[Sorrit]

Trake, on 01 February 2017 - 05:44 PM, said:

I'm wondering now, why would Alkend and Gameleon stick their necks out to defend Omtose? Did they really want a 10 AP person walking around determining the winner of this game?

At this stage they were far from "determining the winner of the game". What's the exaggeration for?

[Kessobahn]

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 05:52 PM, said:

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 05:26 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

This is going to be tricky now. On one hand I want to dig into that train to try to find the alts that didn't actually count towards the vote. On the other hand we have several barbarians around that would have the potential to add weight to their votes so it's going to be near impossible to sort that out.

The fact that we were supposed to only need 7 votes but it took 9 suggests that there can't have been many barbarians on the train. Either that or Omtose had some kind of ability that meant it took more votes that normal to lynch him.

Not necessarily. We know that there were 10 actual players to 15 alts at the bedding of all of this. We also know that of the 10 real alts 4 are/were barbarians with heavy votes - I'm assuming a barb's vote had the potential to count for 2. Now Redshirt didn't self-vote so we can guess up to 3 barbs MAY have been on the train. That means that with their 6 votes, they'd only need one other real alt to join them for the lynch leaving us with a POTENTIAL 5 false alts on the train.

Or 2 barbs and 3 false alts.

Or 1 barb and...

And that isn't even taking any other classes vote-altering potential shenanigans into account.

I think Mockra has a point. According to Mafia 131:

For Barbarians:
"Rage (Free Day or Night Action) Cost - 0 AP: If you use this during the Day, your votes count as two votes, however you will not be able to use Night Actions while you recover. If you use this during the night, you take half damage from weapons, but your votes will not count during the next Day cycle (you can place votes, and they'll be added to the vote count on thread, but they will not count towards the total votes needed). You may use this ability as a free action."

and Warlocks can have:
"Minions of Chaos (Passive): You may not choose this invocation if you are a regular faction member. At the beginning of the game, you summon one or more elementals as follows: 1) One elemental whose votes count and who has one BP. This elemental DOES affect the number of votes needed to lynch someone. 2) Two elementals whose votes do not count and who have a BP. These elementals DO affect the number of votes necessary to lynch someone. 3) Four elementals whose votes do not count. These elementals DO NOT count towards the total number of votes needed to lynch someone. For alts whose votes do not count, the alts can vote, but their votes won't count towards a lynch. You will be given a number of additional alts equal to the number of elementals that you summon. All elementals have 1 HP. A BP prevents all forms of damage for one night cycle."

I'm not sure what other roles could have abilities like this, but my guess is that the vote counts mean that some of the extra alts are able to vote.

[Trake]

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 06:16 PM, said:

Trake, on 01 February 2017 - 05:44 PM, said:

I'm wondering now, why would Alkend and Gameleon stick their necks out to defend Omtose? Did they really want a 10 AP person walking around determining the winner of this game?

At this stage they were far from "determining the winner of the game". What's the exaggeration for?

Their defense was literally " The Survivor will determine the winner of the game when everyone is voting in block. I don't want him dead."

[Lock]

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 05:26 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

This is going to be tricky now. On one hand I want to dig into that train to try to find the alts that didn't actually count towards the vote. On the other hand we have several barbarians around that would have the potential to add weight to their votes so it's going to be near impossible to sort that out.

The fact that we were supposed to only need 7 votes but it took 9 suggests that there can't have been many barbarians on the train. Either that or Omtose had some kind of ability that meant it took more votes that normal to lynch him.

I assume (unsafely) that the Survivor needed more than the normal number of votes to be lynched, as that just sounds like a survivor trait. Obviously that still doesn't preclude any number of possible double and non-voting voting going on, as well.

[Alkend]

Trake, on 01 February 2017 - 06:28 PM, said:

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 06:16 PM, said:

Trake, on 01 February 2017 - 05:44 PM, said:

I'm wondering now, why would Alkend and Gameleon stick their necks out to defend Omtose? Did they really want a 10 AP person walking around determining the winner of this game?

At this stage they were far from "determining the winner of the game". What's the exaggeration for?

