|
Post by Stinky Pete on Sept 18, 2013 12:31:24 GMT -8
I know I'm new, but I tend to agree with Annie, odds are that whoever is chosen is most likely going to be a diplomat, seeing as there are 17 of them. I'd rather vote for someone who isn't posting at this point seeing as how they aren't participating and if they're a spy, then it's just as good a chance as someone else who is active. Why are you all missing the point here? The vote isn't punitive anymore, it's just a valuable piece of information (or a spy-killer) that we have to make the most of. Someone who never tries to convince people of things is the worst person to be revealed as a Diplomat
|
|
Amer
Super Person
My super power is tremendous wealth.
Posts: 372
|
Post by Amer on Sept 18, 2013 12:34:17 GMT -8
I don't see why you're casting it as a campaign "against" you. I'm pretty sure the polygraph test has no needles, and if you're a Diplomat it just means everyone will listen to you because you're trustworthy If you don't see how it's a campaign against me, then you didn't read my post. If being tested isn't a problem, then why haven't you volunteered?
|
|
|
Post by Stinky Pete on Sept 18, 2013 12:40:03 GMT -8
I don't see why you're casting it as a campaign "against" you. I'm pretty sure the polygraph test has no needles, and if you're a Diplomat it just means everyone will listen to you because you're trustworthy If you don't see how it's a campaign against me, then you didn't read my post. If being tested isn't a problem, then why haven't you volunteered? I'm saying that "against" seems like an odd choice of words considering being polygraphed as a Diplomat puts you in an enormous position to sway votes, even if your lack of immunity means the spies decide to kill you, and you really seem to enjoy going crazy analytic on us. I haven't volunteered because I didn't think the volunteer thing was a good strategy, though I'll go along with it for Tulley if enough people are on the bandwagon. But as I've said before, my opinion is still that your polygraph would give us the highest value of information. You know, until I'm blessed with the wisdom of the shoe-spirit, my favorite drink in the whole wide world
|
|
Amer
Super Person
My super power is tremendous wealth.
Posts: 372
|
Post by Amer on Sept 18, 2013 12:49:30 GMT -8
I'm saying that "against" seems like an odd choice of words considering being polygraphed as a Diplomat puts you in an enormous position to sway votes, even if your lack of immunity means the spies decide to kill you, and you really seem to enjoy going crazy analytic on us. I haven't volunteered because I didn't think the volunteer thing was a good strategy, though I'll go along with it for Tulley if enough people are on the bandwagon. But as I've said before, my opinion is still that your polygraph would give us the highest value of information. You know, until I'm blessed with the wisdom of the shoe-spirit, my favorite drink in the whole wide world Ah. I misinterpreted that previous post. I thought you were asking my opinion of the matter, not suggesting that I get put on the chopping block. I'm curious, when did you and Zac decide to target me?
|
|
Annie McClarabow
Super Person
Owner of "All-Night Library"
Pay your library tab, errr I mean fines
Posts: 531
|
Post by Annie McClarabow on Sept 18, 2013 12:59:48 GMT -8
Labeling anyone as a villain this early is without any grounds. Nothing suspicious has happened.
We can try Farrell's strategy - nominate someone who contributes a little to the boards. Not the big talkers or the totally silent but someone in between. I'd be more comfortable with that than with risking a good player as spy bait.
|
|
|
Post by Stinky Pete on Sept 18, 2013 13:16:33 GMT -8
Labeling anyone as a villain this early is without any grounds. Nothing suspicious has happened. That's my point. You don't have to think someone is a spy to vote for them, you just have to want to know about them. If a low-talker turns out to be a spy, that's great, but for the first vote of the game, a smooth-talker's identity could be invaluable in the long run. That's why I had Amer in mind practically from the day I read the new rules. I want to see him revealed as a Diplomat because he makes lots of incisive arguments that I don't want to have to take the effort to weigh out and doubt. As I said, cuts into my drunken shoe-search time
|
|
Amer
Super Person
My super power is tremendous wealth.
Posts: 372
|
Post by Amer on Sept 18, 2013 13:40:45 GMT -8
Labeling anyone as a villain this early is without any grounds. Nothing suspicious has happened. That's my point. You don't have to think someone is a spy to vote for them, you just have to want to know about them. If a low-talker turns out to be a spy, that's great, but for the first vote of the game, a smooth-talker's identity could be invaluable in the long run. That's why I had Amer in mind practically from the day I read the new rules. I want to see him revealed as a Diplomat because he makes lots of incisive arguments that I don't want to have to take the effort to weigh out and doubt. As I said, cuts into my drunken shoe-search time It's a theoretically valid point. However, since I'm the one who came up with that new rule, I'm quite familiar with it, and as others have pointed out, it's clearly in the best interests of the spies to kill any revealed diplomats. The problem with your plan is that it suggests that we test all the best players first, and it's in the best interest of the spies to kill anyone who survives the test. So, we'll very quickly end up with a bunch of dead, good players who can't vote for anything. It's a perfect situation for the spies. That makes you sound very suspicious — especially since you haven't volunteered yourself. There's a reason why we've always killed off the inactives first. A game with a bunch of non-players isn't much of a game.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Wednesday on Sept 18, 2013 13:55:36 GMT -8
it's clearly in the best interests of the spies to kill any revealed diplomats. What's wrong with my idea regarding this? Nominate someone active and if they are diplomat, we try to fix it so they win protection the next week. Solves both sides of the issue. Sure, they might eventually be targeted, but that's like 2 weeks of yelling away and if we get a spy the next week, we protect them again. Like the targeting actives, the only people truly opposed to this would be spies since the protection contests are their only real safety so us fixing those best we can hurts them the most.
