xkcd

by **AngrySquirrel** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:58 am UTC

Hmm... we also haven't heard much from McCaber in a while.

Vote: McCaber

by **Phoenix112358** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:10 pm UTC

Errr; 'in a while'? It's been like 2 days.

Stargate's on Day 2 and it's been going on for almost a month now; though I'll admit that's REALLY REALLY turtling. But can we be a bit less rash and not vote randomly for the sake of a lynch? As far as I know this isn't a timed game (unless I missed something) so there's no rush.

Personally I think that if nothing interesting happens in the next 1-2 days then it would come down to voting for the sake of game progression; but before that I'm pretty sure the discussion will reveal suspicions, which poses interrogations, which might find someone suspicious enough to warrant a vote. Don't vote all willy-nilly.

If in a couple days we have absolutely no clue as to who to vote for, I heard No Vote is also a valid vote; so this means the night can progress without a lynch. (Could someone correct me if I'm wrong on this?). We could always use this to progress the game instead of aiming blindly and having a 7/9 chance of hitting a townie. In a small game an allied kill would make a significant difference, I think. This way we get at most one death at night from the mafia night kill; as opposed to having one night kill and a 7/9 chance for an addition townie dying from friendly fire.

Anyway that's just my two cents on the whole: "Gee Willikers it's been 2 days Vote xx!" thing.

by **Phoenix112358** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:18 pm UTC

Also; it seems to me you're pressing a bit hard for a quick lynch; pushing to kill off the people who havent posted much. Normally I'll be all for killing off lurkers but it hasn't even been a significant time frame, so imo they're not really lurker-status just yet.

I may be over analysing but there's the possibility that you're scum pushing for the town to kill off another town under the pretenses of inactvity. But then again, you might just be rather impatient; so I can't be sure. But:

IGMEOY: AngrySquirrel.

by **AngrySquirrel** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:24 pm UTC

1 vote does not make a lynch.

Problem with nothing happening in games is that it makes others lose interest.

1 vote does not make much difference, but it triggers reactions from people, and reactions are good, talk is good, the more discussion we can get going the more the town get to work with. Also other people's reactions to votes are quite interesting.

And it's fairly easy to unvote.

And as for the whole "no-lynch"-thing. If you read any of the other newbie games you'll see that it comes up fairly often, and it's repeatedly considered a bad option for the town. Yes, a night can progress without a lynch, this however is like giving the mafia a free kill and less information to the town. I don't have it all here in my head atm but I can easily dig up some of the arguments around it if you wish.

by **Phoenix112358** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:39 pm UTC

I realise that a single vote doesn't make a lynch; however like you said it triggers reactions from people. Except you're going on the basis that they're lurking, even though it hasn't been very long. But what I think you're doing is pushing for the people that are active to go for a lurk-vote prematurely; thus eliminating a townie.

On day one we don't have much to go on (not in this game, anyway); and so voting for a person to lynch would likely result in a town kill, wouldn't it? So like I said the mafia get their free kill regardless but we (will likely) lose out on a townie. I do agree that this reduces the amount of discussion and therefore information being tossed out in the open, though. That's why I said give it a few days and if we still have absolutely no clue, then we go for the no vote; but I meant that as a last resort.

by **Angua** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:48 pm UTC

Well, voting Celery at least got them to say something, so the vote had some purpose. I think just giving away the vote to a free mafia kill probably isn't a good idea, but I've never played in a mini before, so don't have a feel for how much it will affect the town.

by **Phoenix112358** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:51 pm UTC

Thats the thing I'm primarily worried about.

If we do hit a town by accident we're down to 5 townies 2 scum; that ratio's much worse than 6 town 2 scum in a small game (the way I see it). In bigger game with like 20 people, an extra town loss isn't as bad, though it's still unfortunate. My reasoning is that on a smaller scale when the numbers change even slightly the overall effect is much larger.

My argument is purely on a numbers point of view, though. I have no clue how this is in practise in small games. Or big games, too. (Second game, with first still in progress).

by **Angua** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:59 pm UTC

That's true, but unless someone actually gives a reason I doubt that anyone will be following the discussion votes. So we might be able to figure out who voted for that person and who was looking suspicious. With just a mafia night kill we'll be no better off than we left the day before and will be definitely down one town player.

Question, I know that mafia only talk to each other at night, but do they know who each other are during day 1?

by **AngrySquirrel** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:36 pm UTC

Phoenix112358 wrote:I realise that a single vote doesn't make a lynch; however like you said it triggers reactions from people. Except you're going on the basis that they're lurking, even though it hasn't been very long. But what I think you're doing is pushing for the people that are active to go for a lurk-vote prematurely; thus eliminating a townie.

