On another not, 23 fusings got me a 6L on my Kongors. I am literally in paradise that I forgot my role for the last post, and consciously forgetting about it for this one. Nothing can bring me down tonight!
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
It does, but the people you are choosing are the most likely to resist you. In fact, what would stop me from siding with SC and just having you sit there silly?
Joseph, Joseph, Joseph. You really need to remember that this is MY courtroom. The evidence will fit how I see fit. I once convinced a jury a man who was scared of water stole a boat!
Why aren't we publicly voting who we want on the D1 Jury? (because the rules isn't the correct answer)
Because we're still in the introductory phase where our votes aren't counted (which I only figured out today after Proph posted about it).
You know, jomafro and I were making a Kingmaker Ace Attorney game once, and it's remarkably similar to this one except it handled the mechanics much worse and generally sucked major ass.
Don't underestimate the importance of the investigation phase though Iso. If we all give the jury 3 townies to judge, it doesn't matter how good their reads are.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
It does, but the people you are choosing are the most likely to resist you. In fact, what would stop me from siding with SC and just having you sit there silly?
Joseph, Joseph, Joseph. You really need to remember that this is MY courtroom. The evidence will fit how I see fit. I once convinced a jury a man who was scared of water stole a boat!
Don't underestimate the importance of the investigation phase though Iso. If we all give the jury 3 townies to judge, it doesn't matter how good their reads are.
Meh, I trust there are enough strong players outside of my suggested Day 1 jury (Rhand, Cyan, Seppel, Megiddo, and Vaimes, to name a few) to not make the Day totally whack. Besides, if I'm on jury duty for Day 1, it's just one Day. Unless I get Nightkilled immediately, it's not like I'm not going to be able to contribute. Anyway, my interactions with people are less biased when I observe them from the outside - as in, not participating in the main thread in Day 1 will actually probably help me catch scum better.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
On another not, 23 fusings got me a 6L on my Kongors. I am literally in paradise that I forgot my role for the last post, and consciously forgetting about it for this one. Nothing can bring me down tonight!
It kind of does, since the Jury can vote to No Lynch.
well yes. But no-lynch isn't good.
Sequestering our best analysts in the Jury isn't really a great idea IMO.
It's good if all of the Defendants are town? Ideally there will be scum in the Defendants, but if it seems like that isn't the case then lynching a townread for the sake of it is worse.
It kind of does, since the Jury can vote to No Lynch.
well yes. But no-lynch isn't good.
Sequestering our best analysts in the Jury isn't really a great idea IMO.
It's good if all of the Defendants are town? Ideally there will be scum in the Defendants, but if it seems like that isn't the case then lynching a townread for the sake of it is worse.
well yes, obviously it's the better of two bad options.
The point here is that we shouldn't put our best analysts into the Jury so that we can avoid the 3 town defendants situation. Plus, how will we even know that we gave the Jury 3 townies to judge? That last question might be better pointed at KK actually.
@KK: How would the Jury know that they were given 3 town defendants? And furthermore, how likely do you think that actually will be given Iso's point?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
It does, but the people you are choosing are the most likely to resist you. In fact, what would stop me from siding with SC and just having you sit there silly?
Joseph, Joseph, Joseph. You really need to remember that this is MY courtroom. The evidence will fit how I see fit. I once convinced a jury a man who was scared of water stole a boat!
Don't underestimate the importance of the investigation phase though Iso. If we all give the jury 3 townies to judge, it doesn't matter how good their reads are.
Meh, I trust there are enough strong players outside of my suggested Day 1 jury (Rhand, Cyan, Seppel, Megiddo, and Vaimes, to name a few) to not make the Day totally whack. Besides, if I'm on jury duty for Day 1, it's just one Day. Unless I get Nightkilled immediately, it's not like I'm not going to be able to contribute. Anyway, my interactions with people are less biased when I observe them from the outside - as in, not participating in the main thread in Day 1 will actually probably help me catch scum better.
It kind of does, since the Jury can vote to No Lynch.
well yes. But no-lynch isn't good.
Sequestering our best analysts in the Jury isn't really a great idea IMO.
So what's your suggestion, then?
My original thought is that we should use the Jury to hunt scum. i.e., put some people we aren't sure about in there and get a ton of info from reading their jury QT after the fact. There is risk there of course that a scum Jury member would lead to a bad outcome, but the hope is that we'd be able to detect the malevolent actor from reading the QT. Getting interaction info from people on the Jury has to be a goldmine.
Putting just our hard townreads in the jury does nothing to help us solve the game, really.
However, that plan was thought out before I realized that people actually can unlock abilities just from being put on the jury. I'm much less interested in pursuing this plan now. I need to think more on what my preference is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
@DV I was basing it on what my ability is, it lends credence to there being a roughly even split based on what you claim. I believe that your ability could very much be pro town, mine just makes me think of an even split among town and scum.
