's slightly silly to do that now (although it'd serve the Authors right for creating such a contrived system ), but when we're down to 12 players, it's only 495+220+66 clans. And only the 4-player clans really matter. Really, there's no disadvantage to not form a clan with any other set of players. Each clan of 4 living players you're in improves your chance of winning.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 12:49:04 GMT -5
Post by zuma on May 20, 2010 12:49:04 GMT -5
Has anyone actually joined a clan yet?
I'm not even sure how this game is amenable to sharing as much information as people have at this point. I have no idea what I am doing so far tho.
PM me to join my completely clueless clan. That sounds like a good name for it, too.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:29:55 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 20, 2010 13:29:55 GMT -5
You should at least create your own 1-player clan, just because you can.
But any particular clan formed now is unlikely to survive until the end game. Once a member of a clan dies, it's better for the survivors to reform a new clan with a replacement. Any 4-player clan that doesn't reform with a replacement will be beaten by any clan with 4 living players.
Instead of trying to create a clan, it's better to form informal connections with other players. Talk to others, see what they say. Once we get down to fewer players, then it will be useful to make clans, since there'll be some expectation of survival by that point.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:31:32 GMT -5
Post by Renata on May 20, 2010 13:31:32 GMT -5
Pleonast, there's someone in the game who wants to kill you specifically, and you make yourself public? Why?
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:33:50 GMT -5
Post by Renata on May 20, 2010 13:33:50 GMT -5
Seeing as you can only win with your clan, forming a clan with people who you have to get rid of in order to win seems counter-productive. I think what he is claiming is that he was trying to lure the Chainies out by pretending to be one of them. Note; you can be in more than one clan at a time, but you can only have one Primary clan at a given time that you win with. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the rules of the game and it's early in the Day so I'm not voting yet, but I find his claimed reasoning very suspicious. I'm not sure if I do or not. I can't say the exact same gambit didn't cross my mind, because it did. luv just put it into action.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:33:51 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 20, 2010 13:33:51 GMT -5
Pleonast, there's someone in the game who wants to kill you specifically, and you make yourself public? Why? There is? Who?
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:38:44 GMT -5
Post by luvbwfc on May 20, 2010 13:38:44 GMT -5
Pleonast, there's someone in the game who wants to kill you specifically, and you make yourself public? Why? There is? Who? Master of the deck as mentioned in ure role pm
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:40:17 GMT -5
Post by Renata on May 20, 2010 13:40:17 GMT -5
The Master of the Deck of Dragons' goal is to destroy all Ascendants. You are an Ascendant.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:40:40 GMT -5
Post by zuma on May 20, 2010 13:40:40 GMT -5
You should at least create your own 1-player clan, just because you can. But any particular clan formed now is unlikely to survive until the end game. Once a member of a clan dies, it's better for the survivors to reform a new clan with a replacement. Any 4-player clan that doesn't reform with a replacement will be beaten by any clan with 4 living players. Instead of trying to create a clan, it's better to form informal connections with other players. Talk to others, see what they say. Once we get down to fewer players, then it will be useful to make clans, since there'll be some expectation of survival by that point. Yeah, ok, I now have a one-person clan. Completely Clueless Clan (CCC) ftw. Anyone want to join CCC? I won't share anything with you, but we can coordinate our votes I suppose. I'm still not even sure what we should talk about at this point. I sure as hell will not be sharing anything about my role, and why should I? Why should anyone? But keep talking, I guess it helps me.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:48:53 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on May 20, 2010 13:48:53 GMT -5
Yeah, ok, I now have a one-person clan. Completely Clueless Clan (CCC) ftw. Anyone want to join CCC? I won't share anything with you, but we can coordinate our votes I suppose. Wait, when you say you won't share anything, do you mean publicly, or even with folks who join your clan?
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:53:25 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on May 20, 2010 13:53:25 GMT -5
Yeah, ok, I now have a one-person clan. Completely Clueless Clan (CCC) ftw. Anyone want to join CCC? I won't share anything with you, but we can coordinate our votes I suppose. Are you being sarcastic, or just dishonest? There's no one person clans. Rules say clans are 2 to 4 people.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:55:54 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 20, 2010 13:55:54 GMT -5
The Master of the Deck of Dragons' goal is to destroy all Ascendants. You are an Ascendant. I don't consider that specific at all. Aren't most of us Ascendants? Does anyone want to state they are not an Ascendant?
