Bad Idea Mafia 4! Game Over, Scum Wins!

[Sephiroths Masamune]

I want everyone's opinion of my suggestions. Which idea do you like better? Do you think we should do something different?

 

[Luxor]

I agree that the hammerer should daykill, to avoid exposing the cop/bomb. I would vote for that but that's kind of been overdone in the last ten posts.

 

[Kirbyoshi]

Vote: Hammerer daykills

 

[th3kuzinator]

confirming.

looks like i wont be quickshooting d1 <_<

 

[th3kuzinator]

and no. I will not support voting.

Just remember three things.

Bombs dont claim
To end each day, scummy people will shoot scummy people AFTER THEY CLAIM.
Anyone who quickshoots before scummy people can shoot the other scummy people is the scum godfather and will be killed as such the following day SO DON'T QUICK SHOOT.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Vote: K uz

 

[Clownbot]

Confirming.

A voting system is fine by me as well as choosing who should make the kill. I haven't read the previous BIMs except a very small portion of BIM3 when it started. I'm obviously missing something here, so I have to ask: why shouldn't bombs claim?

 

[#HBC | Dancer]

Voting for who gets killed is fine.

I have no opinion about rather or not we should vote to see who gets the gun or to just let whoever hammers do it. Thing is, with voting for who gets the gun, we have just as much chance as outing mafia as we do the bomb or cop.

So the way I see it:

voting for who gets gun:

16.5% change (as of now) of outing town.
16.5% change (as of now) of outing scum.

letting whoever hammers get the gun:

0% change of outing town
0% change of outing scum

Either way, it doesn't really matter. We can always change it upon further circumstances.

@Clown: Bomb shouldn't claim because Godfather can shoot them in a LYLO or MYLO situation and win.

 

[SummonerAU]

FML

make post, accidentally move away from page. Super condensed version go.

Confiming. Voting sounds good. More pressure on scum.

@People wanting hammer to kill: The benefits far outweigh the risks. For example, we get to see people's opinions on scum twice in a day. First time for the kill and then second time for the shot. Scum have to give us their reasons for voting two people. If the PRs do a good job, they shouldn't appear scummy enough for us to want to kill/force shoot anyway. We also get a semi-confirmed (there's more chance of the shooter actually being town than maf godfather) townie that we thought was scummy instead of just the hammerer being semi-confirmed

Vote: Sworddancer

Having no opinion and then dumping the numbers for both sides shows you either haven't thought outside of the odds or that you aren't prepared to take a stance on which one you prefer. Both of those aren't good. Please tell me what you think of what I said above.

Yes, this is super condensed.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

If we do go for the 1st idea, we have to set a few rules up.

1. We vote at the beginning of the day, that way, we're not stumbling to find who shoots at the end of the day.

2. We vote for 2 people. That way it covers our bases. If for some reason the 1st person can't shoot/refuses to shoot. We have a 2nd person to either shoot the person who doesn't shoot (depending on their claim), or shoot the person we voted on as a majority. This also works as a fail safe just in case the person who we decided to shoot the person we vote on is V/LA or away for the moment.

3. We must make this a quick short part of the day, and not dwell on it much so we can actively scum hunt for the remainder of the day.

4. If for some reason the person who is decided on as the shooter chooses not to shoot and refuses to claim. They will be shot by the 2nd person. NO EXCEPTIONS. We then proceed to shoot the person we decided on the previous Day, the next Day. We don't give them room to wiggle out from. If they were voted and lynched on the day before, we kill them the next Day.

5. If for the extreme chance the 1st AND 2nd person can't shoot. Then we have the hammerer of the lynch shoot the 1st person, or the 2nd person (depends on the claim of the 1st person), or the lynch target (depends on the claims of the 1st and 2nd people). And in the even more extreme event that the 1st person is the hammer, then we default to the next person who voted and etc.

These are all the important things that I could come up for the time being. If you guys think you have a better idea to solve this, or have more ideas to add then speak up.

 

[#HBC | Dancer]

The problem I see with your plan summoner is that you're assuming town will do good. If, for say, cop and/or bomb doesn't do well enough to the point that they're outed, then town gets screwed over.

However, ideally town should be doing well in the first place, or else they would lose anyways. So in the end I guess I'll have to say that I'm okay with your plan.

 

[July]

@Summoner: I like the idea of seeing everyone's opinion twice a day, and if we are going to make sure that scummy people shoot scummy people at the end of the Day (as Kuz suggests) voting for who daykills instead of just who hammers is the best way to do that.

@Seph: The rules/conditions you listed all seem good to me.