If everyone wants I will claim my ability, its worth the putting a target on myself if need be to be able to use it.
I think we should both claim this during day one to figure out if putting us on the juror is worth it. Or do you want to be a juror day one?
But that is good information to know, I was operating under the assumption that everyone had a similar mechanic to our and that it was at least common to find out otherwise is interesting.
I don't know the actual commonality of abilities like ours, but I'm guessing not everyone has them. There are many ways abilities could work in a game with phases like this. That said, the most concrete thing I can draw is that there are more of them like ours.
Mine's worth it, to the point that I would like to be on the Jury D1. I know I am not the strongest player (by a long shot) so I figure this is my only chance to get on there and use it.
@Iso Matowar's first game, with the quality of players in this game, doesn't surprise me that he started off sounding like that. I would have been much more surprised if he just jumped out and started calling you or Cyan scum, for example. Does it strike you as forced, and not newbness?
@DV I was basing it on what my ability is, it lends credence to there being a roughly even split based on what you claim. I believe that your ability could very much be pro town, mine just makes me think of an even split among town and scum.
If everyone wants I will claim my ability, its worth the putting a target on myself if need be to be able to use it.
I think we should both claim this during day one to figure out if putting us on the juror is worth it. Or do you want to be a juror day one?
But that is good information to know, I was operating under the assumption that everyone had a similar mechanic to our and that it was at least common to find out otherwise is interesting.
I don't know the actual commonality of abilities like ours, but I'm guessing not everyone has them. There are many ways abilities could work in a game with phases like this. That said, the most concrete thing I can draw is that there are more of them like ours.
Mine's worth it, to the point that I would like to be on the Jury D1. I know I am not the strongest player (by a long shot) so I figure this is my only chance to get on there and use it.
@Iso Matowar's first game, with the quality of players in this game, doesn't surprise me that he started off sounding like that. I would have been much more surprised if he just jumped out and started calling you or Cyan scum, for example. Does it strike you as forced, and not newbness?
Mine comes with an added bonus that I don't have to be a strong player while in the jury.
The irony of the forum returning an error when I try to post with a comment about how much I hate its code, followed by discovering that the post did go through after all...
Huh. So we only get 1 vote for Jury? That's...ok then I guess.
Vote Jury: Vaimes
It's a little disappointing that I specifically said the correct answer was not "because of the rules" and am still getting that as an answer.
The correct answer: Unless I'm mistaken again, Jury votes are anonymous and never revealed. Publicly declaring how we vote for Jury will keep everyone more accountable and make it easier to coordinate a consensus for Jury. Which is even more important seeing as how we each get only 1 Jury vote.
this better be an 80% PR game with how much soft-PR-claiming is going on. I mean it isn't even day 1 yet.
@Citric: I think we only get 1 Jury vote each night. Also, explain your choices plz?
Vaimes is incredibly prolific in Quicktopics, and I think he'd be more transparent on his alignment when posting in a quicktopic.
I liked Wheat's tone, plus his usage of actual AA images.
I feel pretty good about my ability to read Seppel after SGM, plus he laid out a number of reads pretty quickly relative to game-time that seem reasonable
They're ordered by preference though
the thing with one juror vote per person is that the scum have much more control over jurors than we do by being able to coordinate votes.
i understand trying to wrest control from them by being public, but they just get to add that information to what they already have and rig it even further.
i do like the information gained from knowing who voted who, but would much rather claim it AFTER the vote, preferably each players' first post of the investigation phase.
@anak/bumper dont claim
knowing you do something is enough for now.
@wheat
dota's long post was very inquisitive. he strikes me as excited to try to figure ***** out. i like that look on him.
your recent posts have had something i look for in particular, which is a visible thought process. i see your thoughts changing steadily, and i think thats a very hard thing to fake.
So you know my suggestions for the jury were strong analysts. Ergo, anybody with a 1st-grade reading comprehension would probably then ascertain that I think Vaimes is a strong analyst. Have you read post #18? Because that's where I specifically explain why I think Vaimes is a good fit for Jury #2.
I've played with Vaimes enough to know that he's a good player. My experience tells me that, as does his track record. Take a look for yourself for the empirical "why".
So you know my suggestions for the jury were strong analysts. Ergo, anybody with a 1st-grade reading comprehension would probably then ascertain that I think Vaimes is a strong analyst. Have you read post #18? Because that's where I specifically explain why I think Vaimes is a good fit for Jury #2.
I've played with Vaimes enough to know that he's a good player. My experience tells me that, as does his track record. Take a look for yourself for the empirical "why".
/barn this
I like that Citrus is looking for connections so early. I agree that it seems pushed for Iso to be making this many pushes for Vaimes. Like, I can understand someone making a case for literally anyone, but it's clear Iso isn't just passively suggesting Vaimes because he thinks Vaimes is a good player. Is there something compelling Iso to make this many posts about wanting Vaimes in this position?
