Re: ESPIONAGE: Round Six (Detective & Civilians win!)

[Nemomon]

1) Yeah, that's just a theory. It might be that the informants already managed to complete their order, and therefore they're among the players who posted so far, or they ignored the order and wait for a better time to complete it - time when much more players will start to discuss.

2) Yeah, the Spy might know that trying to find the informants during the first phase/round might be dangerous, because not so many people are talking, but he also knows that sooner or later they will have to take a part in discussion, and in that time it will be much easier to cover the order. Which pretty much can be anything. The order could even be like "join Nemo in his spams about English" or something like that - in other words the order doesn't need to be to write specific words, but just to behave somehow.But I think I don't have to mention that since among the players only I am the fresh one, and the rest are veterans.

[MoonRaven]

Hmm... I might not vote for anyone today. No comments on Togop's suggestion.

[Kaito Lady]

*comes into the thread after a day*

wha-?

*will vote randomly*

[Stopwatch]

Here's what I think. If the Spy went for the "include those two words in your first post", then Togop rules might work.
But! Togop rules are.. impractical. For Americans, it may work, but foreigners, it might be tricky to rephrase their post.

In any case, if an informant must use certain word in their post, it's a good strategy. Why? Even without Togop rules, the post that must include specific words will sound strange, more or less.
Being restricted even further, they'll either fail to idenfity themselves, either the order will be obvious.

I won't say whether I'm for or against just yet.

Not to derail, but wouldn't it be better to say "native English-speakers" rather than "Americans", and so on?

[bash7353]

Day 1 has started several hours ago. If the goal is to prevent the Spy from learning the Informants' identities, I think we're a bit too late.

The only thing we can do now is look for messages that might be the identification, although previous rounds have shown that it could be anything, so... I don't know.

Let's wait and see what phase change brings.

[Nemomon]

Pesonally I would ignore searching for the informants, and just think who the Spy might be. We're losing time trying to figure out the informants which nota bene aren't our primary targets, and killing them won't help us much finding the spy. In fact killing informants maybe give the spy too much time.

[dumytru]

Here's what I think. If the Spy went for the "include those two words in your first post", then Togop rules might work.
But! Togop rules are.. impractical. For Americans, it may work, but foreigners, it might be tricky to rephrase their post.

In any case, if an informant must use certain word in their post, it's a good strategy. Why? Even without Togop rules, the post that must include specific words will sound strange, more or less.
Being restricted even further, they'll either fail to idenfity themselves, either the order will be obvious.

I won't say whether I'm for or against just yet.

Not to derail, but wouldn't it be better to say "native English-speakers" rather than "Americans", and so on?

Of course.

[Stopwatch]

Pesonally I would ignore searching for the informants, and just think who the Spy might be. We're losing time trying to figure out the informants which nota bene aren't our primary targets, and killing them won't help us much finding the spy. In fact killing informants maybe give the spy too much time.

The Informants may lead back to the Spy actually. I mean, it varies somewhat, but if a lynch is on the Spy then the Informants will come to their defense and that can potentially reveal them once they flip as Informants. It could possibly work the other way round (Spy defending an Informant) but that's less likely. For this to happen though, there needs to be discussion over who to lynch which isn't really happening right now. Sorry if I've not explained that well.

Do you have a current candidate to lynch? If so, why do you want them lynched?

[Nemomon]

I'm voting for Kaito Lady. I sent my vote to Fuji-sama during the prep. phase without knowing that during it we're not voting. But I don't want to change my vote, so I keep it. Why Lady? Because when I was voting yesterday I though she's MIA or otherwise dead.

There are two kinds of evil players - one of them will not post at all and will pretend to be dead hoping that all others will forget about them, or will be active in the topic trying to look innocent, and citizens &c, so others might hesitate to vote against them.

I have decided to vote against silent players, because there's always a chance that we will hit the spy, but even if not, we still will get our fun from the discussions in the topic.

===

I hardly can believe that the spy will try to protect the informant. If anything, I would expect the spy among that players that voted against the informant. In my current Mafia game I play on another board my mafia partner already told me that he will vote against me to throw off suspicion. I expect a similar behaviour in this "mafia" games as well .

[Raiden]

Not sure what to make of Togop's suggestion right now other than I agree with dumytru's reason in that it might prove impractical in use. Need more input to make any real opinion on it.

Hmm... I might not vote for anyone today. No comments on Togop's suggestion.

The rules are very specific that you cannot abstain to vote.

Each Day phase every player, no matter what role they've been assigned, has to cast a vote for any player still alive. Whoever receives the most votes will be lynched. Specific rules:
— You may not abstain.
— You have to vote a player who is alive as of the phase the vote is cast. Voting a dead player or someone who isn't even playing is invalid. You may vote yourself.
*Snips*

[MoonRaven]

Whops. I forgot about that. I guess, I'll go with random vote then...

[Kleene Onigiri]

I think Togops rules could be used and a kinda usefull at Day 1, but afterwards, those rules are useless and would also hinder the flow of discussion. And I also agree with the points, that it's hard for non-native speakers or simply for people that are bad at writing, which would be in both point me AND I CAN'T WRITE WITHOUT EMOTICONS! I'M SORRY!!!! >_<
After day 1, those rules are useless, because if the spy didn't figure out his informants, he would just make new rules anyway with togops rules in mind. And those rules would also hinder the detective imo, since the detective won't be able to post freely and try to give hints etc.

So, as for voting, I go random I guess.

[darkest absol]

I'm voting random as well. There just isn't enough to go on this early.

[Stopwatch]

I'm voting for Kaito Lady. I sent my vote to Fuji-sama during the prep. phase without knowing that during it we're not voting. But I don't want to change my vote, so I keep it. Why Lady? Because when I was voting yesterday I though she's MIA or otherwise dead.

There are two kinds of evil players - one of them will not post at all and will pretend to be dead hoping that all others will forget about them, or will be active in the topic trying to look innocent, and citizens &c, so others might hesitate to vote against them.

I have decided to vote against silent players, because there's always a chance that we will hit the spy, but even if not, we still will get our fun from the discussions in the topic.

===

While lurkers can certainly be a problem, especially as the game goes on, my number one priority after getting the Spy is gaining information with the lynch. Who is for a lynch, who is against it, they can all be telling, but generally you only generate this kind of discussion when enough data is there to start off with. Going for lurkers doesn't really gain information and unless the Spy and Informants are busy in rl, I expect that they will want to keep relatively active so as to avoid appearing as though they're not contributing. That's more of an estimate than a certainty, I suppose.

This may not be the most accurate analysis of the situation given how the Spy-Informant relationship is different from the average Mafia team, but I think the main principles behind it are still useful.

I hardly can believe that the spy will try to protect the informant. If anything, I would expect the spy among that players that voted against the informant. In my current Mafia game I play on another board my mafia partner already told me that he will vote against me to throw off suspicion. I expect a similar behaviour in this "mafia" games as well .

I did say that I found it unlikely the Spy would try to protect their Informants anywhere near as much as the Informants would try to protect the Spy, did I not? I would find it a null tell as to whether the Spy would vote for their Informant or not, at least with an experienced Spy, but as this is only the sixth round and not everyone has played all of those anyway, I may agree that it would be more likely for the Spy to vote for their Informant. Or at least it was before we discussed this :x.

Which board, if I may ask?

[Nemomon]

I must go now, but I'm playing on the ZetaBoards support board. That's the link to the current game, but of course please do not mention to anybody what I just told You about my role, thanks. Plus, on this support board I nearly have played 50 werewolf games which more or less are the same as the mafia games.

http://if.invisionfree.com/topic/5192183/1/