 

[Vult Redux]

/hi

I don't know if I will be able to contribute a good amount of time to this.

... I'll try. ;0


I'm not sure whether electing someone to kill a player is the best method since it can out power roles but I haven't thought too much about it.

 

[Vult Redux]

Voting for who gets killed is fine.

I have no opinion about rather or not we should vote to see who gets the gun or to just let whoever hammers do it. Thing is, with voting for who gets the gun, we have just as much chance as outing mafia as we do the bomb or cop.

So the way I see it:

voting for who gets gun:

16.5% change (as of now) of outing town.
16.5% change (as of now) of outing scum.

letting whoever hammers get the gun:

0% change of outing town
0% change of outing scum

Either way, it doesn't really matter. We can always change it upon further circumstances.

Well that's that!

Vote: Hammerer daykills

I'm have an inclination to this method, still.

 

[Luxor]

Stealing Ziivi's FE PoR format
votee|voters
Kuz| Sephiroth
Sworddancer| SummonerAU

How about this: every time you vote, find the last post with a votecount, and copy and paste it with the update. So if this was the last one, I'd go

vote July

and then post

votee|voters
Kuz| Sephiroth
Sworddancer| SummonerAU
July| Luxor

.

 

[Luxor]

Forgot the next to July lol

 

[July]

Kk, so Luxor, if someone has more than one vote they would have a corresponding number of these --> , right?

 

[BSL]

I dpnt get what the means.

Why not just use a table?

Im ok with seph's rules.

 

[Gova]

Vote counts are a terrible idea.

 

[Luxor]

= 1 vote, so yes @ July.

@Bsl, it's just a visual representation, it's not really a big deal. Easiest way to count votes on someone imo.

@Gova, why?

 

[BSL]

How do you propose we keep track of the votes, then?

 

[BSL]

Ah, I see.

I still want tables though. Keep the and everything, just also use tables.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Unvote

Vote: Gova

Give a valid reason as to why we shouldn't do votes. And also give me an alternative to what we should do if we don't do votes.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

votee|voters
Gova| Sephiroth
Sworddancer| SummonerAU
July| Luxor

 

[th3kuzinator]

Wanna know why seph, I am so town, nator?

Because people like me and gova can ***** about not liking the system and therefore have an excuse not to use it, giving us a free pass from making connections while others do make them. This gives scum a better selection for NKs and spreading fake WIFOM the next day from NK deaths. Kapish? Did not work in the last three BiMs and it won't in this one.

Whoever said the hammerer should be the one to shoot is scum and should die asap.

Listen up. FAKING A SHOT IS A MODKILLABLE OFFENSE.

Scenario: We have one scummy person shoot another scummy person.

1. If the person says he cannot shoot when we decide he is the shooter, he must claim a PR. If he gets CCd we decide who is lying and shoot him. If someone interrupts this process and quickshoots someone else, we know that person is the godfather trying to save a buddy.

2. If the person can shoot then they are most likely town (with a small % chance of being the godfather). If we get them to shoot another scummy player than we have DOUBLE that chance of outing scum through not being able to shoot and shooting another scummy player.

This is the way we will operate. If people don't get hasty and quickshoot people, town will win. Quickshooting has literally been the driving force behind every town BiM loss thus far.

Also, Cops don't claim unless you have a guilty and a clear. That or you deem it necessary to.

Goes without saying we no shooting someone until the person being shot claims.



Now take all that in, realize scumKuz would tell you all of this hoping to get on your good side, and then realize its bad meta and discard it. What are you left with?

townKuz.

Now lets kick some scum *** for once. kthx

 

[#HBC | Dancer]

And if anyone *****es about, then what's to keep us from assuming they're scum, and thus shooting them?

Wanna know why seph, I am so town, nator?

Because people like me and gova can ***** about not liking the system and therefore have an excuse not to use it, giving us a free pass from making connections while others do make them.

Now take all that in, realize scumKuz would tell you all of this hoping to get on your good side, and then realize its bad meta and discard it. What are you left with?

townKuz.

Vote: Kuz

These two lines did not strike a right tone with me.

 

[#HBC | Dancer]

Sorry, forgot the votecount.

votee|voters
Gova| Sephiroth
Sworddancer| SummonerAU
July| Luxor
Kuz l Sworddancer

 

[th3kuzinator]

mmmmmmmhm, explain why they don't.

Could it be the fact that I intentionally WIFOMd the possibility that I was scum twice in an attempt to make you think I was not scum?

Yeah, I bet that was it.