FOS:Iso
@Iso-Why shouldn't we be paranoid of you based on these posts?
After Stargate I would think we'd let Cyan slowly get back into the swing of things. I'm scared the scum can swing him anyway they want, if SC is scum and Cyan is town again we might be in for a lot of trouble this game. I do hope everyone will start putting up ideas early so options become clear.
I also agree with Tom that it might be better to keep votes in the dark as the game goes on so the scum don't have as much information on how to handle the night. But on the other hand are we going to be able to get through an investigative phase productively with our choices hidden? Seems difficult and interesting to say the least.
I'll see what Daisuke has to say about this later.
From some of the older games I've read see Cyan as a very passionate player (something you should understand). Just because Cyan had an off game in SG doesn't mean scum are gonna just walk all over them in this game. Pressure gets reactions and reactions create reads. You of all people know this and use it often enough. Why the change?
@DOTA-What change are you referring to? In reference to Cyan I've only played with him in Predator where he wasn't feeling motivation to play and replaced out (on day 1?) and in Stargate where he voted for essentially every player in the game. Unlike some other players here, I don't like to base my play on reputation. I'd rather Cyan(if town) just shows me how good he is. But the point of my comment on Cyan wasn't to harp on him it's to say that I don't back the idea of placing people strictly based on reputation, which is what Iso is doing.
I'd most certainly love to see Cyan pressure and push reads.
In terms of voting publicly or privately we also can't look at it on the surface as "Scum gets more information, therefore it's bad". We have no idea what kind of abilities players have. I'm willing to bet there are some kind of watchers that can catch people in lies about who they voted for. Maybe people can block votes, or make players unelectable, etc.
If voting publicly is bad then let's let that be hashed out through discussion, NOT just dismiss it out of hand. I hope that clears up whatever you were concerned about.
The irony of the forum returning an error when I try to post with a comment about how much I hate its code, followed by discovering that the post did go through after all...
Huh. So we only get 1 vote for Jury? That's...ok then I guess.
Vote Jury: Vaimes
It's a little disappointing that I specifically said the correct answer was not "because of the rules" and am still getting that as an answer.
The correct answer: Unless I'm mistaken again, Jury votes are anonymous and never revealed. Publicly declaring how we vote for Jury will keep everyone more accountable and make it easier to coordinate a consensus for Jury. Which is even more important seeing as how we each get only 1 Jury vote.
There was some discussion earlier about making the jury votes public, care to read it and weigh in before trying to push everyone into going along with your idea?
So you know my suggestions for the jury were strong analysts. Ergo, anybody with a 1st-grade reading comprehension would probably then ascertain that I think Vaimes is a strong analyst. Have you read post #18? Because that's where I specifically explain why I think Vaimes is a good fit for Jury #2.
I've played with Vaimes enough to know that he's a good player. My experience tells me that, as does his track record. Take a look for yourself for the empirical "why".
/barn this
I like that Citrus is looking for connections so early. I agree that it seems pushed for Iso to be making this many pushes for Vaimes. Like, I can understand someone making a case for literally anyone, but it's clear Iso isn't just passively suggesting Vaimes because he thinks Vaimes is a good player. Is there something compelling Iso to make this many posts about wanting Vaimes in this position?
FOS:Iso
@Iso-Why shouldn't we be paranoid of you based on these posts?
Those were all responses to Wheat asking him(Iso) questions about why he had included Vaimes in his early jury list. I don't see it as Iso pushing Vaimes at all. And if they are scumbuddies as it seems you and CB are suggesting, why did Citric then vote for Vaimes himself for the jury?
The irony of the forum returning an error when I try to post with a comment about how much I hate its code, followed by discovering that the post did go through after all...
Huh. So we only get 1 vote for Jury? That's...ok then I guess.
Vote Jury: Vaimes
It's a little disappointing that I specifically said the correct answer was not "because of the rules" and am still getting that as an answer.
The correct answer: Unless I'm mistaken again, Jury votes are anonymous and never revealed. Publicly declaring how we vote for Jury will keep everyone more accountable and make it easier to coordinate a consensus for Jury. Which is even more important seeing as how we each get only 1 Jury vote.
There was some discussion earlier about making the jury votes public, care to read it and weigh in before trying to push everyone into going along with your idea?
So you know my suggestions for the jury were strong analysts. Ergo, anybody with a 1st-grade reading comprehension would probably then ascertain that I think Vaimes is a strong analyst. Have you read post #18? Because that's where I specifically explain why I think Vaimes is a good fit for Jury #2.
I've played with Vaimes enough to know that he's a good player. My experience tells me that, as does his track record. Take a look for yourself for the empirical "why".
/barn this
I like that Citrus is looking for connections so early. I agree that it seems pushed for Iso to be making this many pushes for Vaimes. Like, I can understand someone making a case for literally anyone, but it's clear Iso isn't just passively suggesting Vaimes because he thinks Vaimes is a good player. Is there something compelling Iso to make this many posts about wanting Vaimes in this position?
