Dead
1. Shockwave07 - Town - Lynched in phascogale
2. kpaca - Town - Lynched in Bobblegong
3. not_a_gimmick - Town - Lynched in Scumtrio
4. Mindreaver - Town - Lynched in Pan
5. DoTArchon King_Deekus - Town - Endgamed
6. Nykllor - Town - Endgamed
7. Rodemy - Town - Endgamed
8. Tordeck - Town - Endgamed
You are the crew of the USS Inheritance, a black Vienna-class deep-space cargo ship somewhere near the Eagle Nebula.
Things... have been better. The ship is on emergency power. The engines are dead. The escape pods are gone. The monitors are playing nothing but Kiss Meets the Phantom of the Park on endless loop.
How could this get any worse? Glad you asked!
The Inheritance is transporting a shipment of big red clicky buttons to a desperate planet on the outer rim. But some among your number are space mafia, who wish to seize the big red buttons for their nefarious purposes. It's your job to stop them, crew. I must inform you that should you fail, you will be fired. Out the airlock.
Eight players will receive the following PM:
You are TOWN. You have a spacesuit and a mounting feeling of dread. You win when the scum are dead.
Four players will receive the following PM:
You are MAFIA along with [X], [Y], and [Z]. You have lost your guns and radios. You really aren't good at this whole mutiny business. You win when the mafia controls the big red buttons.
The game lasts over the course of one very long day. There are no nightkills and there is no scum-chat. The deadline is set for 12/31/9999 at 11:59PM.
At any time during the day, a player may PROPOSE a three-player group. (E.g. "Propose [Proposalname]: A, B, C".) Players may then VOTE for proposals by name. (For example, if a proposal is named TANGO, you would support that proposal by posting "Vote Tango".) When a proposal gets a majority of players' approval, it passes. Those three players will be sent a link to a new quicktopic and prohibited from posting further in the game thread. Those players will have a three-day deadline in which to lynch one of their number in the quicktopic. If they fail to lynch, all three will be killed. Then the survivors will return to the main thread and the quicktopic will be closed.
Additional Rules & Clarifications:
- "Bah" posts are strictly prohibited. If you're dead, you can't post.
- Players in the main thread may not vote for proposals involving players currently in a QT, but may pass additional proposals while waiting for players to come back. The vote threshold for proposals is based on the number of players currently in the main thread, not all living players.
- Players may not post in closed QTs on penalty of modkill. But players are free to reread QTs to which they have access. (If you have something to say to another person in your QT, I recommend you say it before you lynch the third member.)
- Players may not quote QTs, but they may paraphrase them. What constitutes a "paraphrase" is to be construed narrowly and with serious punishments for those who screw it up.
- Proposal names may be one word only, and shouldn't be named anything that would be confusing. I recommend the NATO Phonetic Alphabet for starters.
- While the "real" deadline is set for the end of the 100th century, the mod does reserve the right to set interstitial deadlines for passing proposals on penalty of whatever scary things he can come up with.
It is now Pregame. PM me to confirm receipt of your role PM. Mafia, remember that there is no mafia QT or private communication permitted. The only person you should be talking to is me.
Once ten people have confirmed, the game will begin. Until then, do not post.
(Also, if you haven't gotten a role PM, let me know - I already noticed one mistake in my transcription.)
I agree D_V, I just meant that I wouldn't spam the thread with proposals during RVS, the way I had planned to I didn't really think about the "sticking around" part. So it was good that Xyre did that votecount, and highlight my lack of vision.
I'll keep a list of "archived" proposals which nobody's voting for in a spoiler, once we have enough to justify it. (And I'll always keep the proposals alphabetized by player names.) Don't worry about clutter. If it does get a little messy, I'll just throw out the voteless proposals and let people re-propose them.
Edit: Also, I did think of one corner case I hadn't considered - if three people leaving the thread causes another proposal to suddenly have enough votes to pass. At that point, I'm going to automatically "unvote" people from that proposal until that proposal is at the vote threshold minus one, rather than remove all the votes from it and force everyone to put them back on.
Xyre, I would suggest resetting the vote count and submitted proposals after each lynch. If we really want an old grouping discussed again, someone can just submit it again.
We should arrange for a Rodemy lynch. He's always scum, even if he's town.
we can just control these proposals tbh. Put three scummiest in group with serious directions on what to do
That seems like a terrible idea if we put two scum and one town in a group together right?
It's literally the most obvious way to play (probably not optimal, at least early).
Our options, as I see it:
1) PoE down to a consensus group and see what shakes out of that. In other games this would be the equivalent to "I think the scumteam is in [1,2,3,4], lets lynch through that pile". In that case, even a townie acting scummy getting killed by two equally scummy people isn't the end of the world, because we get concrete flip information and two people who have to justify their votes.