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:56:43 GMT -5
Post by The Authors on May 20, 2010 13:56:43 GMT -5
Yeah, ok, I now have a one-person clan. Completely Clueless Clan (CCC) ftw. Anyone want to join CCC? I won't share anything with you, but we can coordinate our votes I suppose. Are you being sarcastic, or just dishonest? There's no one person clans. Rules say clans are 2 to 4 people. We clarified that, but never updated the original rules post. One person clans are allowed. Sorry for the confusion.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 13:56:56 GMT -5
Post by moodymitchy on May 20, 2010 13:56:56 GMT -5
From Luv.... if they aren't a member of the possibly existing HOC but thought it was a good idea to find them and join in order to put a spanner in the works... surely this would only have worked if the HOC believed what they were told and also if LUV had a Night action that they could use against the HOC ....
I know that we're all getting our heads around this new type of game and I've never played with LUV before so wouldn't know how great the propensity was for getting lynched Day one...
Zuma... I'm happy to join your clan if you'll have me but I agree that we shouldn't tell eash other a thing about any powers actions that may be at our disposal.... As there is going to be a Clan role call each Day/Dusk then I don't see a problem with having coordinated votes.... had clans not been made public then all voting the same might have meant people could spot voting patterns...
Also as the majority of players are at the moment playing the role of "survivor"... I don't see that PLEONAST has done much wrong by posting their PM
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:01:12 GMT -5
Post by zuma on May 20, 2010 14:01:12 GMT -5
Yeah, ok, I now have a one-person clan. Completely Clueless Clan (CCC) ftw. Anyone want to join CCC? I won't share anything with you, but we can coordinate our votes I suppose. Wait, when you say you won't share anything, do you mean publicly, or even with folks who join your clan? publicly for sure, but I guess it might make sense to share some stuff with clan members, but even then it seems that clan members may have loyalties beyond the clan based on what I've read so far. So I'm hesitant to go much further than coordinating votes with clan members until I can get a handle on this game.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:09:02 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 20, 2010 14:09:02 GMT -5
Seeing as you can only win with your clan, forming a clan with people who you have to get rid of in order to win seems counter-productive. If there is a House of Chains and the members of it know that they are a member of it but do not know who the other members are (which is not an unreasonable idea based on anything I've seen so far) then managing to join into a clan with one could potentially provide intelligence towards their elimination. For example, such a HoC player may behave very differently prior to finding any other HoC players, but the only way to catch that behavior change would be if you were in a clan and communicating off-board with them. Also, taking Pleo's transparency at face value and extrapolating that there could be members of the HoC who also need the Master of the Deck (assuming there is such an entity) dead (purely hypothetical WAG on my part) it could be possible for Pleo (or anyone else with his alleged win condition) to work together with such HoC players towards their common goal of eliminating the Master of the Deck in the early or midgame, and then functionally abandon that Master-Killer clan in favor of a Chain-Killer Primary Clan. Or something.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:13:54 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 20, 2010 14:13:54 GMT -5
I see Pleo has already said something similar upthread. I haven't read page 3 yet.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:16:31 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on May 20, 2010 14:16:31 GMT -5
The Master of the Deck of Dragons' goal is to destroy all Ascendants. You are an Ascendant. I don't consider that specific at all. Aren't most of us Ascendants? Does anyone want to state they are not an Ascendant?i don't have ascendant mentioned anywhere in my pm.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:21:03 GMT -5
Post by oredigger77 on May 20, 2010 14:21:03 GMT -5
So far we have HOC, Ascendant, and Deck Master brought up if you're not one of those what are you?
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:24:44 GMT -5
Post by zuma on May 20, 2010 14:24:44 GMT -5
and what are you, oredigger? Post your complete PM please!
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:27:02 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on May 20, 2010 14:27:02 GMT -5
So far we have HOC, Ascendant, and Deck Master brought up if you're not one of those what are you? is this at me?
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:33:51 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on May 20, 2010 14:33:51 GMT -5
My PM mentions Ascendants and the Master of the Deck, but does not specifically say that I am an Ascendant. It is like Pleonast except it's missing that line.
|
|
|
Day One
May 20, 2010 14:40:59 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on May 20, 2010 14:40:59 GMT -5
My role PM talked about Ascendants, but did not explicitly state that I was one. It took a follow-up PM to get that information. I strongly encourage all players to actively ask the Authors about their role PM.
|
|