Nice way to skip everything I actually said and just focus on the fluff. Now tell me Swordscumder. Why have you continued to implement the stupid voting system when I myself just explained why it was dumb. If you were going to be stubborn about it, you could have at least tackled my points and tried to show me that voting was actually the best solution. Instead, you summarily dismiss my argument by focusing on the unimportant sentences and try to make it seem as if you are scum hunting. Sound about right?

If I actually believed in voting, I would be voting you right now.

 

[th3kuzinator]

And if anyone *****es about, then what's to keep us from assuming they're scum, and thus shooting them?

Because, if you had actually read anything I just wrote, QUICKSHOOTING LOSES THE GAME FOR TOWN. Just letting you know, I plan to be the one *****ing about the system until you yourself can convince me otherwise.

Voting for who gets killed is fine.

I have no opinion about rather or not we should vote to see who gets the gun or to just let whoever hammers do it. Thing is, with voting for who gets the gun, we have just as much chance as outing mafia as we do the bomb or cop.

So the way I see it:

voting for who gets gun:

16.5% change (as of now) of outing town.
16.5% change (as of now) of outing scum.

letting whoever hammers get the gun:

0% change of outing town
0% change of outing scum

Either way, it doesn't really matter. We can always change it upon further circumstances.

As if this post was not apparent enough that all his analysis is full of air and circular conclusions.

 

[Luxor]

@Kuz: The logic in your first post doesn't quite compute. You ASSUME that you and Gova will not vote no matter what- and in that scenario (I'm not going to bother with theory on it) it's highly likely that voting would be bad. If everybody votes (read: if you and Gova cooperate) then voting works out just fine, like a Good Idea game.

Your argument boils down to "I don't want to vote, therefore nobody should." Not as valid as "we should all vote and all leave trails so we can all get reads." You're pretty scummy atm.

tl;dr "don't hate, cooperate"

vote Kuz


votee|voters
Gova| Sephiroth
Sworddancer| SummonerAU
Kuz l Sworddancer / Luxor

 

[th3kuzinator]

You're pretty scummy atm.

Thats cute. At least you tried to attack my logic in some way, better than scumdancer over there.

Call me back when you can convince everyone to avidly keep up with the votecount and can successfully police everyone into not lulling behind on said votecount. All it takes is a few people to become lazy with the system and the whole things falls apart and it gives people an excuse to seem pro-town by tallying votecounts. We don't need fake contribution like that.

tl;dr "don't hate, cooperate"

I am surprised. Your actual post made more sense, why tl;dr it into something full of bull? If, at this moment, I said "oh hey, luxor you're right, I will start using the votecount" I would be cooperating and you would still call me scum because I went against one of my convictions. On the other hand, if I don't cooperate I will be called anti-town for not going with the popular option that is incorrectly perceived by many as the correct option.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Wanna know why seph, I am so town, nator?

Because people like me and gova can ***** about not liking the system and therefore have an excuse not to use it, giving us a free pass from making connections while others do make them. This gives scum a better selection for NKs and spreading fake WIFOM the next day from NK deaths. Kapish? Did not work in the last three BiMs and it won't in this one.

What makes you special? Why do you refuse to do it without laying down logic or proof of why it's wrong to do so? Saying it makes you free to **** around doesn't mean ****. If you two get to **** around all game, other people will be think why the hell do we have to do it too? Your pretty much screwing town over, not helping it.

Whoever said the hammerer should be the one to shoot is scum and should die asap.

Listen up. FAKING A SHOT IS A MODKILLABLE OFFENSE.

Scenario: We have one scummy person shoot another scummy person.

1. If the person says he cannot shoot when we decide he is the shooter, he must claim a PR. If he gets CCd we decide who is lying and shoot him. If someone interrupts this process and quickshoots someone else, we know that person is the godfather trying to save a buddy.

2. If the person can shoot then they are most likely town (with a small % chance of being the godfather). If we get them to shoot another scummy player than we have DOUBLE that chance of outing scum through not being able to shoot and shooting another scummy player.

This is the way we will operate. If people don't get hasty and quickshoot people, town will win. Quickshooting has literally been the driving force behind every town BiM loss thus far.

Also, Cops don't claim unless you have a guilty and a clear. That or you deem it necessary to.

Goes without saying we no shooting someone until the person being shot claims.

You do realize that these points work with voting right? And it's not even that, they even work better with voting.

Voting doesn't just bring stability to an obviously chaotic game, it also helps tracks everyone's scum reads. Votes are solid and once put down are forever down. Do you know how easy it is to change a stance? Or to make it seem as if everyone was just "confused" by your words? Well, it's a hell of a lot more easier to do without votes backing you up on every step of the way.