2) Scum we want to kill + two consensus town-reads. To make sure a particular scummy target dies. Again, even if scum slips into one of those town-read slots and saves his partner, killing the town guy we sent in there. It's going to be obvious who the scum are. So unless this is LyLo, this is the safest course, as long as we can find two obvtown. It also gives us the least amount of info to use though, and it's essentially by-passing the proposal mechanic.
3) We nominate lurkers. Preferably three of them. This is literally all I've thought about since I saw this game's mechanic. Either you start playing or all the lurkers die together. None of that "only a few people are posting" nonsense
It'll be tough for our first proposal to be #2. Because there probably aren't claims that would clear anyone, assuming we can find a scummy enough target to begin with. So we'll be going off of behavior and interactions, and we have almost none. Which leaves #1 and #3 to start, which I'm really okay with either as an icebreaker.
Right. Just so it's perfectly clear: all QTs are black boxes. The only people who see what goes on inside them during the game are the three people in that proposal. (Once one of them dies, the other two can't post anymore in it, but can reread it whenever they like.)
dkingsland: Why don't we just say we'll play it by ear for now.
It's literally the most obvious way to play (probably not optimal, at least early).
Our options, as I see it:
1) PoE down to a consensus group and see what shakes out of that. In other games this would be the equivalent to "I think the scumteam is in [1,2,3,4], lets lynch through that pile". In that case, even a townie acting scummy getting killed by two equally scummy people isn't the end of the world, because we get concrete flip information and two people who have to justify their votes.
2) Scum we want to kill + two consensus town-reads. To make sure a particular scummy target dies. Again, even if scum slips into one of those town-read slots and saves his partner, killing the town guy we sent in there. It's going to be obvious who the scum are. So unless this is LyLo, this is the safest course, as long as we can find two obvtown. It also gives us the least amount of info to use though, and it's essentially by-passing the proposal mechanic.
3) We nominate lurkers. Preferably three of them. This is literally all I've thought about since I saw this game's mechanic. Either you start playing or all the lurkers die together. None of that "only a few people are posting" nonsense
It'll be tough for our first proposal to be #2. Because there probably aren't claims that would clear anyone, assuming we can find a scummy enough target to begin with. So we'll be going off of behavior and interactions, and we have almost none. Which leaves #1 and #3 to start, which I'm really okay with either as an icebreaker.
I think #2 is the only way to go here. While it may be tough to get town reads at the start, putting only scummy people in a group increases the chance that we'll put two scum and one town.
Also this whole post smells like preemptively justifying a mislynch to me. Vote Mindreaver
It's literally the most obvious way to play (probably not optimal, at least early).
Our options, as I see it:
1) PoE down to a consensus group and see what shakes out of that. In other games this would be the equivalent to "I think the scumteam is in [1,2,3,4], lets lynch through that pile". In that case, even a townie acting scummy getting killed by two equally scummy people isn't the end of the world, because we get concrete flip information and two people who have to justify their votes.
2) Scum we want to kill + two consensus town-reads. To make sure a particular scummy target dies. Again, even if scum slips into one of those town-read slots and saves his partner, killing the town guy we sent in there. It's going to be obvious who the scum are. So unless this is LyLo, this is the safest course, as long as we can find two obvtown. It also gives us the least amount of info to use though, and it's essentially by-passing the proposal mechanic.
3) We nominate lurkers. Preferably three of them. This is literally all I've thought about since I saw this game's mechanic. Either you start playing or all the lurkers die together. None of that "only a few people are posting" nonsense
It'll be tough for our first proposal to be #2. Because there probably aren't claims that would clear anyone, assuming we can find a scummy enough target to begin with. So we'll be going off of behavior and interactions, and we have almost none. Which leaves #1 and #3 to start, which I'm really okay with either as an icebreaker.
I think #2 is the only way to go here. While it may be tough to get town reads at the start, putting only scummy people in a group increases the chance that we'll put two scum and one town.
Also this whole post smells like preemptively justifying a mislynch to me. Vote Mindreaver
Actually, better response for you. Explain how I'm setting up a mislynch. I think that was a hella opportunistic characterization of my post, and I'd like to see you back it up. I didn't advocate for any particular person. I definitely took a stand in regards to not wanting to put 2 town and 1 scum as our first proposal, but I don't see that as "setting up a mislynch" either.
