|
This. This is the mafia democracy Ecco dreams of at night. We will make it so!
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jul 2, 2022 02:23 |
|
|
This is a democracy, people! Based on our Grecian roots, we need to be expansive and expressive with our words, to hunt down, pin down, and claim as our own the very essence of truth. I expect eloquence, not just "L".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 13:35
|
|
|
I suppose "L" is more rhetoric than I would expect from an rear end, I will let it pass. This time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:Somebody invite Ecco to this I'll PM soru to invite her over.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:3 dead people. Byers and Trill are both in the top 5, but they're the same person. How am I still in the top 5, I had to replace out after D1? ... Never mind, strike that, ongoing game.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Epsilon Plus posted:This will be easy. I'm working under a self-imposed rule that I only participate in one game at a time to insure High Quality Posting. Yes, I have this rule as well. I am currently in three games. I think I have a problem.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
MildManeredManikin posted:Role PMs out. Votefinder up soon. I'm still finishing the docs up so be patient. Sorry, I just got back and saw the role PM, catching up now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:Actually question, what if there's a x-way tie for one of the roles? What happens then? Could that happen with five in a room? Seems like bullshit for someone to deadlock the vote like that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Confirming that i am vanilla town Unless I'm mistaken, we're all vanilla town. The point of the rooms is to give everyone a say in how the powers get used, yeah?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:A thought: should we publicly claim who we're passing ballots to? I can kind of envision scum getting their hands on the majority of ballots and then endlessly passing them around to themselves. Public ballot passing claims might keep that from happening. Might be a bit dangerous, though, as it gives scum information about the ballots being passed around. They can set up their own passing based on what the town's doing. They can't give it to themselves, but they can try to stack the rooms in their favor.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Once we reveal the third power, we can discuss openly in this chat who we should use what powers on, instead of just discussing in the voting room. How is this a good idea? At all? In a standard game, openly planning night actions is bad for town. This game is no different.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
Asiina posted:This is going to be hard to get right unless we get a bunch of confirmed towns in the doc room. Unless you're absolutely certain that there are no scum in the doc room, you'll never have a successful doc, because they'll just kill someone else.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
jon joe posted:This is just some setup speculation, but it's possible scum have a power role to steal a ballot during the night from its intended target by targeting the person who was holding it. Not only that, there's the randomness of the role actor in the room. If you have two scum in the cop room, for instance, and they know the other people in the cop room, I'd kill one of the cops as scum because you lessen the chance of town getting the cop result.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:All the tswift avatars make it hard to tell who's who. True mafia players play with avatars off. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Epsilon Plus posted:If scum are stealing ballots, they could circumvent this, though. This would be particularly lovely if the scum also had a role that let them discern what ballot someone holds (ballotcop?). More than likely, though, I'd guess all scum are vanilla but I wouldn't put money on it. Epsilon's vote here rubs me the wrong way; it's a clear joke vote dropped at the end of a serious post, and wall monitor already had a vote on him from earlier in joke phase. Feels forced.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:hello, i am still shaky on the mechanics Revealing who you send ballots to does make sense in this context, using it as a means to track who can and can't be scum based on who the scum pass to. That's not a bad idea at all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:Okay after sleeping on it my thoughts: If you delay, you have people who have died in the meantime and there are gaps that scum could try to hide in. Full and immediate claims, or none at all. Those are the two ways we can go; any compromise is going to be ineffective, I think.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Votecount in the OP, please, MMM. Yeah, please add this MMM.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
Asiina posted:I would cop/doc Ernie because I think confirmed town Ernie would be very useful in this game. I would roleblock EP, I don't like his WM vote and his posting has been a little off to me. More of a gut read, but best I got for now. I like everything here, Asiina. I'd also throw out WM as a good roleblock; his suggestions sound sincere, but if you think about them they're all built in ways that scum could exploit. Ernie pointed out one of his posts, and the one I quoted before with delayed claims is rubbing me raw the more I think about it. It's the perfect compromise for scum to suggest.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
Asiina posted:I don't like this post at all. Asiina sees what I see, I think. If you don't have information shared on the day of, scum can hide the gaps in information created by dead players. Again, eitehr share everything immediately, all the time, or share nothing. Those are the two options. I find suggestions of half measures to be scum trying to form cracks they can exploit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:Honestly your opinion on me sounds manufactured. You disagree with my strategy, sure thing no problem. I was suggesting holding off claims till D3 because I'm paranoid about what scum can do with their knowledge, especially if we're also announcing who we passed ballots to. ##vote wall monitor
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
jon joe posted:I think wall monitor is genuine in this interaction. WM, JJ, Epi+ scum team?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
jon joe posted:If I may interject my opinion here: There are three powers. The Cop power is marginal, the doc power is useless, and the roleblocker power is probably the best chance we have to stop a scum nightkill. Personally, though, I don't care about any of them, especially since we have to assume that we either use them randomly or scum will be able to know the targets and work around them. What's important to me is the ballot passing. Ernie's idea to use it as a type of cop is great. It's why I'm drawn to agree with Asiina; we share openly about what we're doing with our ballots today.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Hmmm, fair. I wonder how punishing MMM made the scum ability , if any, to counter this situation, though? I've got a question out to MMM, and once he answers I'm going to share what I'm doing with my ballot openly in the thread. I'd encourage everyone else to share the same information I do, because then we can track the ballots.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