FOS:Iso
@Iso-Why shouldn't we be paranoid of you based on these posts?
Those were all responses to Wheat asking him(Iso) questions about why he had included Vaimes in his early jury list. I don't see it as Iso pushing Vaimes at all. And if they are scumbuddies as it seems you and CB are suggesting, why did Citric then vote for Vaimes himself for the jury?
Your last question doesn't make sense? Why would I know why Citrus voted for Vaimes? And how would that have any relation to Iso and Vaimes being scum buddies? I said that I think it's pushed for Iso to want Vaimes that badly when the game has just began and Vaimes making comments like "I'm going to vote for the people I like", I mean does that sound very analytical? Iso is making a case that Vaimes is very good and will use sound reasoning as a Juror yet we already have Vaimes in thread making an illogical case for jurors...
In terms of voting publicly or privately we also can't look at it on the surface as "Scum gets more information, therefore it's bad". We have no idea what kind of abilities players have. I'm willing to bet there are some kind of watchers that can catch people in lies about who they voted for. Maybe people can block votes, or make players unelectable, etc.
If voting publicly is bad then let's let that be hashed out through discussion, NOT just dismiss it out of hand. I hope that clears up whatever you were concerned about.
I am not trying to stifle conversation on this matter.
The more I have thought about it I feel that the town needs to coordinate votes specifically because Jurors are elected on a 1-1 vote basis.
Even though if we can prove that the mafia got a person onto the jury it opens up a can of wifom worms and IDK if those arguments are going to mean a lot.
Currently I think that we need to have some sort of coordination of votes as a 4 to 5 people that we vote for as town members and then townies individually vote for those 4ish members. Four is probably the right number the more I think about it, until we get to smaller groups.
Just saying too, I think its going to be incredibly hard for the mafia if we actually elect two of them to juror spots early on, because faking conversation is going to be really hard.
All I know is that saying, we as town are going to vote for these 3 players and that is it seems really bad to me, because its going to be messed with in some way. I also took issue with the plan that was presented and wanted to squash that into the ground before it even got started, because it seemed pretty bad overall.
Since it is night 0 though and no night abilities can happen night 0 I feel that talking about jury selection today is a good choice even though we don't have a lot of time left to do so.
We have roughly 12 hours left.
Currently, my town reads are TS, Seppel with Tom lagging behind a bit.
Chris I am reading as not town friendly and Iso is over in that boat because I feel that he was trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes with his fast and loose plan, also nominating Chris who I am reading as scum doesn't play in his favor either.
Oh and GJ is clearly town because he has a 6 link.
[quote=TS]In GJ's previous set-up BoAS we also voted at night for people to be on the seat. In that game town felt it conducive to make it public who we planned to vote for before night so that the information could be matched up later for analysis.
Does anyone thing that could apply here? I do.
Push for it then. Why are you coming off so passive?
What? I said, I think that plan could apply here and asked for more opinions. There is nothing passive. The addition of "I do" should have alerted you to that. If I was being passive it would have read "Does anyone think that could apply here." Full stop. Suggesting it and referencing your game for people to take a look at IS pushing it.
I just read through the game briefing again and it seems we should be keeping the best and most active "analysts" around for the investigative phase, not on the jury. The "analysts" can run the players through the ringer during the investigative stage and the jurors are free to use this info to help inform their decisions during the trial.
Also one thing we haven't mentioned. The folks that we put on the jury a few hours from now are ineligible to be defendants (obviously), do we really want to put ourselves in a position where whatever reputable players role scum just get a pass on being investigated?
I'd like to hear other players thoughts on this but it seems we shouldn't be making potential strong scum players "unlynchable" early on. Let's let behavior have it's day.
We have a couple hours left folks, some people still haven't chimed in which is not ideal.
I think that its going to be really hard for any mafia to fake being on the jury since they talk to themselves.
If we didn't get to read what they said then I would be in agreement, but we do get to read what they say, so I don't see it as that large of a negative.
Day 1 anyways I would rather have strong players who are probably going to make the right decision then pick people that may be weaker.
Day 2 I would agree with this line of reasoning. I think this is something for us to revisit tomorrow. Since I think we as a town need a concise plan to deal with this phase.