Quite simply, I think our first proposal should net us as much information as it can. Explain to me how it's best if we send three people in with a known mission? We get a flip, and nothing else. We send in a group of candidates (scummy play or just PoE), and then we get a flip, and also two people directly responsible for it. That's MORE information. And in my book, a better FIRST lynch. Once we have interaction and flips and votes to analyze, I think #2 could be on the table.
And definitely the threat to lurkers should be real (minus Tordeck until the 1st). Chime in or die.
If they don't vote who we tell too well know. Control is the key in a game like this. We need to have everyone accountable.
Ok I see what you are saying Fair enough.
I don't agree that the group in the proposal should be directed ahead of time. Perhaps later in the game, that would be viable. But if I see a town body on the ground, I'd rather hear from the two people who thought it was better to kill him than the other choice they had.
How can we hold people accountable, if we tell them what to do? We're going to get a pile of "I was only following orders"
I almost just want to run 4 groups of 3 straight up and see how the cookies crumble. I know its a terrible idea but it appeals to me so much because of what this game is.
1) PoE down to a consensus group and see what shakes out of that. In other games this would be the equivalent to "I think the scumteam is in [1,2,3,4], lets lynch through that pile". In that case, even a townie acting scummy getting killed by two equally scummy people isn't the end of the world, because we get concrete flip information and two people who have to justify their votes.
2) Scum we want to kill + two consensus town-reads. To make sure a particular scummy target dies. Again, even if scum slips into one of those town-read slots and saves his partner, killing the town guy we sent in there. It's going to be obvious who the scum are. So unless this is LyLo, this is the safest course, as long as we can find two obvtown. It also gives us the least amount of info to use though, and it's essentially by-passing the proposal mechanic.
3) We nominate lurkers. Preferably three of them. This is literally all I've thought about since I saw this game's mechanic. Either you start playing or all the lurkers die together. None of that "only a few people are posting" nonsense
It'll be tough for our first proposal to be #2. Because there probably aren't claims that would clear anyone, assuming we can find a scummy enough target to begin with. So we'll be going off of behavior and interactions, and we have almost none. Which leaves #1 and #3 to start, which I'm really okay with either as an icebreaker.
In the three options you present, the first one includes a justification for mislynching(the bold part), and the third isn't even about hunting scum. Lynching three lurkers in one fell swoop without any idea if they're scum or not could be detrimental to the town. You then suggest that either #1 or #3, the two actions more likely to hit town, should be our course of action.
Also, because we don't get to see the QTs, we get very little info from them. Putting only scummy people in a group and letting them pick the lynch is just begging for a mislynch.
Alright, that's twilight. Obv the doc should protect me. vig or cop should hit Rodemy, I'm hearing a lot of scummy things about him #manypeoplearesaying
1) PoE down to a consensus group and see what shakes out of that. In other games this would be the equivalent to "I think the scumteam is in [1,2,3,4], lets lynch through that pile". In that case, even a townie acting scummy getting killed by two equally scummy people isn't the end of the world, because we get concrete flip information and two people who have to justify their votes.
2) Scum we want to kill + two consensus town-reads. To make sure a particular scummy target dies. Again, even if scum slips into one of those town-read slots and saves his partner, killing the town guy we sent in there. It's going to be obvious who the scum are. So unless this is LyLo, this is the safest course, as long as we can find two obvtown. It also gives us the least amount of info to use though, and it's essentially by-passing the proposal mechanic.
3) We nominate lurkers. Preferably three of them. This is literally all I've thought about since I saw this game's mechanic. Either you start playing or all the lurkers die together. None of that "only a few people are posting" nonsense
It'll be tough for our first proposal to be #2. Because there probably aren't claims that would clear anyone, assuming we can find a scummy enough target to begin with. So we'll be going off of behavior and interactions, and we have almost none. Which leaves #1 and #3 to start, which I'm really okay with either as an icebreaker.
In the three options you present, the first one includes a justification for mislynching(the bold part), and the third isn't even about hunting scum. Lynching three lurkers in one fell swoop without any idea if they're scum or not could be detrimental to the town. You then suggest that either #1 or #3, the two actions more likely to hit town, should be our course of action.
Also, because we don't get to see the QTs, we get very little info from them. Putting only scummy people in a group and letting them pick the lynch is just begging for a mislynch.
Alright, that's twilight. Obv the doc should protect me. vig or cop should hit Rodemy, I'm hearing a lot of scummy things about him #manypeoplearesaying
Do you disagree with the bold part in my #1? Like, that literally we should protect townies acting is a scummy way? How do you tell them from the scum exactly?
The "Preferably three of them", in hindsight, might have been worded better. I'll give you that one. I mean, that it probably doesn't much good to put, say, 2 lurkers with one active player. That gives us almost nothing.
