|
Post by goltar on Jun 27, 2009 9:59:25 GMT -5
goltar: Votes shouldn't be random, therefore lynches shouldn't be random, therefore the statistics of random lynching are never a valid argument. I agree with the point about votes not being random. However, the statistics of random lynching are still a valid argument to consider, especially with so little useful information at this point. Yes, it becomes lower priority as more information becomes available. But it is always a factor that should be considered, and useful for developing more advanced theories.
|
|
|
Post by bobthewarrior on Jun 27, 2009 10:03:41 GMT -5
With this many special roles in the game, both townie and mafia, I favor a no lynch vote. My first thought on how to prove that this is a good idea was to use the first post in the general discussion thread to go back and see how many times a 1st day lynch was successful (town killed mafia) and how many acutally hurt the town. Unfortunately, it's not that straight forward or easy to do, you have to read the rules, understand the premise of who is good and who is evil, and then skim several pages worth of posts looking for the first day lynch. If roles were being revealed, you can stop here, but if not you have to find the results post and figure out from there. Very time consuming, something I don't have a lot of right now. So, I gave up and am just going to go with my gut and assume that more often than not, the first day lynch is town killing town.
I have been a proponent of a first day no-lynch for quite some time. I see a lot of value in the town being able to sort out who is dying and why, and having general conversations to root out the mafia, while letting the power roles do their thing. A good, or even half good, mafia is easily able to hide while letting the town lead itself to death. If the town isn't willing to lead itself to kill itself, the job of the mafia becomes more difficult.
I attempted to voice this opinion in a past game, Smeg's, where I was a townie and nearly lost my head the first day until I was forced to name my role to save my neck. I much prefer to follow than to lead, so I haven't spoken up since and have generally remained behind the scenes, usually only earning a flush-out vote for non-activity.
This game, I am once again going to stick my neck out and support the no-lynch theory. Don't give the mafia a free kill, let the power roles do their thing, and hope for the best.
Vote: No Lynch
Yes, I'm well aware that I cannot change that vote.
Gambling early on is not a good idea imo. When push comes to shove and a vote will either give the town another chance or seal it's fate, that's when it's time to gamble. After all, it's only a game.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Maher on Jun 27, 2009 10:26:49 GMT -5
I have updated the first post indicating how many of each role there are. I'll state it here as well. There are 7 Mafia (3 Power Roles + 4 Goons). There are 3 Neutrals (2 Village Idiots + Mysterious Stranger). There are 14 Townies (6 Power Roles + 8 BOPTs).
I've been asked this by a couple of people: you are allowed to role claim, both your true role and any other role you may wish to claim for whatever nefarious purpose. You may not, however, use the text of your Role PM as evidence to support your claim.
Also please refrain from cheesy tactics such as checking when certain players are online. Keep it within the bounds of the game.
I was asked a good question about the War Hero. I will not directly reveal who the War Hero voted for. Each lynch I will list the number of votes received by each player (with the War Hero's vote only counted once), and then announce who was lynched. So if there is no tied situation, there will be nothing to indicate who the War Hero has voted for.
I will also point out that both vote-switching roles have been removed.
I would like to request that any further in-thread questions be bolded or posted in another text colour so I can pick them out easier.
I will continue to use this red text colour for future mod posts as it stands out reasonably well on both forum skins.
|
|
Kahlan
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by Kahlan on Jun 27, 2009 10:43:43 GMT -5
Jason - I was wondering if you could show Day and Night start/end times on the first page? It would be easier to check there than trying to find each post where the time starts.
|
|
|
Post by water_moon on Jun 27, 2009 10:59:19 GMT -5
So the unknown victim - who cares. When you see a dead person do you bother ask what their name is? I don't. True, but usually if we see a dead person we either A.) know them or B.) know what killed them. Was it an accident? arsinic? asphixiation? Something that began with a letter other than A? It must have been appropiatly gruseome and obivious for most of us suspect foul play or we would have no need of lynching anyone at all. What kinda person would resort to violence? And why kill an extra if not to set up suspense when one of us falls to this foul muderer?
|
|
|
Post by nolecub on Jun 27, 2009 11:07:47 GMT -5
@bob: Normally I would have to disagree with you on a no-lynch on the first day. A no-lynch would normally not give us anything to base our day 2 conversation around.
However, with the town starting the day off, I am inclined to go with the no-lynch day 1 game plan. Really, if the power roles are unable to come up with something during night 1, we are starting off no worse than a normal, mafia kills on night one game.
At least this way, we have a chance to sort out some of the new faces.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 27, 2009 11:13:20 GMT -5
@bob - The hidden assumption behind your post is that the town is by definition not clever enough to deduce being lead astray or not. I find this a dangerous assumption to make. If that was the case, most games with mafia vs town with experienced players would result in a townloss, but my experience tells me otherwise.
Lynching provides information, information that will be valuable later on in pattern and posting analysis. By going for a no lynch, you actually block the town from the chance to use that information. When push comes to shove, as you put it, that information might provide clues.