Still, shouldn't jurors be primarily strongest town reads? One aspect of jurors is that they are protected from going to trial and getting mislynched. If we are able to select three town players as jurors that makes the investigative process that much cleaner.
i think planning out what we want a jury to look like is a nice thought, especially toDay when the scum can't use their nightkill to **** it up.
but what does it really do? the people we pick for jurors might be scum. scum might circumvent it by putting one of their own on. or sow wifom by electing one of us. or literally all three.
by not planning it out and claiming who we voted afterward, we all but completely deprive them of that power.
they cant lie and risk the numbers not adding up. they cant vote together for fear of chain lynching.
they just have to vote for jurors like the rest of us.
sure they can talk about it, but what can they really accomplish?
i think planning out what we want a jury to look like is a nice thought, especially toDay when the scum can't use their nightkill to **** it up.
but what does it really do? the people we pick for jurors might be scum. scum might circumvent it by putting one of their own on. or sow wifom by electing one of us. or literally all three.
by not planning it out and claiming who we voted afterward, we all but completely deprive them of that power.
they cant lie and risk the numbers not adding up. they cant vote together for fear of chain lynching.
they just have to vote for jurors like the rest of us.
sure they can talk about it, but what can they really accomplish?
I mean isn't this whole phase about deciding that very issue? Are there any people that you don't want on the jury? Maybe that's a better direction.
@KK: How would the Jury know that they were given 3 town defendants? And furthermore, how likely do you think that actually will be given Iso's point?
They wouldn't, but the point was that no matter how good the Jury is, if the investigation doesn't give them scum, they can't get a scum lynch.
How likely would it be to have 3 townies up for judgement? Or how likely would it be for the jury to know they had 3 townies?
I do agree with Iso that there are enough strong players that it shouldn't be a concern, for the first question. I was mostly just annoyed that he insinuated investigation was far less important than the trial multiple times.
The second is just down to how many scum get on the jury, but I suppose its possible that the investigation puts 3 obvtown on trail, its unlikely. Especially since those voted on to trial can't post from that moment until trial phase.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
I don't get why so many of you are against being in on the investigation. That's where the real power and responsibility lies. The jury only get to select from the three that the investigation has coughed up for them. Could easily all be town without enough strong players selecting scum.
Anyone who seriously thinks I'm buddying up to Vaimes (looking at you, Citric, TS) needs to actually examine the context of my statements - those being that I was making a point to Wheat, who was acting daft at the time of his questioning of me. (As an added note, DoT, please don't answer questions directed towards other people!)
It doesn't sit well with me that they've pointedly ignored this.
-
@TS: So in what world is it a good idea to have all of our analysts involved in the Investigation? Because if we fill the jury with weak players, they're more likely to make poor lynch decisions than not, which is not conducive to winning the game. My suggestions for jury were weighted. For example, I don't consider GJ to be the beset player in early game, but he still has a good eye and a level head. I'm not sure how this wasn't abundantly clear by the things I said in my very first posts of the game, nor why you disagree with such. Care to enlighten me?
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Also, @Citric: I think it's silly to suppose that scum aren't going to lie about who they vote for jury. Posting it in the thread won't do anything to affect what they tell the hosts they want to do.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Considering I called you out and you don't even bother to explain, this is a bad look. What about me isn't town friendly?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
2014 - Best Mafia Performance (Individual)(Wu Tang) 2014 - Best Mafia Newcomer 2015 - Best Town Performance (Individual) (Predator) 2015 - Best Town Performance (Group) - Predator Mafia 2015 - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - 2015 Invitational 2015 - Best Town Player 2015 - Best Mafia Player 2015 - Best Overall Player
Anyone who seriously thinks I'm buddying up to Vaimes (looking at you, Citric, TS) needs to actually examine the context of my statements - those being that I was making a point to Wheat, who was acting daft at the time of his questioning of me. (As an added note, DoT, please don't answer questions directed towards other people!)
It doesn't sit well with me that they've pointedly ignored this.
-
@TS: So in what world is it a good idea to have all of our analysts involved in the Investigation? Because if we fill the jury with weak players, they're more likely to make poor lynch decisions than not, which is not conducive to winning the game. My suggestions for jury were weighted. For example, I don't consider GJ to be the beset player in early game, but he still has a good eye and a level head. I'm not sure how this wasn't abundantly clear by the things I said in my very first posts of the game, nor why you disagree with such. Care to enlighten me?
The first part of what I wrote was that I liked that Citrus was looking for players having these kinds of interactions. I like that a couple people are looking for suspicious behavior. Look at DOTA he came at me with questions about my behavior, that's useful.
Saying, "let's put all the people I like or hold in high regard" on the jury doesn't sit well with quite a few of us. For example if we put you and your compadres on the jury and then us "weak players" select three town players as defendants then what is the result?
I could be wrong, you could be right but I don't see why we are unreasonable to have other points of view. For all we know Cyan and SC are scummates and laughing it up that you want to be along side them.
Can you at least consider a world in which other people have good ideas? = p
The reason why I would put the players that usually die early in the jury is that if it somehow becomes clear that there was scum on that jury, scum either has to keep those strong players alive to keep their own hidden, or out their own when killing the others.
One of the reasons I loathe meta: Keeps me from putting on a different mask for each game. I assume in Stargate, you believed I wasn't reading like past town games either?
I never said anything of the sort in Stargate. And I don't like what I feel like this post is really trying to accomplish, which is to undermine me by subtly referencing a town game that I struggled in.
