|
Post by Inner Stickler on Jun 22, 2009 12:05:40 GMT -5
I think you can be forgiven this once.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jun 22, 2009 12:16:22 GMT -5
I mentioned this over on Giraffe, but I'll be on vacation starting tomorrow night. I will be checking in, but there will be a couple of days (June 25th, when I turn 40; and June 28) when I'm going to be nowhere near a computer. Nonetheless.
I hate first Days, anyway. Whoever it was said town generally gets lynched is right - although not always, certainly. And I really don't like random voting, nor voting without any reason. Ah, well.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Jun 22, 2009 14:01:11 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm not sure that it makes that much difference at this point which setup we are in. I guess the scum know, but our doc and/or cop don't. How would the scum know what set up we have? Would they know if there were town power roles? The set up is one of three permutations The game setup is randomly chosen from one of three possible setups as detailed below: 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 1 Sane Cop, 1 Sane Doctor, 5 Townies 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Cop, 6 Townies 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Doctor, 6 Townies The two mafia goons will know each other - so if one of them is a roleblocker, then they know there is both a cop and doc. Otherwise, they know there is a doc OR cop. The town on the other hand, have no idea what the set up.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 22, 2009 15:12:18 GMT -5
That makes sense. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jun 22, 2009 16:39:58 GMT -5
vote: metallicsquinkThis just seems like a mafia scum trying sound naive and innocent: How would the scum know what set up we have? Would they know if there were town power roles?
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 22, 2009 16:52:46 GMT -5
Actually, I was trying to see if the scum would have information that Town would not regarding the set up, i.e., maybe something in their PMs. This was my (clearly lame) attempt to trap a scum. Truthfully, I hadn't thought it through that the scum could figure it out just by talking to each other.
|
|
|
Post by special on Jun 22, 2009 17:24:46 GMT -5
Actually, I was trying to see if the scum would have information that Town would not regarding the set up, i.e., maybe something in their PMs. This was my (clearly lame) attempt to trap a scum. Truthfully, I hadn't thought it through that the scum could figure it out just by talking to each other. Scum can talk to each other!!
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Jun 22, 2009 17:52:07 GMT -5
Actually, I was trying to see if the scum would have information that Town would not regarding the set up, i.e., maybe something in their PMs. This was my (clearly lame) attempt to trap a scum. Truthfully, I hadn't thought it through that the scum could figure it out just by talking to each other. Scum can talk to each other!! You know, Zack voted me (in another game) for "forgetting" that scum could talk to each other; maybe I should vote Squink for the same reason.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 22, 2009 17:55:48 GMT -5
I didn't forget that they could talk to each other but that while talking, they would discuss the possible set up and actually figure it out.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 22, 2009 18:08:33 GMT -5
By the way, if you do vote for me for this, then you're voting for me just for being dumb. I think part of my problem with this game is that it's been going so slowly the past few days. I haven't been checking up as much as I could and not being as critical and diligent as I was in my first game where Day 1 was very active. Is Day 1 usually so quiet?
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Jun 22, 2009 18:34:11 GMT -5
Well, Day 1 votes aren't always the best logic. Day 1 helps figure out what people's positions are on mafia strategies and stuff so that we have something to compare later actions against.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 23, 2009 6:34:06 GMT -5
True. I guess where I am struggling here is how to get the conversation going. We don't seem to have much activity toDay.
|
|
|
Post by Jaade on Jun 23, 2009 9:46:22 GMT -5
Squink, the reason that the other game was so lively on Day 1 was because so many players had never played before and there was a lot of information to get out. Here, most of these guys have played many, many games together and so all of that discussion is unncessary. It also seems that most of their thoughts and feelings on Lynch the Lurker and the like have been discussed ad nauseum. Add me to the list of players that don't really care for Day 1. It's just so hard to get everything going. I'm going back to studying for my two tests (today and tomorrow) but I'll definitely have a chance to get back before the end of Day to see if I decide who might be scummy.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 23, 2009 10:41:22 GMT -5
But if no one is saying anything, how will you be able to decide who might be scummy?
|
|
|
Post by The Real FCOD on Jun 23, 2009 10:44:43 GMT -5
Let's see...what's a controversial topic that could spur some discussion...oh I know! What does everyone think about trust lists?
For the new players, a trust lists are where we all post a list of who we trust and who we don't trust. This way, if there's a cop, it's an easy way for them to breadcrumb without exposing themselves. The idea being that when they die we can go back and look at their trust lists and see who they investigated.
Of course, in practice it's kind of a dumb idea, especially in a game this small. I'm not suggesting we try it, I'm saying I think it'd help discussion if everyone gave their opinion on the idea.
Ready? Discuss!