Their defense was literally " The Survivor will determine the winner of the game when everyone is voting in block. I don't want him dead."

Survivor was able to break no-lynches. If your leader says something extremely retarded on thread and everyone else piles on can we lynch them? Not for sure without either other faction member piling on. That's a shit place to be in. Once there is blood in the water we can culture hunt. Till then this is day one again just with one less counting vote. 7 to lynch and 9 players.

[Alkend]

Lock, on 01 February 2017 - 06:40 PM, said:

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 05:26 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

This is going to be tricky now. On one hand I want to dig into that train to try to find the alts that didn't actually count towards the vote. On the other hand we have several barbarians around that would have the potential to add weight to their votes so it's going to be near impossible to sort that out.

The fact that we were supposed to only need 7 votes but it took 9 suggests that there can't have been many barbarians on the train. Either that or Omtose had some kind of ability that meant it took more votes that normal to lynch him.

I assume (unsafely) that the Survivor needed more than the normal number of votes to be lynched, as that just sounds like a survivor trait. Obviously that still doesn't preclude any number of possible double and non-voting voting going on, as well.

That's a BS scenario. If the survivor needs "more" they get a LP.

They're a survivor. They shouldn't need a LP.

[Alkend]

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

This is going to be tricky now. On one hand I want to dig into that train to try to find the alts that didn't actually count towards the vote. On the other hand we have several barbarians around that would have the potential to add weight to their votes so it's going to be near impossible to sort that out.

How exactly were you going to look for those that didn't count off of a single vote train?

[Mockra]

Alkend, on 01 February 2017 - 07:41 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

This is going to be tricky now. On one hand I want to dig into that train to try to find the alts that didn't actually count towards the vote. On the other hand we have several barbarians around that would have the potential to add weight to their votes so it's going to be near impossible to sort that out.

How exactly were you going to look for those that didn't count off of a single vote train?

Stop being dense and read the rest of the page. I clearly laid it or that I think digging into the vote train will be nearly useless due to unprovable variables.

[Mockra]

I'm around if you lurkers actually feel like chatting.

[Telas]

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

[Kessobahn]

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

Interesting point. Will have to read him over.

[Sorrit]

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 08:50 PM, said:

I'm around if you lurkers actually feel like chatting.

Where's your chatting mood?

[Alkend]

Bek Tulas and Pallid have 5 or less posts each so far.

Vote Pallid

[Mockra]

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

Ah, but that third is key. I don't want to aim blindly and hit the member I don't know. Would you want to take that risk, or would you rather try to fill in your blind spot?

[Mockra]

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 09:30 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 08:50 PM, said:

I'm around if you lurkers actually feel like chatting.

Where's your chatting mood?

And I'm still here. Don't stress.

[Sorrit]

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:05 PM, said:

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

Ah, but that third is key. I don't want to aim blindly and hit the member I don't know. Would you want to take that risk, or would you rather try to fill in your blind spot?

The point is that odds that you hit your fellow are 1:7. Those are some very good odds by mafia standards.

[Mockra]

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 10:09 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:05 PM, said:

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

Ah, but that third is key. I don't want to aim blindly and hit the member I don't know. Would you want to take that risk, or would you rather try to fill in your blind spot?

The point is that odds that you hit your fellow are 1:7. Those are some very good odds by mafia standards.

Yeah, that's decent. It's still a 3 way split at the moment though and even with that 1:7 I'd rather try to fill in the blanks then risk putting my team at a disadvantage.

At the same time, you're wrong about the odds. (Never tell me the odds!) I do know my leader, but that leaves me 12 other alts floating around. That also assumes that I'm not a puppeteer and that I'm on the bonehunters which is the only team that would actually be likely to not have puppet alts running around. None of which am I prepared to confirm or deny at this point.

[Kessobahn]

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:21 PM, said:

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 10:09 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:05 PM, said:

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

Ah, but that third is key. I don't want to aim blindly and hit the member I don't know. Would you want to take that risk, or would you rather try to fill in your blind spot?