By the way, since people are latching onto the QT thing. We don't need to see the arguments there. Sure, it might be nice to see D_V be all "I'm totes scum and you can't do anything about it cause my buddy is in here, ha ha". But since it's three people in there, and 2 votes to kill somebody, the two people who lived voted for the guy who died. That's all we care about. They then come back tothe thread as a whole and have to justify their vote. Maybe they kill a scum and we all say "yay, townpoints for you!" or they kill town and we get to say "why was <dead guy> a better choice than <guy still alive>, convince us you're not scum".
Or we can put two town in the group, with one suspect, direct the two town to kill the guy, and then whatever he flips they just say "oh,you told us to, derp".
The two-town-one-scum scenario would work better once we have killed scum, and have people on the record voting to kill him. If Shockwave, Seppel, and Tordeck go into a room, deliberate among themselves, and kill a scum tordeck, I would have a lot stronger town read on D_V/Shock later on in the game when we NEED to murder the last scum, and we think it's Rodemy.
"Putting only scummy people in a group and letting them pick the lynch is just begging for a mislynch." - I know this is gonna get taken out of context later, but that's not the worst thing in the world to happen. Think about it.
Let's not get too stuck on this vote strategy business. Watched too many times (including my first game host recently) town players get caught up on mechanics and not the players actions.
But while it's up a couple of quick notes before I bang my head as nothing so far has given us a good reason to break from RVS:
1) Scum team proposal groups work only until 2 or more of the scum team die. Then you want townies vs scum.
2) I noted the opening post said something about "Active QTs". While it would be awesome to turn this game into several mini mafia games, I'd like the limit of proposals pushed through to two as getting 4 wrong loses us the game... Funny enough that works for the scum team as well!
3) I don't think there are any PRs this game, don't answer me if you think/know I'm wrong, but I'd dread to make this another misdirection.
I think preplanning strategies for the QT groupings that require a certain number of lurkers or consensus reads in either direction is great folly until you have those reads.
When you propose a grouping, explain why.
Myself, I am hoping to find a dichotomy and make them duke it out.
But we cannot force such things.
As for the actual game, I have a villa read on kpaca which is likely very premature.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Curiosity killed the cat. But for awhile, I was a suspect.
King_Deekus's oxygen tank suddenly bursts, sending him flying forward into a pile of ravenous kittens. "I don't even know why we kept these things onboaaaaaard!" he screams.
Luckily, the ravenous kittens get bored of him after they discover he's ninety percent indigestible space-suit.
@king Deekus: Do you actually think Mindreaver is scum? Also, Hi. I am rodemy. I'm the village idiot sometimes. I once almost won a scum game by playing into that times a billion. Apocalypse (or as i like to call it: Tacos Apaco.) mafia. Check it out if you can. ITS A DOOOOOZY..
@Mindreaver: Deekus has a point. Bolded #1 is super sketch and throws you right at the top of my first scumspect for proposal.
I almost just want to run 4 groups of 3 straight up and see how the cookies crumble. I know its a terrible idea but it appeals to me so much because of what this game is.
If you know it's a terrible idea, why did you propose it?
That's all for tonight.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thank you for choosing
Rodemy Pizza
It’s not the best choice, but it’s a choice nonetheless
Let's not get too stuck on this vote strategy business. Watched too many times (including my first game host recently) town players get caught up on mechanics and not the players actions.
But while it's up a couple of quick notes before I bang my head as nothing so far has given us a good reason to break from RVS:
1) Scum team proposal groups work only until 2 or more of the scum team die. Then you want townies vs scum.
2) I noted the opening post said something about "Active QTs". While it would be awesome to turn this game into several mini mafia games, I'd like the limit of proposals pushed through to two as getting 4 wrong loses us the game... Funny enough that works for the scum team as well!
3) I don't think there are any PRs this game, don't answer me if you think/know I'm wrong, but I'd dread to make this another misdirection.
I don't understand why you said "Lets not get caught up in game mechanics" and then went straight into game mechanics. Usually, when someone wants to change the subject (like you did) they change the subject, not add on to the thing they said should be changed....
IS not the current quarrel between Deekus and Mindreaver good enough to end rvs? I say we look into those two first, seeing as they are currently in the spotlight.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thank you for choosing
Rodemy Pizza
It’s not the best choice, but it’s a choice nonetheless
@Rodemy - "even a townie acting scummy getting killed by two equally scummy people isn't the end of the world". I actually have said it twice now. Do you disagree with what I said here?
Myself, I am hoping to find a dichotomy and make them duke it out.
But we cannot force such things.