I find what you say both demoralizing and alarming, and rest assured, I'll keep my eye on you.
|
|
|
Post by water_moon on Jun 27, 2009 11:13:39 GMT -5
As for the no lynch, I'm not that worried about taking out the VI's we'd have to manage to hit BOTH of them so it's not like the usual "one false move".
The chance to vote is a condundrum, esp with a penalty for not casting a vote, though I have to ask: if a person is wrongfully imprisioned are they penalized the next day?
that is if the crooked cop detains them (not allowed to post ie. vote) will they have a posting condition the next day?
|
|
|
Post by water_moon on Jun 27, 2009 11:15:09 GMT -5
and is the detainment only or the day or does it go through the night also?
|
|
|
Post by muzzz on Jun 27, 2009 11:22:13 GMT -5
But it is always a factor that should be considered, and useful for developing more advanced theories. I disagree. We should be trying to gather information to make things less random. And we definitely shouldn't be basing theories on things that ought to be irrelevant. Re. Bob's post - I completely disagree. Really, completely. NK's aren't nearly as informative as lynches. Powerroles can do their thing tonight whether we lynch or not. But most importantly, if the town isn't willing to risk lynching, the mafia win automatically!
|
|
|
Post by Jason Maher on Jun 27, 2009 11:31:34 GMT -5
Jason - I was wondering if you could show Day and Night start/end times on the first page? It would be easier to check there than trying to find each post where the time starts. Absolutely. I will periodically/sporadically update the second post in the thread with how long is left in the current day/night and what time the current phase will end.
@water_moon: the punishment for not voting does not apply if you are prevented from voting by being detained and/or healed. Detainment is for the day phase only.
You can be punished in the same manner as someone who doesn't vote for other offences, such as quoting from a Role PM or editing a post (other than to delete an accidental night post).
|
|
|
Post by OneTreeHill on Jun 27, 2009 15:12:37 GMT -5
A no-lynch at this point doesn't seem like it would give us much information to go on. Wouldn't it just let the baddies blend in while none of their own are lynched?
|
|
|
Post by soylentred on Jun 27, 2009 15:24:52 GMT -5
@bob - The hidden assumption behind your post is that the town is by definition not clever enough to deduce being lead astray or not. I find this a dangerous assumption to make. If that was the case, most games with mafia vs town with experienced players would result in a town loss, but my experience tells me otherwise. Lynching provides information, information that will be valuable later on in pattern and posting analysis. By going for a no lynch, you actually block the town from the chance to use that information. When push comes to shove, as you put it, that information might provide clues. I find what you say both demoralizing and alarming, and rest assured, I'll keep my eye on you. But it is always a factor that should be considered, and useful for developing more advanced theories. I disagree. We should be trying to gather information to make things less random. And we definitely shouldn't be basing theories on things that ought to be irrelevant. Re. Bob's post - I completely disagree. Really, completely. NK's aren't nearly as informative as lynches. Powerroles can do their thing tonight whether we lynch or not. But most importantly, if the town isn't willing to risk lynching, the mafia win automatically! I so fully agree with these two posts - do not assume the town is not clever enough to understand that the benefit of the first day lynch is reaped in the end game, do not assume also that the town does not have the ability to do the reaping. We don't lynch we replay day one on day two and on and on. The lynch is the only tool we have on day one and as Muzz said far more valuable than an NK for information gathering. I am of the opinion that pushing for a no vote is win win for mafia - both as a guise to pretend they are concerned for the town and again in knowing full well the town will most likely lynch regardless of these pretend attempts at protecting our numbers. (yay two two two quotes in one)
|
|
|
Post by colorlessgreen on Jun 27, 2009 15:47:10 GMT -5
I know many of you are playing your first game on this forum, so you may not have read the last mafia game we played, so I'd like to draw your attention to a few posts from that game: Post by Xanth, in which he said that he had no idea that there were any role reveals, despite there having been a NK that already occurred in which he got a role reveal. Post by me. in which I comment on this (though it doesn't really go anywhere) for a bit more information, including the fact that Xanth has enough mafia experience to be sure to read the rules. Post by Nazdakka (host), in which he reveals (at the end of the game) that Xanth is mafia. Post by Xanth, in which he admits it was an intentional tactic. So, after this brief history lesson, we have this post from this game: Post by Xanth, in which he bases half of his post/early game strategy upon roles that are no longer in use. Does it look to anyone else like he's attempting the same thing in this game? Semi-OT: BTW, I did the links using spf code, so if it works differently here I'll post a follow up with the correct links. -CG
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Jun 27, 2009 15:57:12 GMT -5
@cg : Sorry, while I disagree with Xanth's (and, in extension, Bob's) logic, I find this actually not all that helpful.
Basically, you say: - The previous round, he said this, and he was mafia. - This round, he is saying it again.
And leave us to draw our own conclusions. Actually, 2bh, I find this pleads AGAINST Xanth being mafia, because that tactic would be ridiculously suicidal. It would suggest Xanth is somewhat of a mafia incompetent, and judging from his posts in this and the previous round, it seems clear to me he is anything but.
|
|