|
|
|
Post by Stinky Pete on Sept 18, 2013 14:14:01 GMT -8
There's a reason why we've always killed off the inactives first. A game with a bunch of non-players isn't much of a game. Do you really think the spies are going to kill an inactive Diplomat just because they got polygraphed? I like Zac's immunity help idea. Plus they still get another vote before/if the spies decide to kill them
|
|
Annie McClarabow
Super Person
Owner of "All-Night Library"
Pay your library tab, errr I mean fines
Posts: 531
|
Post by Annie McClarabow on Sept 18, 2013 14:19:36 GMT -8
How can you guarantee protection? Some of the immunity challenges are based on dumb luck. I think it's more likely than not that our first polygraph will likely be a diplomat - there are more of us than there are spies/assassin. And it's a foregone conclusion that that diplomat will be dead within a week or sooner. Sure, dead diplomats can strategize but it's not fun or useful to the group when you can't vote due to early demise.
So asking someone to willingly go on the block isn't exactly appealing when it spells certain doom and an early end to the game.
|
|
|
Post by Son Anheuser on Sept 18, 2013 14:23:14 GMT -8
So again, the spies know who they are. Everyone else is either a diplomat or the assassin. If I were the spies I would target the strongest players who I knew were not spies. Spies don't need the polygraph for that. It would give the spies a greater chance of winning immunity.
Bu as diplomats we have no information and the poly can only help us determine who is definitely a diplomat. As the poly vote does not automatically kill the person, as the votes did in games past, this does change the nature of the vote a bit.
|
|
|
Post by Son Anheuser on Sept 18, 2013 14:26:48 GMT -8
How can you guarantee protection? Some of the immunity challenges are based on dumb luck. I think it's more likely than not that our first polygraph will likely be a diplomat - there are more of us than there are spies/assassin. And it's a foregone conclusion that that diplomat will be dead within a week or sooner. Sure, dead diplomats can strategize but it's not fun or useful to the group when you can't vote due to early demise. So asking someone to willingly go on the block isn't exactly appealing when it spells certain doom and an early end to the game. But the spies would be trying to get the assassin and the assassin would be trying to get the spies first wouldn't they? I would be. 17 diplomats running around may eventually get a spy or the assassin, but the real danger to each of those groups is the other. I think.
|
|
Annie McClarabow
Super Person
Owner of "All-Night Library"
Pay your library tab, errr I mean fines
Posts: 531
|
Post by Annie McClarabow on Sept 18, 2013 14:28:16 GMT -8
So again, the spies know who they are. Everyone else is either a diplomat or the assassin. If I were the spies I would target the strongest players who I knew were not spies. Spies don't need the polygraph for that. It would give the spies a greater chance of winning immunity. Bu as diplomats we have no information and the poly can only help us determine who is definitely a diplomat. As the poly vote does not automatically kill the person, as the votes did in games past, this does change the nature of the vote a bit. While I enjoy a good analysis, it would be helpful if you actually proposed or supported a plan.
|
|
Super Sarah
Super Person
Dancer
Mildtropolis: safe from Coronavirus but the crowd will kill you!
Posts: 381
|
Post by Super Sarah on Sept 18, 2013 14:35:44 GMT -8
Labeling anyone as a villain this early is without any grounds. Nothing suspicious has happened. That's why I had Amer in mind practically from the day I read the new rules. I want to see him revealed as a Diplomat because he makes lots of incisive arguments that I don't want to have to take the effort to weigh out and doubt. As I said, cuts into my drunken shoe-search time I know right?! I'm disappointed that Amer thinks I couldn't have figured out the challenge. I think he's just jealous.
|
|
|
Post by Son Anheuser on Sept 18, 2013 14:39:03 GMT -8
So again, the spies know who they are. Everyone else is either a diplomat or the assassin. If I were the spies I would target the strongest players who I knew were not spies. Spies don't need the polygraph for that. It would give the spies a greater chance of winning immunity. Bu as diplomats we have no information and the poly can only help us determine who is definitely a diplomat. As the poly vote does not automatically kill the person, as the votes did in games past, this does change the nature of the vote a bit. While I enjoy a good analysis, it would be helpful if you actually proposed or supported a plan. I am saddened you are not enjoying my inner monologue. I would propose we vote for the strongest players. Remove the doubt. yes there is a chance the spies or assassin will go after them as well but they already know that player is likely a diplomat so our vote for that person can only help us as diplomats gain information we did not have. if we happen to capture an assassin or spy, all the better. If not, at least we know. Please, blow holes in my plan at your leisure.
|
|
Amer
Super Person
My super power is tremendous wealth.