Two days is long enough to get a post in. I don't see a reason to drag things out if it's not necessary. I like for things to happen and I like to encourage people to participate. Voting is a great way to get people to participate, and I never asked anyone to follow my vote. The most pro-town you can do in a game of mafia is making up your own mind and not follow people blindly.

Posts and reactions gives us information and the most valuable thing to us right now is information. The more information we've got the better chance we stand at finding our mobsters.

Phoenix112358 wrote:On day one we don't have much to go on (not in this game, anyway); and so voting for a person to lynch would likely result in a town kill, wouldn't it? So like I said the mafia get their free kill regardless but we (will likely) lose out on a townie. I do agree that this reduces the amount of discussion and therefore information being tossed out in the open, though. That's why I said give it a few days and if we still have absolutely no clue, then we go for the no vote; but I meant that as a last resort.

We can not rely on a potential cop to find our targets for us. Votes and lynches gives us a lot of information while still giving us at least the chance to hit mafia. Like Angua said, No-lynch = no information and a free mob-kill and it will leave us at the exact same point, and equally clueless, tomorrow as we are today only with one less town player.

Angua wrote:Question, I know that mafia only talk to each other at night, but do they know who each other are during day 1?

They usually get told who their team-members are in their role-PM and since this is a vanilla game I assume it's business as usual.

by **Psycho Goose** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:35 pm UTC

And about the no-lynch vote: Keep in mind that you'll always have a greater chance of hitting a townie than hitting a mafioso -- the time the mafia gets the majority is when they win. And just looking at people's posts, while plenty educational, does not provide us with as much information as voting patterns do. If you're feeling philosophical, blame it on the difference between words and deeds.

Also, as for AngrySquirrel voting too early -- at least s/he (forgive me for not knowing your gender) hasn't tried to start a bandwagon. That is when I get suspicious.

Though I'm not sure who is helped more by going for a faster game -- the mafia, or the townies? The answer, of course, is "everyone," but who's more likely to win?

by **Kolko** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:38 pm UTC

A nolynch, at a time when you can safely lynch the wrong person without losing is almost always a bad idea. It basically gives the first kill, which for us means a 2/9 chance of hitting scum, to the mafia who has 0 chance of hitting scum. That said, a completely random lynch isn't good either, I'd really like a solid reason before I vote, though admittedly there aren't a lot of those to be found d1.

Also, AngrySquirrel is most definately on the female side of the spectrum

by **Phoenix112358** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:03 pm UTC

Kolko wrote:Also, AngrySquirrel is most definately on the female side of the spectrum

Off topic, but there's a spectrum? Male slowly going toward female? Did not know o_O;. Cool!

Back on topic:

Psycho Goose wrote:Also, as for AngrySquirrel voting too early -- at least s/he (forgive me for not knowing your gender) hasn't tried to start a bandwagon. That is when I get suspicious.[/size]

That is true. I guess I jumped the gun a bit and assumed that a single vote would trigger others to follow suite and end up in a lynch straight away.

Anyway I get what you guys are saying about the no-vote, and I agree that it's a bad idea hence why I said as a last resort - but I guess now with your explanations it shouldn't even be used as a last resort, I suppose. At any rate I understand your points I'm not trying to be argumentative

by **Flying_Cookie** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:15 pm UTC

I feel that most of what I would have said in regards to Phoenix's posts have been said, but I have to say this even if it has been said, that it seemed to me like AS was just trying to get people who hadn't posted yet to post, with the side advantage of getting some discussion going at the same time. That seemed fairly clear to me, and from my skimming of other mafia threads it seems like its a fairly common practice to do just that at the beginning. I guess I'm just making assumptions now, but I think it was rather obvious, so I'm sort of getting the feeling that you where overreacting, which makes you look sort of suspicious, possibly like you where trying to protect a scum buddy. I think its a bit to early to get any solid suspicions, but that along with your potential joke role-claim (I know I said we should ignore it, but it seems like you where muddying the waters, even if it was accidental) is making me at least a little suspicious. IGMEOY Phoenix

In light of your last post (I didn't know it told you if a post happened while you where typing one up, that's cool) I feel a little less suspicious, but I'm still going to watch you.

by **crucialityfactor** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:32 am UTC

Angua wrote:Question, I know that mafia only talk to each other at night, but do they know who each other are during day 1?

Everyone knew everything there was to know about their role from the start of the game.