This is kinda where I was coming into the game. The idea of choosing three players to scrap their way to the best lynch sounds intensely fun, and I was actually hoping to be included in a few of the QTs.
But, in reality... I'm pretty sure kpaca's plan is strictly better, especially in the late game.
I don't understand why you said "Lets not get caught up in game mechanics" and then went straight into game mechanics. Usually, when someone wants to change the subject (like you did) they change the subject, not add on to the thing they said should be changed....
Sorry, but they are garbage. First, you managed to put BOTH the people beginning with N in the same group. Also, you put erryone in exactly one group, giving me nothing to analyze.
I missed the significance of this earlier.
shockwave voting for a proposal including himself and seeing it as a responsibility is actually exceptionally villagery, and not something I find it likely that a wolf would think to fake.
Or if they did, they would save it for later in the phase for a more serious proposal.
How much thought did you put into these groupings?
For example, I note that you put yourself with a fairly new player and a notorious lurker, rather than relishing the challenge to figure out whoever are the most accomplished players in this game.
Propose Team Wobbegong : megiddo, seppel, NAG
vote team wobbegong
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Curiosity killed the cat. But for awhile, I was a suspect.
Obviously lynching a townie would not be the end of the world, I don't disagree with that. But within the context of your post it seems like a weird thing to say.
Quote from Mindreaver »
Like, that literally we should protect townies acting is a scummy way? How do you tell them from the scum exactly?
Even scummy acting townies are townies. Personally I would prefer to lynch scum. And while there is no sure fire way to tell town from scum, I think we can aim higher then a preemptively justified mislynch.
Quote from Mindreaver »
"Putting only scummy people in a group and letting them pick the lynch is just begging for a mislynch." - I know this is gonna get taken out of context later, but that's not the worst thing in the world to happen. Think about it.
Again, "not the worst thing in the world" is a pretty low bar. I'm not saying it's the worst thing in the world. I'm saying it's a bad strategy.
Let's break it down by the numbers.
#1. If we get three scum into a group, then we automatically hit scum because they will have to lynch someone. But this is very unlikely. The chance that none of our picks are townies is pretty low.
#2. If we put two scum and one townie into a group, then the townie's dead automatically. Not only that, but we give those two scum a chance to communicate and coordinate privately. This is the worst possibility, and more likely to happen then possibility #1.
#3. If we get one scum and two townies into a group, then there is a solid chance that the townies will lynch correctly. This is infinitely more likely to hit scum then possibility #2, and more likely to actually happen then possibility #1.
#4. If we put all townies in a group, then we lose a townie no matter what. Obviously want to avoid this.
Given this, I think it would be much better to pick someone that the town collectively trusts to put into each proposal with clear instructions that that person is not to be lynched. If they are lynched, then we know the other two in the group are both scum, which negates the worst case scenario of possibility #2. I think one person we trust plus two of our highest suspects is the most likely way to get to possibility #3, which is the best case scenario. I think this will yield better results then putting only our highest suspects in a group, because that strategy is more likely to result in possibility #2, which is the worst case scenario.
Quote from Shockwave07 »
Let's not get too stuck on this vote strategy business. Watched too many times (including my first game host recently) town players get caught up on mechanics and not the players actions.
I think a little more discussion on the subject would be healthy. I agree that too much focus could distract us from actual scum hunting, but I don't think we are there yet.
Quote from Rodemy »
@king Deekus: Do you actually think Mindreaver is scum?
He's the only person who has pinged my scumdar, but it's hardly enough for me to have a solid read on him.
Quote from Rodemy »
EBWODP: ALSO DEEKUS- Why did you vote mindreaver instead of proposing a group
I was using my "Vote" more as a FOS. I don't have enough of a read on him, or anyone else for that matter, to propose a group.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Deadline: 12/31/9999, 11:59 PM MST
1. dkingsland967 - Mafia - Triumphant
2. D_V - Mafia - Triumphant
3. Huntzilla
Megiddo- Mafia - Triumphant4. Seppel - Mafia - Triumphant
Active QTs
None
Dead
1. Shockwave07 - Town - Lynched in phascogale
2. kpaca - Town - Lynched in Bobblegong
3. not_a_gimmick - Town - Lynched in Scumtrio
4. Mindreaver - Town - Lynched in Pan
5. DoTArchon
King_Deekus- Town - Endgamed6. Nykllor - Town - Endgamed
7. Rodemy - Town - Endgamed
8. Tordeck - Town - Endgamed
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Things... have been better. The ship is on emergency power. The engines are dead. The escape pods are gone. The monitors are playing nothing but Kiss Meets the Phantom of the Park on endless loop.
How could this get any worse? Glad you asked!