Someone let me know when I can put a real vote on GJ.
@Matowar: If you disagree with my reasoning for why I think certain people should be on the jury on certain Days, please outline for me why. Otherwise, this looks like mudslinging for the sake of mudslinging. Also, why are you concerned about dying early if you think there are stronger players than you in this game? Doesn't that mean that they'd be more likely to eat a kill than you?
-
@TS: As I said, there are plenty of strong analysts in this game to carry a Day even if we jam 3 into jury slots on the first two Days. Sure, I've considered that Chris, GJ, Seppel, Vaimes, and Cyan could all be scum. Does that suddenly discount the usefulness of watching these 5 players interact with each other in a jury? If anything, it'll be harder for them to come across naturally if more than one of them are scum, which is ultimately what I'm hoping we'll pick up on if I somehow managed to suggest 3+ scum for jury duty. Yes, I know that I'm not the only person with good ideas in Mafia, despite the fact that I like to pretend otherwise rather often. But do consider that I've also looked at all of the angles and have weighed the pros and cons of each. Normally I don't like spelling out my thought process for people because it makes scum harder to catch (namely when they know what I'm looking for) but it's recently been mentioned to me that I might get more people to listen to me if I outline my reasoning for my actions and suggestions to others, so, here's hoping.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Joseph, Joseph, Joseph. You really need to remember that this is MY courtroom. The evidence will fit how I see fit. I once convinced a jury a man who was scared of water stole a boat!
The GJ way path to no lynching:
Why?
For either but preferably both.
Because we're still in the introductory phase where our votes aren't counted (which I only figured out today after Proph posted about it).
You know, jomafro and I were making a Kingmaker Ace Attorney game once, and it's remarkably similar to this one except it handled the mechanics much worse and generally sucked major ass.
Sequestering our best analysts in the Jury isn't really a great idea IMO.
I'm pretty convincing when I need to be.
Meh, I trust there are enough strong players outside of my suggested Day 1 jury (Rhand, Cyan, Seppel, Megiddo, and Vaimes, to name a few) to not make the Day totally whack. Besides, if I'm on jury duty for Day 1, it's just one Day. Unless I get Nightkilled immediately, it's not like I'm not going to be able to contribute. Anyway, my interactions with people are less biased when I observe them from the outside - as in, not participating in the main thread in Day 1 will actually probably help me catch scum better.
So what's your suggestion, then?
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Nice.
I just got 24 achievements right now.
It's good if all of the Defendants are town? Ideally there will be scum in the Defendants, but if it seems like that isn't the case then lynching a townread for the sake of it is worse.
The point here is that we shouldn't put our best analysts into the Jury so that we can avoid the 3 town defendants situation. Plus, how will we even know that we gave the Jury 3 townies to judge? That last question might be better pointed at KK actually.
@KK: How would the Jury know that they were given 3 town defendants? And furthermore, how likely do you think that actually will be given Iso's point?
Putting just our hard townreads in the jury does nothing to help us solve the game, really.
However, that plan was thought out before I realized that people actually can unlock abilities just from being put on the jury. I'm much less interested in pursuing this plan now. I need to think more on what my preference is.
I don't know the actual commonality of abilities like ours, but I'm guessing not everyone has them. There are many ways abilities could work in a game with phases like this. That said, the most concrete thing I can draw is that there are more of them like ours.
Mine's worth it, to the point that I would like to be on the Jury D1. I know I am not the strongest player (by a long shot) so I figure this is my only chance to get on there and use it.
@Iso Matowar's first game, with the quality of players in this game, doesn't surprise me that he started off sounding like that. I would have been much more surprised if he just jumped out and started calling you or Cyan scum, for example. Does it strike you as forced, and not newbness?
Mine comes with an added bonus that I don't have to be a strong player while in the jury.
The hell, I didn't see that you ninja'd in-between my posts when I made it. I really hate this forum code
I was thinking more specifically on how hard he seems to be buddying up to you
The hell, I didn't see that you ninja'd in-between my posts when I made it. I really hate this forum code
I was thinking more specifically on how hard he seems to be buddying up to you
Huh. So we only get 1 vote for Jury? That's...ok then I guess.
Vote Jury: Vaimes
It's a little disappointing that I specifically said the correct answer was not "because of the rules" and am still getting that as an answer.
The correct answer: Unless I'm mistaken again, Jury votes are anonymous and never revealed. Publicly declaring how we vote for Jury will keep everyone more accountable and make it easier to coordinate a consensus for Jury. Which is even more important seeing as how we each get only 1 Jury vote.
Unofficial Jury Votecount 1.1
Vaimes (1): CitricBase
See above per #168
Vaimes is incredibly prolific in Quicktopics, and I think he'd be more transparent on his alignment when posting in a quicktopic.
I liked Wheat's tone, plus his usage of actual AA images.