Posts: 372
|
Post by Amer on Sept 18, 2013 14:53:47 GMT -8
it's clearly in the best interests of the spies to kill any revealed diplomats. What's wrong with my idea regarding this? Nominate someone active and if they are diplomat, we try to fix it so they win protection the next week. Solves both sides of the issue. Sure, they might eventually be targeted, but that's like 2 weeks of yelling away and if we get a spy the next week, we protect them again. Like the targeting actives, the only people truly opposed to this would be spies since the protection contests are their only real safety so us fixing those best we can hurts them the most. 1) It's not easy to fix a challenge, and you rarely even have the option to do so. 2) Of course, they're going to kill them the following week. At best, you'll have one voting confirmed-diplomat per week, as they keep killing them off. 3) What are you even attempting to gain by putting powerful diplomats in a position to be killed, week after week? Honestly, this is like a mirror of the Salem witch hunts. Let's vote for the better players. If they're innocent, they'll die a good Christian death!So again, the spies know who they are. Everyone else is either a diplomat or the assassin. If I were the spies I would target the strongest players who I knew were not spies. Spies don't need the polygraph for that. It would give the spies a greater chance of winning immunity. Bu as diplomats we have no information and the poly can only help us determine who is definitely a diplomat. As the poly vote does not automatically kill the person, as the votes did in games past, this does change the nature of the vote a bit. If I'm a spy, here's what I'd be thinking: - There's roughly a 1 in 4 chance that the group randomly votes for a spy
- There's roughly a 1 in 4 chance that the assassin kills a spy
- If my math is right, that's around a 45% chance that a spy is dying the first week, and it gets worse each week.
However, if the spies convince everyone to vote for a diplomat, they can guarantee that there's only a 25% chance that a spy gets killed, and there's even a chance that they could snare the assassin. Convincing the people to vote for a diplomat is a win-win for the spies. They get to kill a diplomat or the assassin, and they don't have to worry about being voted out. And, yet again, I have to point out that the people who are pushing to kill an active player, are not nominating themselves.
|
|
|
Post by bigsexy on Sept 18, 2013 14:53:57 GMT -8
Hmmm Well, I was all for voting Stabby off first, but reading this has gotten me thinking. I think Neutrino is right, to an extent. I think that a known diplomat is pretty useless to the spies, but if it's an inactive player who is shown to be a diplomat, the spies have less to worry about because they aren't swaying other people's votes down the road. Being revealed as a diplomat gains you trust from the other diplomats, and that's only dangerous to the spies, if the person who is revealed is actively looking for spies. Of course, this puts an even larger target on the diplomats back, but if I were a spy, I'd want to get rid of the ones that are more active. They'd be the ones that are more likely to figure out who is a spy, than an inactive player. The only reason I've been inactive till now is because I had to work all weekend and haven't really had much to contribute till now. I'm sure I will once we get more into the game, if I survive that long.
|
|
Farrell
Super Person
Bureau of Investigation Agent
Posts: 398
|
Post by Farrell on Sept 18, 2013 14:54:50 GMT -8
Voting for an inactive helps the spies Specifically naming who you are v oting for in the forums helps the spies Voting for someone who you think is a diplomat but want to be sure helps the spies
Voting for someone you think is a spy, helps the diplomats
I know who im voting for and have told two others. Ill tell more but if the spies kill my target then the people i told are my next suspects.
|
|
Annie McClarabow
Super Person
Owner of "All-Night Library"
Pay your library tab, errr I mean fines
Posts: 531
|
Post by Annie McClarabow on Sept 18, 2013 15:07:01 GMT -8
But what has anyone done that is spy like? I should probably just shut up now. I'm useless on painkillers.
|
|
|
Post by Son Anheuser on Sept 18, 2013 15:13:25 GMT -8
[glow=red,2,300]However, if the spies convince everyone to vote for a diplomat, they can guarantee that there's only a 25% chance that a spy gets killed, and there's even a chance that they could snare the assassin.Convincing the people to vote for a diplomat is a win-win for the spies. They get to kill a diplomat or the assassin, and they don't have to worry about being voted out.[/glow]
There's the hole I was looking for. Yes that does give the spies something, but the diplomats need information more than anyone else. Does that possible advantage to the spies negate the benefit the diplomats have by gaining some information?
|
|