Votes are in mafia games for a reason, and by not implementing it, we put town in a serious disadvantage.

Now take all that in, realize scumKuz would tell you all of this hoping to get on your good side, and then realize its bad meta and discard it. What are you left with?

townKuz.

Now lets kick some scum *** for once. kthx

Why are you even telling us this? I mean are we really asking if your scum or not 1 day into the game? No. So why the hell are you telling us that this is town kuz not scum? I think I recall you once saying that town shouldn't think about how to look more town. And should focus on looking for scum.

Unvote

Vote: Kuz

votee|voters
Sworddancer| SummonerAU
July| Luxor
Kuz l Sworddancer Sephiroth

Btw Gova, I still want that answered.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Wow super ninja'd! I made this at the time there was only #68.

 

[th3kuzinator]

If you can convince everyone else in this game to accept the votecount method, I will reconsider it. Gova included.

My scum shoot scum thing still stands.

 

[th3kuzinator]

I think I recall you once saying that town shouldn't think about how to look more town. And should focus on looking for scum.

And? When was I trying to appear more town? I just simply told you my alignment.

You do realize you are doing the same thing I accused Swords of doing yes? Focus on the fluff sentences and finding them as an excuse to vote me. Are you voting me because of that, or because of my reluctance to implement the stupid votecounts?

 

[Luxor]

Thats cute. At least you tried to attack my logic in some way, better than scumdancer over there.

Call me back when you can convince everyone to avidly keep up with the votecount and can successfully police everyone into not lulling behind on said votecount. All it takes is a few people to become lazy with the system and the whole things falls apart and it gives people an excuse to seem pro-town by tallying votecounts. We don't need fake contribution like that.

I am surprised. Your actual post made more sense, why tl;dr it into something full of bull? If, at this moment, I said "oh hey, luxor you're right, I will start using the votecount" I would be cooperating and you would still call me scum because I went against one of my convictions. On the other hand, if I don't cooperate I will be called anti-town for not going with the popular option that is incorrectly perceived by many as the correct option.

The second half I don't really get, but the first half is adequate and true. You correctly say that the problem with a voluntary voting system is when people start to ignore it or game it or otherwise abuse it. However, I'd like to at least attempt to use a voting system and try to get it to work. If it works, great; if it doesn't, we don't lose anything. That sound fine to you?

fixed this btw
votee|voters
Sworddancer| SummonerAU
Kuz l Sworddancer Sephiroth Luxor

 

[Luxor]

Also @Gova, answer Seph.

And I need to think about scum-shoot-scum for a minute.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

And? When was I trying to appear more town? I just simply told you my alignment.

But what's the point of even telling us that? Is there even substance for your reasoning?

You do realize you are doing the same thing I accused Swords of doing yes? Focus on the fluff sentences and finding them as an excuse to vote me. Are you voting me because of that, or because of my reluctance to implement the stupid votecounts?

Why do you think it's either or? Why can't it be both? If your going to waste my time by reading your fluff, I might as well respond to it no? Or if you didn't want anyone to respond to it, why did you put it in your statement in the first place?

 

[th3kuzinator]

That sound fine to you?

If you can convince everyone else in this game to accept the votecount method, I will reconsider it. Gova included.

Fair enough.

But what's the point of even telling us that? Is there even substance for your reasoning?

Is there any substance for knowing im town? I am actually the N0 cop and I investigated myself just to be sure I wasn't secretly scum. '

Why do you think it's either or?

Convenient. You turn it around as an attack on me that I didn't consider a third option when you yourself didn't even answer the question.

If your going to waste my time by reading your fluff, I might as well respond to it no? Or if you didn't want anyone to respond to it, why did you put it in your statement in the first place?

Ever consider the third option where I was purposefully being spiteful and just wanted to waste your time? Never saw it coming.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Is there any substance for knowing im town? I am actually the N0 cop and I investigated myself just to be sure I wasn't secretly scum. '

This doesn't answer why you felt like throwing in a "btw I'm town" statement into the game when there hasn't been one accusation of you being scum yet. I think this was your way of self metaing yourself, and trying to paint yourself town.

Convenient. You turn it around as an attack on me that I didn't consider a third option when you yourself didn't even answer the question.

Your right, because no one would ever think it could be answered with another question.

Why can't it be both?

Your grasping for straws, you claim that I'm dodging your questions, when the answer was there in the first place.

Ever consider the third option where I was purposefully being spiteful and just wanted to waste your time? Never saw it coming.

So your being useless on purpose?