Also on the subject of time limits. I don't want to have to use them. Not having to would make me very happy. Don't feel like you need to rush to a lynch, but at the same time, there's only 9 of you so the game should run at a faster clip than normal games.

by **crucialityfactor** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:33 am UTC

Vote Count:

McCaber - 1 (AngrySquirrel)

by **Psycho Goose** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:27 am UTC

Well, since the game's been going pretty slowly, I will suggest that we talk about what we were talking about in Azrael's game -- namely, strategy.
Who, for instance, should claim?

I, for one, think that the cop shouldn't claim unless: 1) they are at risk of being lynched 2) they found a mafioso and it's LYLO, or 3) they found a mafioso and there's only one left. If they found a mafioso with two left then we're still in the dark once our cop dies. Hopefully, instead, they can try to swing the vote in one direction or another, and gather more information until it is LYLO. Alternately, if they get nightkilled, we can look back at their previous posts and see who they suspect.

I'm not sure about the doctor.
[cheesy TV announcer voice]So let's hear what you think!!![/cheesy TV announcer voice]

by **Flying_Cookie** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:35 am UTC

I already said my opinion, but we might as well have some talking happening, so.
I think its a bad idea for the cop to claim if their about to be lynched, since then scum could claim cop, and if there isn't one in the setup, then there would be no counter claim. Maybe if their close to being lynched they could make a post of their suspicions, so when we find out they're the cop after death (Which I think we would) Question: Do we find out what role someone is once they die? then we can look into the people they mentioned. Maybe everyone should do that if they get close to being lynched so its not obvious and the scum don't hammer the cop in particular. Dunno.

If they find scum I guess its up to them to decide, and otherwise just push for that person being lynched if they don't want to role-claim. I talked about what would happen if they were scum or cop before. If its LYLO then I'd say they should try and push for the scum they found, then if they can't then claim. But if it is LYLO then the scum might be tempted to claim, or counter claim... Huh. But if theirs only one left, then they should obviously go ahead.

Again I don't think the doctor should ever claim.

by **Angua** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:55 am UTC

Personally I'm of the opinion that no one should really claim, because there's nothing to stop mafia from claiming as well. It seems to just muddy the waters and try to cast doubt on what's going on.

I think we do find out their role when they die.

by **Kolko** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:46 am UTC

Angua wrote:Personally I'm of the opinion that no one should really claim, because there's nothing to stop mafia from claiming as well. It seems to just muddy the waters and try to cast doubt on what's going on.

I think we do find out their role when they die.

Maybe, but if the cop didn't claim we wouldn't know if someone was scum, which would be very bad for the town.

by **Psycho Goose** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 6:10 am UTC

And muddied waters may be an acceptable risk; right now the waters aren't very muddy, but they are oh so shallow.
Information, even if it is confusing and may not be true, is still something to work with.

I think that claims are fine as long as we get an extra lynch for the next day in case it turns out that the claimer was lying.

by **cellery** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:17 am UTC

(Quick post before everyone else wakes up)

My thoughts on the current topic: I don't think that the cop should ever claim at all unless he/she finds at least one mafia member (and definitely at some point if they found them both). Throwing the possibilities of a false cop claim would either end up with the cop getting lynched, or getting NK'd that night.

However, I think that, assuming he/she does find scum, that the cop should try to claim before LYLO, if at all possible. If we reach LYLO and the cop claims just then, there's almost definitely going to be a scum counter-claim, and we won't know for sure who the real cop is until it's already too late.

by **crucialityfactor** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 9:12 pm UTC

McCaber has been replaced by Game_boy. All votes have been reset.

Have a nice day!

by **Psycho Goose** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:44 am UTC

Vote: Game_boy.
Look. We've been playing for days, and I can't think of a single useful thing he's contributed to discussion! Even if he isn't scum, it just gets on my nerves. I'm getting a kind of scummy vibe from him too.

That is all. Lynch the mofo.

[/sarcasm]
Unvote. Don't wanna run the risk of that being taken seriously.

by **Phoenix112358** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:24 am UTC

Sorry I haven't been posting; had exams a few days ago and then a whole day competition today.

Anyway; re the cop claiming:
If I were the cop and investigated someone and they turned out scum I would just analyse all their posts and behaviour for anything incriminating; and then just make an argument against them like a normal townie would. Basically, try to convince everyone else that he's scum - but if worst comes to worst then I would claim. Hopefully if a counter-claim arises, the argument you built up against them would have enough substance to get them lynched.

And I don't quite get your post, Psycho Goose?

by **Psycho Goose** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:31 am UTC

There isn't a point, really. I just thought somebody oughta welcome the guy. And I like your position on claiming.

And I don't really have anything to talk about. This is mildly infuriating.

by **Game_boy** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:34 am UTC

I'm playing now. I live in the UK but accepted last night, hence the delay.