The Inheritance is transporting a shipment of big red clicky buttons to a desperate planet on the outer rim. But some among your number are space mafia, who wish to seize the big red buttons for their nefarious purposes. It's your job to stop them, crew. I must inform you that should you fail, you will be fired. Out the airlock.
Eight players will receive the following PM: Four players will receive the following PM: The game lasts over the course of one very long day. There are no nightkills and there is no scum-chat. The deadline is set for 12/31/9999 at 11:59PM.
At any time during the day, a player may PROPOSE a three-player group. (E.g. "Propose [Proposalname]: A, B, C".) Players may then VOTE for proposals by name. (For example, if a proposal is named TANGO, you would support that proposal by posting "Vote Tango".) When a proposal gets a majority of players' approval, it passes. Those three players will be sent a link to a new quicktopic and prohibited from posting further in the game thread. Those players will have a three-day deadline in which to lynch one of their number in the quicktopic. If they fail to lynch, all three will be killed. Then the survivors will return to the main thread and the quicktopic will be closed.
- "Bah" posts are strictly prohibited. If you're dead, you can't post.
- Players in the main thread may not vote for proposals involving players currently in a QT, but may pass additional proposals while waiting for players to come back. The vote threshold for proposals is based on the number of players currently in the main thread, not all living players.
- Players may not post in closed QTs on penalty of modkill. But players are free to reread QTs to which they have access. (If you have something to say to another person in your QT, I recommend you say it before you lynch the third member.)
- Players may not quote QTs, but they may paraphrase them. What constitutes a "paraphrase" is to be construed narrowly and with serious punishments for those who screw it up.
- Proposal names may be one word only, and shouldn't be named anything that would be confusing. I recommend the NATO Phonetic Alphabet for starters.
- While the "real" deadline is set for the end of the 100th century, the mod does reserve the right to set interstitial deadlines for passing proposals on penalty of whatever scary things he can come up with.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Once ten people have confirmed, the game will begin. Until then, do not post.
(Also, if you haven't gotten a role PM, let me know - I already noticed one mistake in my transcription.)
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
With 12 present, it's 7 votes to pass proposals.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Propose RVS-One: Tordeck, Shockwave, Seppel
(7 to pass)
RVS-One: Seppel, Shockwave07, Tordeck
1 - Mindreaver
Active Proposals
None
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Hey man its good to see that info, also the proposals seem to stay for ever because there isn't any night phase.
I guess I can FoS if I wanted.
Edit: Also, I did think of one corner case I hadn't considered - if three people leaving the thread causes another proposal to suddenly have enough votes to pass. At that point, I'm going to automatically "unvote" people from that proposal until that proposal is at the vote threshold minus one, rather than remove all the votes from it and force everyone to put them back on.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Have any other strategies entered your mind?
Xyre, I would suggest resetting the vote count and submitted proposals after each lynch. If we really want an old grouping discussed again, someone can just submit it again.
We should arrange for a Rodemy lynch. He's always scum, even if he's town.
Because sep is in it. Duh.
Hi Rodemy.
That seems like a terrible idea if we put two scum and one town in a group together right?
Our options, as I see it:
1) PoE down to a consensus group and see what shakes out of that. In other games this would be the equivalent to "I think the scumteam is in [1,2,3,4], lets lynch through that pile". In that case, even a townie acting scummy getting killed by two equally scummy people isn't the end of the world, because we get concrete flip information and two people who have to justify their votes.
2) Scum we want to kill + two consensus town-reads. To make sure a particular scummy target dies. Again, even if scum slips into one of those town-read slots and saves his partner, killing the town guy we sent in there. It's going to be obvious who the scum are. So unless this is LyLo, this is the safest course, as long as we can find two obvtown. It also gives us the least amount of info to use though, and it's essentially by-passing the proposal mechanic.
3) We nominate lurkers. Preferably three of them. This is literally all I've thought about since I saw this game's mechanic. Either you start playing or all the lurkers die together. None of that "only a few people are posting" nonsense
It'll be tough for our first proposal to be #2. Because there probably aren't claims that would clear anyone, assuming we can find a scummy enough target to begin with. So we'll be going off of behavior and interactions, and we have almost none. Which leaves #1 and #3 to start, which I'm really okay with either as an icebreaker.
We never get to see the threads of the three players.
dkingsland: Why don't we just say we'll play it by ear for now.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Also this whole post smells like preemptively justifying a mislynch to me. Vote Mindreaver
Actually, better response for you. Explain how I'm setting up a mislynch. I think that was a hella opportunistic characterization of my post, and I'd like to see you back it up. I didn't advocate for any particular person. I definitely took a stand in regards to not wanting to put 2 town and 1 scum as our first proposal, but I don't see that as "setting up a mislynch" either.