jon joe posted:When you say you plan to share openly, which of the following applies (check all that apply): A and C for sure, and more besides. B I'm still weighing in my head, but I'm inclined to say target chat should stay in the docs on the off chance we get a scum-free room, but that we need to claim the target we're voting for in the room and it should be revealed the next day. Again, so we can track discrepancies.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
wall monitor posted:Deadline is in about 24 hours. I have an irrational hatred of no-euphemism D1's and might just hammer myself rather than let D1 go without a euphemism, if it looks like it might go that way. Plurality vote, there will never be a no lynch this game unless we intend it to happen.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Okay. Why wait? In fact, what is the debate? Revealing what room(s) you're in and who you are sending your ballot to is the only way to have a hope at tracking ballots. It is absolutely something scum do not want to have tracked. I can see arguments for the power targets being revealed or not, but not wanting people to know who you gave your ballot to is scummy in this game. My question to MMM is about finding a way to verify specific ballots. To wit: in each room we were given a voter number (Voter 1, Voter 2, etc.). When I give my ballot away, does the person I gave it to have the same number? If so, we can track the individual ballots much easier by referring to each ballot as ROOM-NUMBER.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:I see a lot of ballot conversation but not a lot of scumhunting. Like we can do whatever we want to control the ballots but I think more important is actually finding and plorping scum. wall monitor is scum; he didn't even respond to my vote on him which I didn't bothering making a case for, because he can't. His vote on Ernie was that bad, he even knew to remove it as soon as Ernie responded to it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:I don't see the problem with being open with our ballots/who we're voting for, at least as far as roleblock goes. Like, what do I care if scum knows who I vote for a roleblock? What're they gonna do? If we roleblock scum, that scum won't make the nightkill if he knows up front he's roleblocked.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Ah! Interesting. If we trying tracking them and it becomes clear that it's hurting us, we stop. But refusing to do it from the start denies us the opportunity to even try to use it. You're using people's fear of the unknown to make them avoid doing something that could be hugely helpful.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
Whelp, voter number does not follow ballots. I'm in the roleblocker room. I'm giving my ballot to Ernie tomorrow. I haven't decided on my target yet, but feel like that should be talked about in the rooms instead of here.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:When did MMM confirm this? Via PM, just now. I asked him if my voter number would stay with my ballot, so since I'm Voter 3 in the roleblock room would Ernie be Voter 3 tomorrow? MMM said he hadn't planned for it to work like that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:Byers, I don't see any purpose in talking about anything in the rooms instead of here. Can you explain that? That information can then easily be shared in the scum doc, so scum will have all that data, while the townies in the thread won't, giving scum an information advantage. I think we ought to roleblock Mac or Asiina for being in the roleblock room, and then target the cop and doctor on the other one of them. Then tomorrow the cop can confirm if that person was town or scum (and out themselves as the prior day's cop because it doesn't mean they're cop again). We can track to see if former cops end up being scum so we know if their results are suspect. If you don't announce what room you are in, how can we know that the ballot you sent was received? You have to announce the room to have a hope at tracking the specific ballot. I think that there is some value in holding target discussions in the rooms so that if we do get a room with no scum in it, the targets are a surprise to scum that night. But the discussions in the rooms should be made public the next day. Someone explain why we're roleblocking a roleblocker?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Byers, could you answer a hypothetical question for me? I can't answer that; the hypothetical is too vague. Who are the players? Who got the ballot (which we know because we've shared the rooms we're in)? If someone else is in them that shouldn't be, how did they get the ballot? That's why we should share openly, because we can look for the patterns and the discrepancies, but your question ignores the whole of the issue to try and focus on a singular event. You can't do that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:If only one person says they passed a ballot to X, and X says yes, they received one ballot Three people say they passed a ballot to X. One of those three dies in the night. X gets two ballots. What room was the now dead player in?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:To avoid roleblocking someone that might get the cop or doctor powers. I'm not too confident on those powers being worth anything this game. The needed coordination for town to get the powers to target who they want and the randomness of who gets results makes both of those powers really weak, but the roleblocker power is probably the best weapon we have if we can successfully target scum. I'd rather lose the doc and cop to have full use of the roleblocker power. wall monitor posted:loving hell, I've been told in the past that making a big deal about getting voted on is something only scum would do, and here I'm being told that not defending yourself is something only scum would do. Which the gently caress is it? Depending on context, both can be scummy. And I voted you based on the context you thought you were voting. The post you thought he'd quoted was the post about waiting three days. I've stated before that your plan was a perfect plan for scum to concoct to make ballot tracking and such worthless. You voted Ernie in reaction to thinking he'd cased that post. Even if he had, I find you're kneejerk aggressive defense to be scummy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Passers dying does not prevent the receiver from receiving, I believe. No, but now scum can hide because there's no way to know whose ballot is missing. When people die in this game, they will take information we can use with them if we do not claim openly on the day of the action.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
Asiina posted:I have no doubt that scum are going to be able to mess with it somehow, but either they mess with it and we have no way of knowing it happened or they mess with it and because we were completely open we were able to track it in some way. This.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Asiina posted:This is actually really annoying because absolutely everybody has to be on board or the openness plan does not work. If information is missing then there's no point to any of it. Also this.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jul 2, 2022 02:23 |
|
|
jon joe posted:Let's just say, I feel that scum are going to be able to play some heavy wifom with ballot tracking somehow, maybe even confirm scum as town. There's a few things they can not twist. For starters, they can not give ballots to each other. Which means every time scum flip, ever person they gave a ballot becomes confirmed town. That is huge, and it's why scum will not want to share information. I guarantee that most of the scum team is arguing against ballot tracking in the thread.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 03:08
|
|