1. #1081
    Quote Originally Posted by rolo4804 View Post
    So, while you guys vote on lurkers, let me remind you that voting in lurkers gives us no voting evidence for the next day. If we lynch mumbles, we will be down to 22 at end of night. Then we lynch Roose and we are down to 18 at end of night (barring zero protections). It sucks that we have a few super lurkers, but we aren't in the numbers position to simply waste two game days lynching two lurkers and getting no evidence. That would simply be handing the game over to scum. That's not to say that the night kills won't be scum, or that Roose and Mumbles aren't scum themselves, but historically speaking lunching lurkers has not been something that have us good results.
    Originally lynch lurkers started because we had a game where most of the scum lurked and the town pretty much pulled themselves apart because omg town has to lynch people and lynching is always better than not lynching (and people forgot about the people who were lurking and scum won) so then it became "OMG lurkers are scums lynch them!". Then it turned into "omg lurkers aren't adding anything to the game always lynch them". There are good things and bad things with that mentality.

    Quote Originally Posted by faraway14 View Post
    I only come to these forums to play this game - and I only have time to come to the forums once every 24 hours or so and less over the weekends (which is why I didn't post during the treann debacle). If that's not enough activity for you then I'll asked to be replaced. I don't have any other hours in the day to commit to a game like this.
    For the reasons stated above people on these forums learned to be pretty intolerant of people not posting. Also some are pretty damn impatient when it comes to ending of day/night. Some people play it like it's their job /shrug. Honestly the amount you are posting is fine imo. You are adding to the game and posting fairly frequently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Majad View Post
    His huge post was but it isn't anymore.

    Your posts now shouldn't be moderated at all since you have 15 posts.
    It's actually 20 for it to stop completely. 10-15 just reduces it considerably. Sadly longer posts under 20 do trigger it due to someone accidentally training the filter to think long posts by low post count people is probably spam ><

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebert View Post
    "Any lynch is better than no lynch".

    And this is why it isn't.
    Pretty much an "x is always a good idea" isn't a good idea. Very few things are always or never. Like it's probably never a good idea to jump into lava.

    Quote Originally Posted by Worgenite View Post
    all of them will be huge for a while. We started out with 30 players
    Honestly vote records on no lynches can also be helpful because you can see patterns from that, especially if it later turns out that the other people who had votes on them were scum. You can honestly learn things from anything.

  2. #1082
    Scarab Lord Firebert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Dat Ingurlund, brrrrrap
    Posts
    4,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Worgenite View Post
    all of them will be huge for a while. We started out with 30 players
    Not true either: we can lynch with a minority.
    Isomorphic for LoL EU West
    W/L/Death count: Wolf: 0/1/1 | Mafia: 0/5/5 | TPR: 0/2/2
    SK: 0/1/1 | VT: 1.5/3.5/5 | Cult: 1/0/1
    Legendary Overlooked for WoW EU-EN.

  3. #1083
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebert View Post
    Not true either: we can lynch with a minority.
    I was going to respond to that... but then I thought I would just go to bed because I am exhausted and your statement makes no sense to me at all and you usually make a lot of sense so I am probably just missing something obvious.

  4. #1084
    Stood in the Fire Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by faraway14 View Post
    You guys play so differently than I - lynch a RC'd cop on day 1 because of a change of playing behaviour? I would have at least waited to see if he'd come with anything on D2 or D3. Even if he didn't come up with the goods, he would have been a magnet for almost every mafia action under the sun - perhaps saving a town death on N1.

    While I don't agree with your reasoning, there's nothing we can do now - thanks for repeating.
    I've asked this myself a few times. What's the positive side to lynching a RC cop, even if the threat is they will be NKd? That's why I didn't switch over my vote. That's also why I tend to not vote for lurkers. It's easier to get away with the loss of a lurking town day 1 when the game is average sized. A game this size with the amount we have lurking is dangerous. If we kill them it gives scum a free day or 2 to vote without building suspicion. If we leave them alive, sooner or later we will get to the point where we need them to be active and vote for a town win and they won't be there. That's why I asked if we have a vigilante to make those lurking his kills (or hers). That way the vigi will give the town a beneficial kill even if its on a townie, and we build MORE of a vote tally on others to get info and build an evidence trail for endgame.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 07:27 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Arlee View Post
    I was going to respond to that... but then I thought I would just go to bed because I am exhausted and your statement makes no sense to me at all and you usually make a lot of sense so I am probably just missing something obvious.
    I believe he's giving us a riddle of sorts. While a player needs a majority of the votes to be lynched, said player could have a minority of total allowable votes to be lynched. Right now we have 26 alive. 14 is auto lynch. Anything less than 14 is a minority of the 14 needed for an auto lynch. Hell, someone could be lynched by 5 votes with 26 alive if enough people spread out their votes over everyone. I think that is what he is trying to say. Maybe?
    wyrd bið ful aræd

  5. #1085
    Scarab Lord Firebert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Dat Ingurlund, brrrrrap
    Posts
    4,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Arlee View Post
    I was going to respond to that... but then I thought I would just go to bed because I am exhausted and your statement makes no sense to me at all and you usually make a lot of sense so I am probably just missing something obvious.
    Player with the highest votes gets lynched, regardless of how many votes.