The point is that odds that you hit your fellow are 1:7. Those are some very good odds by mafia standards.

Yeah, that's decent. It's still a 3 way split at the moment though and even with that 1:7 I'd rather try to fill in the blanks then risk putting my team at a disadvantage.

At the same time, you're wrong about the odds. (Never tell me the odds!) I do know my leader, but that leaves me 12 other alts floating around. That also assumes that I'm not a puppeteer and that I'm on the bonehunters which is the only team that would actually be likely to not have puppet alts running around. None of which am I prepared to confirm or deny at this point.

According to the op, the Bonehunters leader is a rock gnome, which the information thread states has a clockwork toy (puppet alt) as it's racial ability. Of course you wouldn't be deliberately avoiding that fact, would you?

[Sorrit]

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:21 PM, said:

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 10:09 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:05 PM, said:

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

Ah, but that third is key. I don't want to aim blindly and hit the member I don't know. Would you want to take that risk, or would you rather try to fill in your blind spot?

The point is that odds that you hit your fellow are 1:7. Those are some very good odds by mafia standards.

Yeah, that's decent. It's still a 3 way split at the moment though and even with that 1:7 I'd rather try to fill in the blanks then risk putting my team at a disadvantage.

At the same time, you're wrong about the odds. (Never tell me the odds!) I do know my leader, but that leaves me 12 other alts floating around. That also assumes that I'm not a puppeteer and that I'm on the bonehunters which is the only team that would actually be likely to not have puppet alts running around. None of which am I prepared to confirm or deny at this point.

It's 1:7 if you consider the fake alts are evenly (impossible, I know) laid out between the teams and you are master of none of them.

It sounds like your abilities are capable of creating some quite significant advantages/disadvantages for your team and that if you're not a leader you believe that number of those fake alts are in your team. I don't believe this behaviour of yours is based on the default odds with unknown variables, looks like there's something additional you do or do not know.

[Mockra]

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 10:38 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:21 PM, said:

Sorrit, on 01 February 2017 - 10:09 PM, said:

Mockra, on 01 February 2017 - 10:05 PM, said:

Telas, on 01 February 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

Just looking back over the train section, and this stood out.

Mockra, on 31 January 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

I was thinking partly along similar lines as Sorrit here.

The other thing that I have on my mind is that I don't have a full idea of who is on my team. The information we have as players is limited. The way that I can find out the information I'm missing is by getting other players to speak up and start interacting with one another and analyzing their interactions.

There's a reason why I posed it as a question rather than an accusation or vote.

Followers know most of the players in their faction already (their leader plus themself is 2 out of 3). Their concern is finding the leaders of opposing factions. But leaders don't know anything about their team. They are the ones who worry that they 'don't have a full idea who is on their team'. Mockra's priority is finding his own team, and that screams leader to me.

Ah, but that third is key. I don't want to aim blindly and hit the member I don't know. Would you want to take that risk, or would you rather try to fill in your blind spot?

The point is that odds that you hit your fellow are 1:7. Those are some very good odds by mafia standards.

Yeah, that's decent. It's still a 3 way split at the moment though and even with that 1:7 I'd rather try to fill in the blanks then risk putting my team at a disadvantage.

At the same time, you're wrong about the odds. (Never tell me the odds!) I do know my leader, but that leaves me 12 other alts floating around. That also assumes that I'm not a puppeteer and that I'm on the bonehunters which is the only team that would actually be likely to not have puppet alts running around. None of which am I prepared to confirm or deny at this point.

It's 1:7 if you consider the fake alts are evenly (impossible, I know) laid out between the teams and you are master of none of them.

It sounds like your abilities are capable of creating some quite significant advantages/disadvantages for your team and that if you're not a leader you believe that number of those fake alts are in your team. I don't believe this behaviour of yours is based on the default odds with unknown variables, looks like there's something additional you do or do not know.

Don't put words into my mouth here. I don't have any more information than you do. I was simply pointing out that your math was flawed because you were failing to account for the variables.

That was a good spot about the BH leader Kesso. I'd completely overlooked the gnome ability because they fail to appeal to me.