Quite simply, I think our first proposal should net us as much information as it can. Explain to me how it's best if we send three people in with a known mission? We get a flip, and nothing else. We send in a group of candidates (scummy play or just PoE), and then we get a flip, and also two people directly responsible for it. That's MORE information. And in my book, a better FIRST lynch. Once we have interaction and flips and votes to analyze, I think #2 could be on the table.
And definitely the threat to lurkers should be real (minus Tordeck until the 1st). Chime in or die.
Ok I see what you are saying Fair enough.
I don't agree that the group in the proposal should be directed ahead of time. Perhaps later in the game, that would be viable. But if I see a town body on the ground, I'd rather hear from the two people who thought it was better to kill him than the other choice they had.
How can we hold people accountable, if we tell them what to do? We're going to get a pile of "I was only following orders"
Give me the shot captain.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the sigpic.
Spider-Man Mafia 3 (Off-Site: NGA)
Metroid Mafia (Off-Site: Mafia Universe)
Also, because we don't get to see the QTs, we get very little info from them. Putting only scummy people in a group and letting them pick the lynch is just begging for a mislynch.
That's funny, because I'm pretty sure I just did.
Vote Mindreaver
Vote Mindreaver
Vote Mindreaver
Vote Mindreaver
Vote Mindreaver
Vote Mindreaver
Vote Mindreaver
Alright, that's twilight. Obv the doc should protect me. vig or cop should hit Rodemy, I'm hearing a lot of scummy things about him #manypeoplearesaying
I don't think the sun is ever coming up.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the sigpic.
Spider-Man Mafia 3 (Off-Site: NGA)
Metroid Mafia (Off-Site: Mafia Universe)
Good thing the mod had the foresight to put a unlimited voter in the game. Otherwise how else would we have won this game already?
The "Preferably three of them", in hindsight, might have been worded better. I'll give you that one. I mean, that it probably doesn't much good to put, say, 2 lurkers with one active player. That gives us almost nothing.
By the way, since people are latching onto the QT thing. We don't need to see the arguments there. Sure, it might be nice to see D_V be all "I'm totes scum and you can't do anything about it cause my buddy is in here, ha ha". But since it's three people in there, and 2 votes to kill somebody, the two people who lived voted for the guy who died. That's all we care about. They then come back tothe thread as a whole and have to justify their vote. Maybe they kill a scum and we all say "yay, townpoints for you!" or they kill town and we get to say "why was <dead guy> a better choice than <guy still alive>, convince us you're not scum".
Or we can put two town in the group, with one suspect, direct the two town to kill the guy, and then whatever he flips they just say "oh,you told us to, derp".
The two-town-one-scum scenario would work better once we have killed scum, and have people on the record voting to kill him. If Shockwave, Seppel, and Tordeck go into a room, deliberate among themselves, and kill a scum tordeck, I would have a lot stronger town read on D_V/Shock later on in the game when we NEED to murder the last scum, and we think it's Rodemy.
"Putting only scummy people in a group and letting them pick the lynch is just begging for a mislynch." - I know this is gonna get taken out of context later, but that's not the worst thing in the world to happen. Think about it.
But while it's up a couple of quick notes before I bang my head as nothing so far has given us a good reason to break from RVS:
1) Scum team proposal groups work only until 2 or more of the scum team die. Then you want townies vs scum.
2) I noted the opening post said something about "Active QTs". While it would be awesome to turn this game into several mini mafia games, I'd like the limit of proposals pushed through to two as getting 4 wrong loses us the game... Funny enough that works for the scum team as well!
3) I don't think there are any PRs this game, don't answer me if you think/know I'm wrong, but I'd dread to make this another misdirection.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the sigpic.
Spider-Man Mafia 3 (Off-Site: NGA)
Metroid Mafia (Off-Site: Mafia Universe)
When you propose a grouping, explain why.
Myself, I am hoping to find a dichotomy and make them duke it out.
But we cannot force such things.
As for the actual game, I have a villa read on kpaca which is likely very premature.
Luckily, the ravenous kittens get bored of him after they discover he's ninety percent indigestible space-suit.
Vote Count
(7 to pass)
RVS-One: Seppel, Shockwave07, Tordeck
3 - Mindreaver, Rodemy, Shockwave07
Active Proposals
None
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
I didn't read much of the flavor of Inheritance Mafia.
Oh god this playerbase.
As long as an effort is put in.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the sigpic.
