|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 14:11:14 GMT -5
And another thing I just considered - the faster we start lynching, the smaller the number of votes required for a lynching becomes, allowing us to more easily lynch mafia members.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Oct 27, 2008 14:12:14 GMT -5
Fair enough... but if we're going to strategize to that point, we should apply some kind of logic. Either lynch the "quiet" people first because they're unknown factors, or get rid of the cleverest players first, because we don't want them advising the mafia guys on how to play.
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 14:12:39 GMT -5
We lose nothing significant by trying, though. If there are 5, we've actually got a slightly greater than 1-in-3 chance to hit one, and even if we don't, that means that by next turn we're at very nearly 50-50. It's risky, but it gives us a chance to curtail them now and even if it fails, forces them into a situation where we're practically guaranteed to take down at least one next round, because we know they won't bring down one of their own. Plus, if we already have a killing of our own, we can gauge how the Mafia reacts, which might give us a clue as to how close to base we were with our votes. Nice... persuasive vote. Let's go for it! Both Negromante and you have two votes each. And I still have a feeling about you. I'm going to do what I said I wouldn't. Unlynch/Negromante Lynch/Thuellai Let the blood flow! ;D So now the votes are like so: Cernunnos56- 1 Negromante- 1 Thuellai- 3 Hero2490- 1 Goats- 1
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 14:13:52 GMT -5
Also, Cern, two points.
1. I only had ONE vote, from Sabon. WK never actually switched, nor did Presto. Until you switched, thus betraying your own code of conduct and letting Nigromante get off scott free. (and as WK's pointed out, Mante's an unknown factor)
2. Isn't it nice how you make both of us suspicious and then turn on me as soon as I make an argument for narrowing down Mafia canidates?
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 14:14:59 GMT -5
Fair enough... but if we're going to strategize to that point, we should apply some kind of logic. Either lynch the "quiet" people first because they're unknown factors, or get rid of the cleverest players first, because we don't want them advising the mafia guys on how to play. I say the people that talk the most... yet also defend themself the most. I know this works against me... but I think that the more you talk and the more you defend yourself... you're just trying to "pass the buck."
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 14:17:03 GMT -5
Yeah, but if you continue to spread that viewpoint, you force people to not speak up for fear of incriminating themselves. And if we do things that way we're forced to nominate based on guesswork and waste our chances to lynch - which we won't get many of with this small a group.
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 14:19:07 GMT -5
Also, Cern, two points. 1. I only had ONE vote, from Sabon. WK never actually switched, nor did Presto. Until you switched, thus betraying your own code of conduct and letting Nigromante get off scott free. (and as WK's pointed out, Mante's an unknown factor) 2. Isn't it nice how you make both of us suspicious and then turn on me as soon as I make an argument for narrowing down Mafia canidates? Comeone... if one of us survives... we still win! I'm just trying to get them off my back now. WK already knows we're in this together! ... Anyway... I'm just kidding! I think we should keep the vote spread and wait for them to strike. Obviously the people who are good at arguing (WK, Rinjo, me, you) and convincing others will be the first to go... mark my words!
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 14:19:51 GMT -5
Oh yeah, Chuck, I mean, I know that.
I'm just hoping to take you down first.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Oct 27, 2008 14:24:32 GMT -5
Chuck does have kind of a point though. If we're just accepting that we're running a good chance of eliminating one of our own, but its a calculated risk... we should agree on targeting one specific individual, and we should have reason for doing so. You've proven yourself clever, which makes you a liability if you're mafia.
The biggest reason I haven't changed my vote yet just to try to get closer to a majority here (you sold me on the idea that we're better off killing someone, even if we're wrong) is because Chuck seems awfully adamant.
On the other hand, if I were in the mafia, I'd point fingers at my allies in a situation like this too... especially given a consensus seems completely unlikely at this point.
Here is what I propose. IF Chuck and Thuellai are both mafia, they're taking a calculated gamble here. If only one or the other is mafia, then we have no real way of knowing which one is. Seems like the reasonable thing to do is reach for the best consensus (right now, Thuellai is closest to having 7 votes) and lynch him. Next round we can reassess, but if nothing obvious presents itself, Chuck should be the next most favorable target. If they're taking a gamble by accusing one another as they have, then we get two of the (potentially) 5 mafiosi in the first two days. If only one of them is, chances are 50/50 that we'll eliminate one by killing Thuellai. Who the mafia chooses to victimize might shine some light on things afterward as well...