Because I've never seen a successful game using No Lynch to the benefit of the Town (for the no-information-gained reason) I'm also against No Lynch.

I'm not happy with you even joke-voting me (assuming I'm interpreting right). I can't even think of a reason for you to say that.

Vote: Psycho Goose

by **Psycho Goose** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 8:37 am UTC

I'd joke-vote because this game is Serious Business, and people will die if we aren't careful. Not a laughing matter. No sir-ee.
So I clearly did that because I'm a bad person.

Welcome, by the way.

by **Game_boy** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:36 am UTC

...

Unvote

by **Kolko** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:46 pm UTC

Psycho Goose wrote:I'd joke-vote because this game is Serious Business, and people will die if we aren't careful. Not a laughing matter. No sir-ee.
So I clearly did that because I'm a bad person.

Welcome, by the way.

*Checks the list of possible set-ups* No, still no jester. WHY ARE YOU ACTING LIKE THIS?

You're confusing me

by **Gregoriev** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:22 pm UTC

Kolko wrote:
Psycho Goose wrote:I'd joke-vote because this game is Serious Business, and people will die if we aren't careful. Not a laughing matter. No sir-ee.
So I clearly did that because I'm a bad person.

Welcome, by the way.

*Checks the list of possible set-ups* No, still no jester. WHY ARE YOU ACTING LIKE THIS?

You're confusing me

Because Goose is obviously scum!

by **Psycho Goose** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 7:57 pm UTC

You obviously didn't check the fine-print. All of these setups involve forcing helpless Third World children to act out the results of our actions.
Methinks we should stop playing?

In all seriousness, though, I haven't the slightest idea of what to do. Nobody really looks suspicious at this point. If I had to vote for somebody who's been posting frequently, then I'd probably go for Phoenix for that FoS on AS's lurker-lynching idea -- but that's only really because I kind of agree with that lurker-lynching idea; I can see easily where Phoenix is coming from. Heck, the scummiest-looking person right now is probably me...

If I had to vote for somebody right now, then I'd probably vote for Cellery or Gregoriev: since this is a newbie game, I wouldn't expect the mafia to have much of a clue as to what they should do (rhyme unintentional) and would probably expect them to hang back a bit because of that. But I'm just grasping at straws here: they probably haven't been posting much because there isn't honestly much to say.

Oh, and I apologize to Game_boy for being a bit rude in response to his vote. Sorry about that. I know we got started on the wrong hoof, but hopefully we can move past that?

by **crucialityfactor** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:10 pm UTC

Psycho Goose wrote:You obviously didn't check the fine-print. All of these setups involve forcing helpless Third World children to act out the results of our actions.

The mod denies any and all existence of the Third World.

by **crucialityfactor** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:58 am UTC

by **Flying_Cookie** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:03 am UTC

Posting Posting, what to say... Well, since we need to do something, I guess we should discuss voting, I suppose if I had to vote I'd probably vote for phoenix or Goose, the only people who seem very suspicious to me so far, but goose seems more like he's just screwing around until there is actually something to do, so I'm not as suspicious of him...

by **Gregoriev** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:08 am UTC

I'd vote for...I'm not quite sure. I agree with Goose, no one seems to be too suspicious. And I hang back because I don't have anything to say; it has nothing to do with my alignment >.>

by **Angua** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:17 am UTC

What with with Gregoriev going it has nothing to do with my alignment >.>.

That seems kind of suspicious, a bit wifomy.

by **Gregoriev** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:19 am UTC

Angua wrote:What with with Gregoriev going it has nothing to do with my alignment >.>.

That seems kind of suspicious, a bit wifomy.

I was replying to Goose's light FoS. Is this a problem?

by **Angua** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:22 am UTC

Gregoriev wrote:
Angua wrote:What's with with Gregoriev going it has nothing to do with my alignment >.>.

That seems kind of suspicious, a bit wifomy.

I was replying to Goose's light FoS. Is this a problem?

The wording was definitely a bit off. You could have just said that you didn't really have any new thoughts/didn't know what to say.

>.> just looks suspicious, that's practically the whole point of the emoticon. Looking obviously suspicious seems a bit wifomy to me.

by **Phoenix112358** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:14 am UTC

What exactly makes me look 'very suspicious'? The no lynch thing? I expressed that I was looking from a merely numbers-point of view.

by **Gregoriev** » Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:03 am UTC

Angua wrote:The wording was definitely a bit off. You could have just said that you didn't really have any new thoughts/didn't know what to say.

>.> just looks suspicious, that's practically the whole point of the emoticon. Looking obviously suspicious seems a bit wifomy to me.

I love me my shifty eyebrows.

Who is online