|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 12:18:42 GMT -5
The comic attitude to his posts could also be a cover - on the other hand, maybe he's just suicidal? Or maybe he's clever enough to realize we'd never kill someone we don't take seriously as a threat. Personally, I doubt that.  |
|
|
|
Post by Presto on Oct 27, 2008 12:20:28 GMT -5
Or he could be making it obvious that he is a Mafia member because he is, because he anticipates that we think we're too smart to believe he would act like a mafia member when he IS a mafia member. In plain sight and all that. I'll check again tonite and if I feel its needed, I may or may not alter my vote to eliminate someone. But for now, it might be wiser to let the Mafia make the first strike... That way we don't risk losing TWO townies in one day. Wow! Really good thought! I like that!  All of your points are good... but this one is really good. Thanks. But its still a dangerous gambit because we wouldn't learn much more than we knew on the first day, and would only weaken our position more without making any headway. In this way our options are. 1) CHoose at random, chancing to get a Mafia member while chacing losing TWO townsfolk, speeding up our loss. 2) Making no obvious choice and lose one Townsmember for certain, but narrowing down the pool of possible Mafiosa's and Townys for our next vote. |
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 12:26:26 GMT -5
"But that only works if I know that you know that I know that you know that I know that you know..."
It's an endless argument, and one no mafioso would want to extinguish for the advantage of confusion and our tendency to target Cerrunos first.
Forcing us to make the first decision puts us in a tough spot. Like you said, we either take the chance of nailing a townsperson the first go-round, or we do nothing, and lose at least one anyway. Personally, I think even hitting two townspeople this early in would be a good way to start - sure, it thins us out, but not only do we have a starting understanding of the Mafia's motivations, but we're still ahead 7-5. It helps our probability.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 12:28:26 GMT -5
Yeah, personally I would never vote to kill someone who argued that I was a Mafia member, especially if it was properly convincing. Too easily telegraphed. Makes you look suspicious and generally confirms that person's suspicions. If they're correct, let them live until they have no power to enforce it, and their repetitive accusations lose force. EDIT: Then kill them about the third or fourth time. I'll remember that and quote you in thread 3-5 on this issue! |
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 12:34:26 GMT -5
The comic attitude to his posts could also be a cover - on the other hand, maybe he's just suicidal? Or maybe he's clever enough to realize we'd never kill someone we don't take seriously as a threat. Personally, I doubt that. Guess we'll know if I get voted out and "killed" after Thursday or not! |
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 12:36:49 GMT -5
"But that only works if I know that you know that I know that you know that I know that you know..." It's an endless argument, and one no mafioso would want to extinguish for the advantage of confusion and our tendency to target Cerrunos first. Forcing us to make the first decision puts us in a tough spot. Like you said, we either take the chance of nailing a townsperson the first go-round, or we do nothing, and lose at least one anyway. Personally, I think even hitting two townspeople this early in would be a good way to start - sure, it thins us out, but not only do we have a starting understanding of the Mafia's motivations, but we're still ahead 7-5. It helps our probability. Or... we could nail 1 Mafia and 1 towns-folk in one day too! Read that again: but we're still ahead 7-5. It helps our probability. SuperBro only said he PMed people who had a position in the game! How did you mysteriously know the amount of Mafia members unless you got a PM stating that? No one prior to this post had a number... just a number we thought could be the amount of Mafia members! I think you sir... are part of the Mafia! I would change my vote... but I'm against that! I'm staying with my vote today... but on day 2! You're going to get me voting you out! |
|
|
|
Post by Presto on Oct 27, 2008 12:39:48 GMT -5
"But that only works if I know that you know that I know that you know that I know that you know..." It's an endless argument, and one no mafioso would want to extinguish for the advantage of confusion and our tendency to target Cerrunos first. Forcing us to make the first decision puts us in a tough spot. Like you said, we either take the chance of nailing a townsperson the first go-round, or we do nothing, and lose at least one anyway. Personally, I think even hitting two townspeople this early in would be a good way to start - sure, it thins us out, but not only do we have a starting understanding of the Mafia's motivations, but we're still ahead 7-5. It helps our probability. Or... we could nail 2 Mafia folk in one day too! Hardly, since the Mafia won't vote off one of their own. |
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 12:42:17 GMT -5