I'm really torn here. I had a gameplan (kill the quiet people!) and Thuellai's argument to kill 'mante fits well with that (and he's right in pointing out that until Chuck changed his vote, 'mante had the most votes...). However, it seems as if the logic weighs toward killing Thuellai now.
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 14:25:23 GMT -5
Oh yeah, Chuck, I mean, I know that. I'm just hoping to take you down first. LOL! I'm just playing guys! I can't take my vote and change it! It honestly goes against my being. They always tell you on multiple choice tests to always go with your first guess. So... Unlynch/Thuellai Lynch/Negromante ;D I just wanna see someone lynched! ;D
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Oct 27, 2008 14:27:48 GMT -5
So are we going to try to make a majority decision and target Negromante here?
Argh! Of course Thu and Chuck's "back and forth" could all be designed to keep us guessing and keep their "made man' butts un-lynched!!! *grumbles*
Okay. Here goes. Because my original gameplan was to kill the quiet folk, and because Thu has sold me on the idea that we get the biggest benefit out of killing somebody, irrespective of whether its one of us or one of them...
Unlynch/hero2490 Lynch/Negromante
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 14:29:31 GMT -5
Chuck does have kind of a point though. If we're just accepting that we're running a good chance of eliminating one of our own, but its a calculated risk... we should agree on targeting one specific individual, and we should have reason for doing so. You've proven yourself clever, which makes you a liability if you're mafia. The biggest reason I haven't changed my vote yet just to try to get closer to a majority here (you sold me on the idea that we're better off killing someone, even if we're wrong) is because Chuck seems awfully adamant. On the other hand, if I were in the mafia, I'd point fingers at my allies in a situation like this too... especially given a consensus seems completely unlikely at this point. Here is what I propose. IF Chuck and Thuellai are both mafia, they're taking a calculated gamble here. If only one or the other is mafia, then we have no real way of knowing which one is. Seems like the reasonable thing to do is reach for the best consensus (right now, Thuellai is closest to having 7 votes) and lynch him. Next round we can reassess, but if nothing obvious presents itself, Chuck should be the next most favorable target. If they're taking a gamble by accusing one another as they have, then we get two of the (potentially) 5 mafiosi in the first two days. If only one of them is, chances are 50/50 that we'll eliminate one by killing Thuellai. Who the mafia chooses to victimize might shine some light on things afterward as well... I'm really torn here. I had a gameplan (kill the quiet people!) and Thuellai's argument to kill 'mante fits well with that (and he's right in pointing out that until Chuck changed his vote, 'mante had the most votes...). However, it seems as if the logic weighs toward killing Thuellai now. Mark my words. You will be one of the the first to go.. because you are very good at convincing people in arguments!
|
|
|
Post by Cernunnos on Oct 27, 2008 14:31:30 GMT -5
So are we going to try to make a majority decision and target Negromante here? Argh! Of course Thu and Chuck's "back and forth" could all be designed to keep us guessing and keep their "made man' butts un-lynched!!! *grumbles* Okay. Here goes. Because my original gameplan was to kill the quiet folk, and because Thu has sold me on the idea that we get the biggest benefit out of killing somebody, irrespective of whether its one of us or one of them... Unlynch/hero2490 Lynch/NegromanteI feel real bad... dude hasn't even got on yet, and already he's halfway lynched.
|
|
|
Post by Thuellai on Oct 27, 2008 14:31:20 GMT -5
He's got a point - You're a good debater, you're making some excellent points, you're receptive to logic, and you're quick to decide and point out who you suspect.
Where I come from, that adds up to "target", WK. 'Course, you can't un-post.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Oct 27, 2008 14:35:10 GMT -5
You know, Chuck, the arguments you make for killing me also apply to you. Also, I don't have "Scorpion Clan" in my signature. You're actually right... I can pretty much bet that the following people; myself, Chuck, Thuellai, and rinjo (Asmodeus isn't in this thing???) are all going to outsmart ourselves, and end up dead quickly.
|
|