I feel pretty good about my ability to read Seppel after SGM, plus he laid out a number of reads pretty quickly relative to game-time that seem reasonable
They're ordered by preference though
i understand trying to wrest control from them by being public, but they just get to add that information to what they already have and rig it even further.
i do like the information gained from knowing who voted who, but would much rather claim it AFTER the vote, preferably each players' first post of the investigation phase.
@anak/bumper dont claim
knowing you do something is enough for now.
@wheat
dota's long post was very inquisitive. he strikes me as excited to try to figure ***** out. i like that look on him.
your recent posts have had something i look for in particular, which is a visible thought process. i see your thoughts changing steadily, and i think thats a very hard thing to fake.
/barn this
I like that Citrus is looking for connections so early. I agree that it seems pushed for Iso to be making this many pushes for Vaimes. Like, I can understand someone making a case for literally anyone, but it's clear Iso isn't just passively suggesting Vaimes because he thinks Vaimes is a good player. Is there something compelling Iso to make this many posts about wanting Vaimes in this position?
FOS:Iso
@Iso-Why shouldn't we be paranoid of you based on these posts?
@DOTA-What change are you referring to? In reference to Cyan I've only played with him in Predator where he wasn't feeling motivation to play and replaced out (on day 1?) and in Stargate where he voted for essentially every player in the game. Unlike some other players here, I don't like to base my play on reputation. I'd rather Cyan(if town) just shows me how good he is. But the point of my comment on Cyan wasn't to harp on him it's to say that I don't back the idea of placing people strictly based on reputation, which is what Iso is doing.
I'd most certainly love to see Cyan pressure and push reads.
In terms of voting publicly or privately we also can't look at it on the surface as "Scum gets more information, therefore it's bad". We have no idea what kind of abilities players have. I'm willing to bet there are some kind of watchers that can catch people in lies about who they voted for. Maybe people can block votes, or make players unelectable, etc.
If voting publicly is bad then let's let that be hashed out through discussion, NOT just dismiss it out of hand. I hope that clears up whatever you were concerned about.
Those were all responses to Wheat asking him(Iso) questions about why he had included Vaimes in his early jury list. I don't see it as Iso pushing Vaimes at all. And if they are scumbuddies as it seems you and CB are suggesting, why did Citric then vote for Vaimes himself for the jury?
Your last question doesn't make sense? Why would I know why Citrus voted for Vaimes? And how would that have any relation to Iso and Vaimes being scum buddies? I said that I think it's pushed for Iso to want Vaimes that badly when the game has just began and Vaimes making comments like "I'm going to vote for the people I like", I mean does that sound very analytical? Iso is making a case that Vaimes is very good and will use sound reasoning as a Juror yet we already have Vaimes in thread making an illogical case for jurors...
I am not trying to stifle conversation on this matter.
The more I have thought about it I feel that the town needs to coordinate votes specifically because Jurors are elected on a 1-1 vote basis.
Even though if we can prove that the mafia got a person onto the jury it opens up a can of wifom worms and IDK if those arguments are going to mean a lot.
Currently I think that we need to have some sort of coordination of votes as a 4 to 5 people that we vote for as town members and then townies individually vote for those 4ish members. Four is probably the right number the more I think about it, until we get to smaller groups.
Just saying too, I think its going to be incredibly hard for the mafia if we actually elect two of them to juror spots early on, because faking conversation is going to be really hard.
All I know is that saying, we as town are going to vote for these 3 players and that is it seems really bad to me, because its going to be messed with in some way. I also took issue with the plan that was presented and wanted to squash that into the ground before it even got started, because it seemed pretty bad overall.
Since it is night 0 though and no night abilities can happen night 0 I feel that talking about jury selection today is a good choice even though we don't have a lot of time left to do so.
We have roughly 12 hours left.
Currently, my town reads are TS, Seppel with Tom lagging behind a bit.
Chris I am reading as not town friendly and Iso is over in that boat because I feel that he was trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes with his fast and loose plan, also nominating Chris who I am reading as scum doesn't play in his favor either.
Oh and GJ is clearly town because he has a 6 link.
What? I said, I think that plan could apply here and asked for more opinions. There is nothing passive. The addition of "I do" should have alerted you to that. If I was being passive it would have read "Does anyone think that could apply here." Full stop. Suggesting it and referencing your game for people to take a look at IS pushing it.
Also one thing we haven't mentioned. The folks that we put on the jury a few hours from now are ineligible to be defendants (obviously), do we really want to put ourselves in a position where whatever reputable players role scum just get a pass on being investigated?
I'd like to hear other players thoughts on this but it seems we shouldn't be making potential strong scum players "unlynchable" early on. Let's let behavior have it's day.
We have a couple hours left folks, some people still haven't chimed in which is not ideal.
If we didn't get to read what they said then I would be in agreement, but we do get to read what they say, so I don't see it as that large of a negative.