    Lets say that we have 5 current lynch targets, and everyone spreads their votes as evenly as possible on all targets, and then day ends.
    A: 6
    B: 5
    C: 5
    D: 5
    E: 5
    (currently 26 players remaining)

    A gets lynched with only 6 votes, where 14 is required for majority.
    Isomorphic for LoL EU West
    W/L/Death count: Wolf: 0/1/1 | Mafia: 0/5/5 | TPR: 0/2/2
    SK: 0/1/1 | VT: 1.5/3.5/5 | Cult: 1/0/1
    Legendary Overlooked for WoW EU-EN.

  6. #1086
    Quote Originally Posted by rolo4804 View Post
    I've asked this myself a few times. What's the positive side to lynching a RC cop, even if the threat is they will be NKd?
    You can't believe every role claim you see, mate.
    Win and live. Lose and die.
    Rule of life. No change rule.
    Running worse than losing.
    Random casual stuff now


  7. #1087
    Stood in the Fire Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Arlee View Post
    Originally lynch lurkers started because we had a game where most of the scum lurked and the town pretty much pulled themselves apart because omg town has to lynch people and lynching is always better than not lynching (and people forgot about the people who were lurking and scum won) so then it became "OMG lurkers are scums lynch them!". Then it turned into "omg lurkers aren't adding anything to the game always lynch them". There are good things and bad things with that mentality.
    Oh I remember and I completely agree with the notion. It logically makes sense in most games. When we have a game of 15 or 20, a sprinkle of a few new people, and the rest vets, we will typically have a few "lurking" but no super lurkers (past few games). Of course there are a few games (coughdrmadhattercough) where we do have completely inattentive players. I started right after that initial game (I believe) that you are talking about. Could have been my first game I don't remember, but I do remember the LaL push from early on. When done early, the town gains more from removing that person than someone active due to needing people active at end game for votes. The town knows that we are giving up and sacrificing a first or second day lynch (giving scum a free pass) in order to have a smoother finish. It's a helpful move. I'm sure 90% of us will agree on that. I don't think it's a good move in this size game though with 3 (or possible more) night kills. We have two (that I can think of without looking at the totals) that fit the profile. Roose has finally posted, but was it anything? He has 50+ pages to chime in on, maybe he's reading up idk. My initial post about this topic I started was before we had a replacement added (or at least I hadn't read up to that point yet). I was thinking we'd have 3 lurkers we needed to get rid of with 3 nks happening as well. We'd be down to 14 with only lynches on lurkers and losing the game. We got the replacement (but no post yet) so I'm thinking it looks like 2 lynches as 6 nks before we move away from the lurkers. 18 is a better position than 14, but still it's wasting either today and/or tomorrow on giving scum a free lynch target. Hell, maybe it's only scum voting for lurkers atm. /shrug
    wyrd bið ful aræd

  8. #1088
    Scum have every reason to want to kill lurkers as well, PRs tend to lurk as do enemy scum. Unfortunately, many scum players are just as likely to go after the most active people so that they can shut the game up.
    Win and live. Lose and die.
    Rule of life. No change rule.
    Running worse than losing.
    Random casual stuff now


  9. #1089
    Stood in the Fire Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Lysah View Post
    You can't believe every role claim you see, mate.
    I'm not saying I'd believe it or that I did believe it, but id at least give someone the benefit to prove they are who they say they are (even if its feared the claimed cop will die at night). You asked what the difference between killing Treann and Kel would have been. I personally think Treanns vote is tainted due to the RC and subsequent suicide vote. Killing Kel (who was also town) possibly wouldn't have gone down the same way. Who knows if we lynched Kel if Treann would have died at night. I didn't think he was the cop, but possibly a bomb or pgo. To me, voting Treann day one has always been a joke. While you can get some info on it later in the game, people can use that as the excuse. Even so, we didn't har to vote Kel either. Making a push on anyone would have been fine (hindsight >.>).