Or... we could nail 2 Mafia folk in one day too! Hardly, since the Mafia won't vote off one of their own. I edited that after thinking about it for a second. Reread my edit. |
|
|
|
Post by Presto on Oct 27, 2008 12:44:54 GMT -5
"But that only works if I know that you know that I know that you know that I know that you know..." It's an endless argument, and one no mafioso would want to extinguish for the advantage of confusion and our tendency to target Cerrunos first. Forcing us to make the first decision puts us in a tough spot. Like you said, we either take the chance of nailing a townsperson the first go-round, or we do nothing, and lose at least one anyway. Personally, I think even hitting two townspeople this early in would be a good way to start - sure, it thins us out, but not only do we have a starting understanding of the Mafia's motivations, but we're still ahead 7-5. It helps our probability. Or... we could nail 1 Mafia and 1 towns-folk in one day too! Read that again: but we're still ahead 7-5. It helps our probability. SuperBro only said he PMed people who had a position in the game! How did you mysteriously know the amount of Mafia members unless you got a PM stating that? No one prior to this post had a number... just a number we thought could be the amount of Mafia members! I think you sir... are part of the Mafia! I would change my vote... but I'm against that! I'm staying with my vote today... but on day 2! You're going to get me voting you out! That... Is very good thinking. It is funny how he would just HAPPEN to pick a specific number. Hmm... Very very suspicious. It's especially suspicious as we were working with a possible Mafia numbers of 3 or 4, how would you pick out 5 as a number? And.. this feels very Dejavuey. |
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 12:53:02 GMT -5
If you look back, you'll see when he first announced the players in the start thread (and we had one FEWER player), I argued that a 1:2 ratio was most likely from a traditional standpoint, and that with a value between 12 and 15 (which we have) the most likely values were thus 4 and 5. I've been working with the number 5 since then as a worst-case scenario, and because we're now closer to 15 players than 12. If you want to work with the number 4, feel free - that just makes me more right, since we can at worst reduce our odds to 8-4.
|
|
|
|
Post by Presto on Oct 27, 2008 12:54:57 GMT -5
If you look back, you'll see when he first announced the players in the start thread (and we had one FEWER player), I argued that a 1:2 ratio was most likely from a traditional standpoint, and that with a value between 12 and 15 (which we have) the most likely values were thus 4 and 5. I've been working with the number 5 since then as a worst-case scenario, and because we're now closer to 15 players than 12. If you want to work with the number 4, feel free - that just makes me more right, since we can at worst reduce our odds to 8-4. Wow.. this is begining to make my head hurt. XD Curse your thrice damned suspicion! -runs to class- |
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 13:00:59 GMT -5
If you look back, you'll see when he first announced the players in the start thread (and we had one FEWER player), I argued that a 1:2 ratio was most likely from a traditional standpoint, and that with a value between 12 and 15 (which we have) the most likely values were thus 4 and 5. I've been working with the number 5 since then as a worst-case scenario, and because we're now closer to 15 players than 12. If you want to work with the number 4, feel free - that just makes me more right, since we can at worst reduce our odds to 8-4. A 1:2 ratio? Do you know how many mafia members that is? You stated 5! If we have 15 players that is a 1:3 ratio not a 1:2... hence why I think it's you. You keep back tracking... and lying. It's obvious! |
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 13:02:56 GMT -5
1 Mafia to 2 townspeople is 1 out of 3 people. By that ratio, you get 5 Mafia and 10 townspeople - which is 1 mafia for every 3 players. It's not my fault that you misinterpreted the second half of the ratio. Personally, I think it's suspicious that you latched onto this so hard after making so many cracks about your own suspicious behavior. Plus, I've stuck to my guns - I'm taking down Nigromante based on nothing but random chance, like I stated from the very beginning thread before the game even started. YOU threatened to change your vote just to eliminate me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 13:06:05 GMT -5
1 Mafia to 2 townspeople is 1 out of 3 people. By that ratio, you get 5 Mafia and 10 townspeople - which is 1 mafia for every 3 players. It's not my fault that you misinterpreted the second half of the ratio. Personally, I think it's suspicious that you latched onto this so hard after making so many cracks about your own suspicious behavior. Oh... ok. Yeah you're right about that number! Don't I feel dumb! ;D Oh well. Can't blame me for trying to jump on you after "smelling blood." |
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 13:07:09 GMT -5
Sure I can! That's the fun of the game! If we can't fly off the handle at inconsistent evidence and well-meaning mistakes, what can we do?
|
|