Day 1 anyways I would rather have strong players who are probably going to make the right decision then pick people that may be weaker.
Day 2 I would agree with this line of reasoning. I think this is something for us to revisit tomorrow. Since I think we as a town need a concise plan to deal with this phase.
but what does it really do? the people we pick for jurors might be scum. scum might circumvent it by putting one of their own on. or sow wifom by electing one of us. or literally all three.
by not planning it out and claiming who we voted afterward, we all but completely deprive them of that power.
they cant lie and risk the numbers not adding up. they cant vote together for fear of chain lynching.
they just have to vote for jurors like the rest of us.
sure they can talk about it, but what can they really accomplish?
I mean isn't this whole phase about deciding that very issue? Are there any people that you don't want on the jury? Maybe that's a better direction.
maybe matowar?
who would you NOT want on the jury?
I don't currently want Iso, Cyan, Seppel, matowar or myself on the jury either so glad we are in agreement on that part.
I also don't want people who are super eager.
i am, after all, delightful.
How likely would it be to have 3 townies up for judgement? Or how likely would it be for the jury to know they had 3 townies?
I do agree with Iso that there are enough strong players that it shouldn't be a concern, for the first question. I was mostly just annoyed that he insinuated investigation was far less important than the trial multiple times.
The second is just down to how many scum get on the jury, but I suppose its possible that the investigation puts 3 obvtown on trail, its unlikely. Especially since those voted on to trial can't post from that moment until trial phase.
Anyone who seriously thinks I'm buddying up to Vaimes (looking at you, Citric, TS) needs to actually examine the context of my statements - those being that I was making a point to Wheat, who was acting daft at the time of his questioning of me. (As an added note, DoT, please don't answer questions directed towards other people!)
It doesn't sit well with me that they've pointedly ignored this.
-
@TS: So in what world is it a good idea to have all of our analysts involved in the Investigation? Because if we fill the jury with weak players, they're more likely to make poor lynch decisions than not, which is not conducive to winning the game. My suggestions for jury were weighted. For example, I don't consider GJ to be the beset player in early game, but he still has a good eye and a level head. I'm not sure how this wasn't abundantly clear by the things I said in my very first posts of the game, nor why you disagree with such. Care to enlighten me?
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Considering I called you out and you don't even bother to explain, this is a bad look. What about me isn't town friendly?
2014 - Best Mafia Performance (Individual)(Wu Tang)
2014 - Best Mafia Newcomer
2015 - Best Town Performance (Individual) (Predator)
2015 - Best Town Performance (Group) - Predator Mafia
2015 - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - 2015 Invitational
2015 - Best Town Player
2015 - Best Mafia Player
2015 - Best Overall Player
The first part of what I wrote was that I liked that Citrus was looking for players having these kinds of interactions. I like that a couple people are looking for suspicious behavior. Look at DOTA he came at me with questions about my behavior, that's useful.
Saying, "let's put all the people I like or hold in high regard" on the jury doesn't sit well with quite a few of us. For example if we put you and your compadres on the jury and then us "weak players" select three town players as defendants then what is the result?
I could be wrong, you could be right but I don't see why we are unreasonable to have other points of view. For all we know Cyan and SC are scummates and laughing it up that you want to be along side them.
Can you at least consider a world in which other people have good ideas? = p
The reason why I would put the players that usually die early in the jury is that if it somehow becomes clear that there was scum on that jury, scum either has to keep those strong players alive to keep their own hidden, or out their own when killing the others.
I never said anything of the sort in Stargate. And I don't like what I feel like this post is really trying to accomplish, which is to undermine me by subtly referencing a town game that I struggled in.
Someone let me know when I can put a real vote on GJ.
Unrelatedly, I want to be on the Jury after Iso.
It is no surprise that I loathe meta, and did you not call my day 1 post the scummiest posts of the game?
The GJ way path to no lynching:
That's not indicative. He also said that to me (you and I were both bleeding town that game).
-
@TS: As I said, there are plenty of strong analysts in this game to carry a Day even if we jam 3 into jury slots on the first two Days. Sure, I've considered that Chris, GJ, Seppel, Vaimes, and Cyan could all be scum. Does that suddenly discount the usefulness of watching these 5 players interact with each other in a jury? If anything, it'll be harder for them to come across naturally if more than one of them are scum, which is ultimately what I'm hoping we'll pick up on if I somehow managed to suggest 3+ scum for jury duty. Yes, I know that I'm not the only person with good ideas in Mafia, despite the fact that I like to pretend otherwise rather often. But do consider that I've also looked at all of the angles and have weighed the pros and cons of each. Normally I don't like spelling out my thought process for people because it makes scum harder to catch (namely when they know what I'm looking for) but it's recently been mentioned to me that I might get more people to listen to me if I outline my reasoning for my actions and suggestions to others, so, here's hoping.
-
@Cyan: I'm interested in knowing why.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player