|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2010 5:17 pm
The thing with inactive people though, is that they're not helping their team anyway, so it's not worth the other team taking them out.
Do you guys think the vigilante is inactive or just didn't decide to kill yesterday?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:47 pm
Vig can only kill once, so it'd be stupid to use it on night one.
And that "let's leave the inactives alone" strategy is EXTREMELY dangerous for the town. What if two of the inactives happen to be mafia members? It doesn't matter if they're contributing. All that matters is their numbers. With that kind of thinking you could wind up losing because you weren't allowing yourself to pursue any leads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:53 pm
Allegro Vig can only kill once, so it'd be stupid to use it on night one. And that "let's leave the inactives alone" strategy is EXTREMELY dangerous for the town. What if two of the inactives happen to be mafia members? It doesn't matter if they're contributing. All that matters is their numbers. With that kind of thinking you could wind up losing because you weren't allowing yourself to pursue any leads. In this forum there are no vigilante limitations unless it's stated. For this game I decided not to limit the vigilante, but usually when we implement it it has a 50% backfire chance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2010 8:12 pm
Allegro For role balancing issues, there are only two Friends this game. Someone needs to correct the role list, then. >_> The Friends should still get in contact with each other if they haven't, though. Allegro Vig can only kill once, so it'd be stupid to use it on night one. This, pretty much. Vigilante is a Townie, so making rando-kills is more likely to hurt their side than help it. badtzmaru The thing with inactive people though, is that they're not helping their team anyway, so it's not worth the other team taking them out. The problem with that idea is that Town can only win if we eliminate all scum. If we ignore inactives completely, and one or more of the inactives is Mafia, then we'll run into a problem very quickly. Also, being inactive in the thread doesn't necessarily equate to being inactive in the game. A Mafia member might not post in the thread very much to avoid suspicion (fewer posts = fewer chances to slip up), but that doesn't mean that they're not contributing to their side through PMs or something similar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2010 8:24 pm
Sorry I haven't been very active, everyone. I've been busy, and sick, and mostly just been playing Minecraft for hours on end. It's so addicting! sweatdrop
It seems like I haven't missed much though. (again)
Let's see. So, most people believe that Kath's death was not meta-gaming, and Allegro's survival has led a few people(Maru) to suspect that he could be mafia. I'm 90% sure that Allegro is vanilla townie this game and plus, like he said, he's a good player and I am not going to lynch him unless my opinion changes. With such low numbers we can't risk lynching a good ACTIVE player this game. In addition, Maru threw suspicion on him and Maru has been saying a lot of suspicious stuff this game and in general has been very rash and inconsistent with her words. From the looks of it, she saw a small opportunity to get a nice free lynch kill out of Allegro, and decided to go for it. For these reasons, I'm going to get things moving and point my FoS at badtzmarul-Bari-Chan-l Hobo Scruffy Hmm...
Bari, your bro just died. What are your thoughts? Oh noes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 7:33 am
I see your points about inactive members. But I've always just thought they weren't a threat to their opposing team. (Just take Medeus' example last game. xd ) The way I see it, if they don't log in at all then we can wait until the end of the game to get rid of them, and focus on catching the larger threats first. But like Zephyr said, if there are players pretending to be inactive then that's dangerous, and I don't have a problem with lynching them. I think we should keep track of those who log on but don't post in the topic. Allegro With that kind of thinking you could wind up losing because you weren't allowing yourself to pursue any leads. And what about my lead on you? xp I think it's as big of a lead as inactive members. And I'm being ambiguous and inconsistent because I'm unsure of everything. I had a small feeling that Allegro could be mafia (that keeps on growing by the page) but since there's no proof, I don't want to just outright vote for him. But I thought I'd share my thoughts anyway since everyone wants everyone to post something. (I'm starting to regret it now, though... sweatdrop ) Zephyrkitty Allegro Vig can only kill once, so it'd be stupid to use it on night one. This, pretty much. Vigilante is a Townie, so making rando-kills is more likely to hurt their side than help it. Oh... Well, the front page says that s/he can kill once a day, so that's what I thought. I've heard Allegro is a good player so of course I don't want him gone if he's town, but if he's mafia then he's a dangerous threat to us which is why I was thinking of taking the chance. If you guys are so sure about Allegro, then I'll let it go. (Hobo, how are you 90% sure he's good?) But if one of you three end up being mafia, then I'm going to become suspicious of the rest of you two. ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 8:36 am
badtzmaru The way I see it, if they don't log in at all then we can wait until the end of the game to get rid of them, and focus on catching the larger threats first. And what if you're wrong? What if you keep voting off innocents? All of the sudden, the game's over on day four because there's two inactive mafia members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 8:52 am
Well, if they keep being inactive, it won't be a problem for us to get rid of them since there won't be any mafia kills and we'd soon be able to determine that the inactive people are mafia. And it goes both ways with "what if"s; what if we keep voting off inactive townies? Soon we'll be outnumbered by the mafia, and the game will be over for us.
But anyway, which inactive people are you looking to lynch? We should start keeping track of who's logged on and who hasn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:19 am
Hobo Scruffy l-Bari-Chan-l Hobo Scruffy Hmm...
Bari, your bro just died. What are your thoughts? Oh noes. I'm tryiiiiing. ; 3;
Being semi-grounded and all. Not much I can really do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:52 am
badtzmaru Well, if they keep being inactive, it won't be a problem for us to get rid of them since there won't be any mafia kills and we'd soon be able to determine that the inactive people are mafia. And it goes both ways with "what if"s; what if we keep voting off inactive townies? Soon we'll be outnumbered by the mafia, and the game will be over for us. But anyway, which inactive people are you looking to lynch? We should start keeping track of who's logged on and who hasn't. Okay, you really ARE getting more suspicious, Badtz. I'm not looking to lynch anyone yet, as much as you seem to want me to. What I want is for people to speak up. That way, it'll be easier for us to determine who is or is not a mafia member. We don't want to lynch ANYBODY who's inactive. Rather, we want to MAKE them active. Your zeal for lynching players who can't defend themselves is...troubling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:54 am
So as I see it, the only leads we have no is Maru's suspicion on Allegro, which I'm not convinced of, and the suspicion on Maru... Hm.
By the way, I wanted to ask this for some time now... How do you check when somebody logged on?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:34 am
I dunno, I just check the timestamp on the last post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:41 am
Allegro I dunno, I just check the timestamp on the last post. Oh, ok XD I'll ask someone else then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:48 am
Allegro I'm not looking to lynch anyone yet, as much as you seem to want me to. What I want is for people to speak up. That way, it'll be easier for us to determine who is or is not a mafia member. We don't want to lynch ANYBODY who's inactive. Rather, we want to MAKE them active. ...I thought you were looking to get rid of inactive players because of this post: Allegro Lynching me instead of looking for inactive mafia members would be an example of getting distracted. xd Allegro Your zeal for lynching players who can't defend themselves is...troubling. I'm the one who argued that it's pointless to lynch inactive players. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:50 am
Weasel-chan By the way, I wanted to ask this for some time now... How do you check when somebody logged on? Some people display when they last logged in to Gaia on their profile page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