    And Lysah, you aren't one to use that "can't believe every claim" bullshit with me. Whenever you've claimed you expect the chance to prove yourself. Like I said, I didn't trust or believe, but I was willing to see how Treann would play it out.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 07:51 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Lysah View Post
    Scum have every reason to want to kill lurkers as well, PRs tend to lurk as do enemy scum. Unfortunately, many scum players are just as likely to go after the most active people so that they can shut the game up.
    They do, it works well for both sides, or at least as the potential to. You leave out that scum get a benefit from it as well. A few games back you were a hard push on people reading rules and guides and such, especially with lurkers. You were very hard pressed to remove lurkers due to missing end game votes if kept alive because that is a benefit to scum. You were town then. Just seems convienent for you to leave out that side of the spectrum when it suits you as scum this go around.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 07:53 PM ----------

    I hope everyone else sees that playstyle change from Lysah.
    wyrd bið ful aræd

  10. #1090
    Field Marshal Krayzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Idaho, PotatoLandUSA
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by rolo4804 View Post
    I'm not saying I'd believe it or that I did believe it, but id at least give someone the benefit to prove they are who they say they are (even if its feared the claimed cop will die at night). You asked what the difference between killing Treann and Kel would have been. I personally think Treanns vote is tainted due to the RC and subsequent suicide vote. Killing Kel (who was also town) possibly wouldn't have gone down the same way. Who knows if we lynched Kel if Treann would have died at night. I didn't think he was the cop, but possibly a bomb or pgo. To me, voting Treann day one has always been a joke. While you can get some info on it later in the game, people can use that as the excuse. Even so, we didn't har to vote Kel either. Making a push on anyone would have been fine (hindsight >.>).

    And Lysah, you aren't one to use that "can't believe every claim" bullshit with me. Whenever you've claimed you expect the chance to prove yourself. Like I said, I didn't trust or believe, but I was willing to see how Treann would play it out.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 07:51 PM ----------



    They do, it works well for both sides, or at least as the potential to. You leave out that scum get a benefit from it as well. A few games back you were a hard push on people reading rules and guides and such, especially with lurkers. You were very hard pressed to remove lurkers due to missing end game votes if kept alive because that is a benefit to scum. You were town then. Just seems convienent for you to leave out that side of the spectrum when it suits you as scum this go around.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 07:53 PM ----------

    I hope everyone else sees that playstyle change from Lysah.
    I'm confused. You quoted her saying that scum players want to kill lurkers and said that she didn't point out that scum like to kill lurkers...

    Please explain.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 09:15 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Arlee View Post
    For the reasons stated above people on these forums learned to be pretty intolerant of people not posting. Also some are pretty damn impatient when it comes to ending of day/night. Some people play it like it's their job /shrug. Honestly the amount you are posting is fine imo. You are adding to the game and posting fairly frequently.
    I agree that Faraway has posted plenty. It's the players like Mumbles, SaintSinner, etc that aren't adding anything to the game (I know SaintSinner was replaced) that I believe should be lynched. I only feel they should be lynched because I have no active players who stand out as scum to me yet. There are a few I'm looking at but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt until I have a stronger feeling about it.
    "STUPID *headdesk* FUCKING *headdesk* SLIP *headslam*! Fuck! FuckfuckfuckfuckfuckFUCK! ~ Dyra"

  11. #1091
    Blademaster falbacca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    25
    that's what I wanna know!! O.o

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 10:56 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Allysene View Post
    What the hell is up now with the insults?
    that's what I wanna know!! (sorry if this pops up twice - getting tired and made a boo-boo; now on to reading the rest of the posts)

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 11:29 PM ----------

    well that was alot to digest ... I'm tired though and it's way past my usual bedtime ... so for now, til I'm more awake:

    FoS Decagon (for taking things too seriously)
    FoS Lysah (just cause she MIGHT be scum)
    and FoS Mumbles85 (for not posting ....)

  12. #1092
    Quote Originally Posted by rolo4804 View Post
    And Lysah, you aren't one to use that "can't believe every claim" bullshit with me. Whenever you've claimed you expect the chance to prove yourself.
    What? I don't believe I've ever claimed to hide from a lynch, my only claims have been jokes or power plays.

    I'm not even sure what the end of your post is arguing.
    Win and live. Lose and die.
    Rule of life. No change rule.
    Running worse than losing.
    Random casual stuff now


  13. #1093
    Stood in the Fire Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Krayzy View Post
    I'm confused. You quoted her saying that scum players want to kill lurkers and said that she didn't point out that scum like to kill lurkers...

    Please explain.
    I apologize. I'm at work on my phone so I may not be coming off as concise as I'd like. My point being is that when Lysah is playing pro town, she makes sure players see every angle and nuance of a situation. I don't believe she's doing that right now. Last time she was scum, she tried playing the same way but wasn't as thorough, which is how I feel she's playing now. My whole basic point from my last few posts is simply put that we are not in the position to lynch lurker(s) with a heavy night kill count. We would be wasting a day of voting and giving scum a free vote day as well. Maybe you can glean something from a lurker lynch when t comes to scum hunting, but generally when it's decided on that a lurker is being lynched, EVERYONE will generally try and get on that bandwagon asap. And yes, Lysah is right. Scum should want lurkers gone too due to the possibility of lurkers having TPRs. My point is that there is a positive and a negative attached to both town and scum. In my opinion the our negative greatly outweighs our positive for lynching a lurker. Scums positive greatly outweighs their negative for keeping a lurker around. Lysah is generally very good at giving both sides of the spectrum. It is in my opinion she isn't doing that this time to attempt to not give away her position.