Spider-Man Mafia 3 (Off-Site: NGA)
Metroid Mafia (Off-Site: Mafia Universe)
@king Deekus: Do you actually think Mindreaver is scum? Also, Hi. I am rodemy. I'm the village idiot sometimes. I once almost won a scum game by playing into that times a billion. Apocalypse (or as i like to call it: Tacos Apaco.) mafia. Check it out if you can. ITS A DOOOOOZY..
@Mindreaver: Deekus has a point. Bolded #1 is super sketch and throws you right at the top of my first scumspect for proposal.
If you know it's a terrible idea, why did you propose it?
That's all for tonight.
That's like the purpose of the game imo. If I was the mod I would have envisioned two or more of these red buttons going at the same time.
I don't understand why you said "Lets not get caught up in game mechanics" and then went straight into game mechanics. Usually, when someone wants to change the subject (like you did) they change the subject, not add on to the thing they said should be changed....
IS not the current quarrel between Deekus and Mindreaver good enough to end rvs? I say we look into those two first, seeing as they are currently in the spotlight.
I'll look over it tomorrow sometime. Quarter after eleven now and have work in the morning... Yay digging post holes...
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the sigpic.
Spider-Man Mafia 3 (Off-Site: NGA)
Metroid Mafia (Off-Site: Mafia Universe)
This is kinda where I was coming into the game. The idea of choosing three players to scrap their way to the best lynch sounds intensely fun, and I was actually hoping to be included in a few of the QTs.
But, in reality... I'm pretty sure kpaca's plan is strictly better, especially in the late game.
Holy crap, I agree with Rodemy.
So here we go!
Propose Team_Rocket (King_Deekus, Nykllor, not_a_gimmick)
Propose Team_Mystic (Seppel, Mindreaver, Tordeck)
Propose Team_Valor (Kpaca, dkingsland967, Shockwave07)
Propose Team_Instinct (D_V, Rodemy, Megiddo)
...
Vote Team_Rocket
Vote Team_Mystic
Vote Team_Valor
Vote Team_Instinct
Also, I'm applying mod fiat to rename your proposals because I'm lazy.
On that note,
Vote Count
(7 to pass)
Instinct: D_V, Megiddo, Rodemy
1 - Seppel
RVS-One: Seppel, Shockwave07, Tordeck
2 - Mindreaver, Shockwave07
Active Proposals
None
Rocket: King_Deekus, not_a_gimmick, Nykllor
Mystic: Mindreaver, Seppel, Tordeck
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
shockwave voting for a proposal including himself and seeing it as a responsibility is actually exceptionally villagery, and not something I find it likely that a wolf would think to fake.
Or if they did, they would save it for later in the phase for a more serious proposal. As fun as this sounds, do you feel this is optimal play? How much thought did you put into these groupings?
For example, I note that you put yourself with a fairly new player and a notorious lurker, rather than relishing the challenge to figure out whoever are the most accomplished players in this game.
Propose Team Wobbegong : megiddo, seppel, NAG
vote team wobbegong
Even scummy acting townies are townies. Personally I would prefer to lynch scum. And while there is no sure fire way to tell town from scum, I think we can aim higher then a preemptively justified mislynch.
Again, "not the worst thing in the world" is a pretty low bar. I'm not saying it's the worst thing in the world. I'm saying it's a bad strategy.
Let's break it down by the numbers.
#1. If we get three scum into a group, then we automatically hit scum because they will have to lynch someone. But this is very unlikely. The chance that none of our picks are townies is pretty low.
#2. If we put two scum and one townie into a group, then the townie's dead automatically. Not only that, but we give those two scum a chance to communicate and coordinate privately. This is the worst possibility, and more likely to happen then possibility #1.
#3. If we get one scum and two townies into a group, then there is a solid chance that the townies will lynch correctly. This is infinitely more likely to hit scum then possibility #2, and more likely to actually happen then possibility #1.
#4. If we put all townies in a group, then we lose a townie no matter what. Obviously want to avoid this.
Given this, I think it would be much better to pick someone that the town collectively trusts to put into each proposal with clear instructions that that person is not to be lynched. If they are lynched, then we know the other two in the group are both scum, which negates the worst case scenario of possibility #2. I think one person we trust plus two of our highest suspects is the most likely way to get to possibility #3, which is the best case scenario. I think this will yield better results then putting only our highest suspects in a group, because that strategy is more likely to result in possibility #2, which is the worst case scenario.
I think a little more discussion on the subject would be healthy. I agree that too much focus could distract us from actual scum hunting, but I don't think we are there yet.
He's the only person who has pinged my scumdar, but it's hardly enough for me to have a solid read on him.
I was using my "Vote" more as a FOS. I don't have enough of a read on him, or anyone else for that matter, to propose a group.