--FCOD
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 23, 2009 10:46:34 GMT -5
I thought the first rule of Mafia was "trust no one".
|
|
|
Post by The Real FCOD on Jun 23, 2009 10:48:39 GMT -5
That is true. Perhaps the concept is misnamed. A more appropriate name would perhaps be "suspicion lists." The idea is that you list the people of whom you are most and least suspicious. Obviously you can't trust anyone unless they're a fellow scum, fellow mason, or dead (and there are exceptions to those cases as well).
--FCOD
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 23, 2009 10:50:28 GMT -5
I was just summarizing all the Day 1 posts to see if anything did strike me as suspicious. I actually have to do a little work right now but then I'm going to post what I've noticed so far in the game.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jun 23, 2009 11:34:48 GMT -5
It's always interesting to go back and look at dead mafia's suspicion lists, too. Who they said they suspected, who they said they trusted, and compare to who they voted. So I think they're good from that aspect as well. The downside is it lets the mafia know who is trusted, making the trusted one a good night kill. I generally think that more discussion of any type is better than less discussion.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Jun 23, 2009 11:40:31 GMT -5
Trust no one - especially those asking for trust or don't trust lists :-)
|
|
|
Post by The Real FCOD on Jun 23, 2009 11:45:24 GMT -5
And ESPECIALLY NAF. He's always scum.
--FCOD
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Jun 23, 2009 12:13:22 GMT -5
"Trust no-one" is a good axiom to work on at the beginning of the game. It's worth noting that, in the early game, the only people who can trust anyone are the mafia - because they know which side everyone is on. With their greater knowledge, they may be able to identify the Town power roles, because those power roles know more than the regular Townsperson, but aren't one of the Mafia. Thus, in the early game I'd be against them.
I think the late game sees de facto trust lists quite often - a player choosing to vote one way rather than another because he trusts one claim more than another.
Some of the vets around here got badly burned in a game where trust lists were published. It's why they tend to be a bit chary of them nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 23, 2009 12:53:53 GMT -5
"Trust no-one" is a good axiom to work on at the beginning of the game. It's worth noting that, in the early game, the only people who can trust anyone are the mafia - because they know which side everyone is on. With their greater knowledge, they may be able to identify the Town power roles, because those power roles know more than the regular Townsperson, but aren't one of the Mafia. Thus, in the early game I'd be against them. When you say in the early game, you'd be against "them", do you mean trust lists?
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Jun 23, 2009 13:29:20 GMT -5
When you say in the early game, you'd be against "them", do you mean trust lists? That was my meaning, yes.
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 23, 2009 13:48:01 GMT -5
I've been looking over all the Day 1 posts so far and the person who seems the most suspicious to me is Jaade. It's not that she has the lowest post count (that isn't saying much since most of us have pretty low post counts toDay) but her two posts are 128 which says she won't be around much and 162 where she says she'll “definitely have a chance to get back before the end of Day to see if I decide who might be scummy”. I feel like she is setting herself up for a baseless vote at the end of the Day.
On that note, however, a few people have discussed random voting. I still don't get the point. If we all random vote, we risk not learning anything from the lynch. In addition, if everyone agrees that we are randomly voting, any two or more people who vote for the same person are going to look very suspicious which might deter anyone from voting for the same person as someone else. I assume a tie ends in a no-lynch situation.
I agree that voting might get people talking but I don't agree that random voting will get any results. So even though my case against Jaade is pretty weak, it's better than nothing at this point. Perhaps it will get her to come back and answer my question in post 163 about how she is going to find anything scummy in time for a vote.
Vote: Jaade[/color]
|
|
|
Post by metallicsquink on Jun 23, 2009 13:54:00 GMT -5
In re-reading my vote, I don't think I made myself very clear. What struck me about Jaade's post 162 is she made it seem like a very passive act for her to come back, read through what everyone else was saying and find something scummy. I would think she would want to be participating here to try to find scum herself. So perhaps she is going to come back late in the Day, read through everyone else's posts, see what cases they have made and piggyback on someone else's vote for someone from Town.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jun 23, 2009 18:09:38 GMT -5
unvote:metallicsquink I never did have a very good reason, and you seem thoughtful and pro-town in your last few posts.
|
|
|
Post by texcat on Jun 23, 2009 22:50:46 GMT -5
And ESPECIALLY NAF. He's always scum. --FCOD And I might vote NAF if I knew who that was....
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Jun 24, 2009 3:47:05 GMT -5
Vote Count:
1 Special Ed (FCoD #103)
1 FCoD (Special Ed #111)
1 Jaade (metallicsquink #174)
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Jun 24, 2009 8:42:25 GMT -5
And ESPECIALLY NAF. He's always scum. --FCOD And I might vote NAF if I knew who that was.... Hmm, that would be an interesting silly aside - it's not actually mentioned explicitly in the rules that you have to vote for someone who is actually playing this game ;D
|
|