    If we were to lynch a lurker right now, I believe we would have both town and scum jump on it. I don't believe there is enough of a separation in that vote to determine who is an isn't scum due to association with other scum. That is why I propose lynching someone else and having the vigi (what kind of batman game wouldn't have a vigilante) kill one of our lurkers. We do need the lurkers gone. I 100% agree with that, but we can't afford another free scum lynch.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-16 at 11:17 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Lysah View Post
    What? I don't believe I've ever claimed to hide from a lynch, my only claims have been jokes or power plays.

    I'm not even sure what the end of your post is arguing.
    I meant more like "fine don't trust I'm the cop. I'm dying tonight anyways after that claim" and then you remaining alive. You were the cop that game and had a doc in your pocket, but it's still the premise. We had 2 people claiming doctor, one overtly and one covertly through you, and you claiming cop. If you remember then, I was trying to get people to not lynch Robo, not because I trusted him, but because we had a way of checking his claim with a kill target. If it didn't check, we could lynch him the next day. If we lynched him and he came back true we lose a TPR. If we decided to lynch someone completely different, we could have hit another townie and been in the same voting position. To me it was a no brainer then, same with Treann this past day.
    wyrd bið ful aræd

  14. #1094
    Field Marshal Celtic209's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    91
    Hello crazy people of mmo-champ. Welcome to the nuthouse

    Any chance i can get a catch-up post?

  15. #1095
    Stood in the Fire Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    496
    Catch up post is somewhere between OP and post #1093 =P

    I wanna say day 2 was on page 46 or so. If you read from the sart of day 2 there's a few "catch up" style posts involving the lynch vote on our day 1 target. If you feel like reading everything, it's mostly fluff with a few gems sporadically tossed around.

    A quick run down. Treann started the threw off with a self vote (as he always does) and people jumped on it (as they always do) until people caught on to one of his "tells." He garnered some real votes, CC Commissioner Gordon RC cop, votes moved to Kel who "jokingly" asked here he should post his night action, and then they flipped back to Treann. Treann self voted and boom he died shortly after. Kel was killed during the night along with another TPR and a reg townie. We are currently discussing the merits of voting other lurkers are not. Prior to you replacing SaintSinner, he seemed to be in pole position. That position is now on Mumbles if I'm not mistaken. Lysah is the person commanding the second amount of votes (could we get a tally?) that's 1100 posts in a nutshell.
    wyrd bið ful aræd

  16. #1096
    Moderator Anakso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    4,574
    So I see saintsinner got replaced.

    Unvote
    Vote: Mumbles

  17. #1097
    Field Marshal Celtic209's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    91
    Thank you kind sir Ill try reading up

  18. #1098
    Stood in the Fire Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by celtic209 View Post
    Thank you kind sir Ill try reading up
    Try to get passed 20 posts outside FUN STUFF as well. Until then mods have to okay your posts I guess. Just don't do it in a trolling or spamming manner.
    wyrd bið ful aræd

  19. #1099
    Quote Originally Posted by rolo4804 View Post
    I meant more like "fine don't trust I'm the cop. I'm dying tonight anyways after that claim" and then you remaining alive. You were the cop that game and had a doc in your pocket, but it's still the premise. We had 2 people claiming doctor, one overtly and one covertly through you, and you claiming cop. If you remember then, I was trying to get people to not lynch Robo, not because I trusted him, but because we had a way of checking his claim with a kill target. If it didn't check, we could lynch him the next day. If we lynched him and he came back true we lose a TPR. If we decided to lynch someone completely different, we could have hit another townie and been in the same voting position. To me it was a no brainer then, same with Treann this past day.
    My strategy then guaranteed a win, even if I had to kill all of the other TPR to get there.
    Win and live. Lose and die.
    Rule of life. No change rule.
    Running worse than losing.
    Random casual stuff now


  20. #1100
    Quote Originally Posted by Firebert View Post
    Player with the highest votes gets lynched, regardless of how many votes.

    Lets say that we have 5 current lynch targets, and everyone spreads their votes as evenly as possible on all targets, and then day ends.
    A: 6
    B: 5
    C: 5
    D: 5
    E: 5
    (currently 26 players remaining)

    A gets lynched with only 6 votes, where 14 is required for majority.
    Oh right... I keep forgetting that we don't have to actually get to the vote limit to lynch people this game ><

    Quote Originally Posted by Lysah View Post
    My strategy then guaranteed a win, even if I had to kill all of the other TPR to get there.
    That seems far more like luck than a solid town strategy.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •