Using Strawberry is literally useless IMO. You’re never going to get anything out of it when your “opponent” is “the collective trust that town has on the promise that they are about to make Today”. Mafia can’t even do anything about it.
I proposed this idea at the signups thread, and I still think we should do this.
[quote=“Zone_Q11, post:21, topic:11027, full:true”]
Using Strawberry is literally useless IMO. You’re never going to get anything out of it when your “opponent” is “the collective trust that town has on the promise that they are about to make Today”. Mafia can’t even do anything about it.
Willing to give Zone a very slim townlean here and it’s something I agree with too.
I have a further suggestion as well. Who wants to be checked tonight?
if its selfish i dont see it being good. remember mafia has both anti claim and strongman. people pushing lies too far is also … i hate it personally. im not sure what else you could be thinking of
Is this pl going to actually follow plans or nah? I’ll follow the consensus plan if everybody else participates too. But if people aren’t going to listen then why bother?
not sure wym? if they waste both on VTs? it can happen yeah anything can happen if thats what u mean. i just think its risky to do hypo claims. on FoL. we havent done it before. ive never seen us do it. i think we might mess up. but i dunno. if u guys want we could try
All things considered, I would’ve been unambivalently fond of expressing direction for the Strawberry option ahead of time. Without expressing a wilfulness to skew votes majorly, although it’s perhaps the only way for evil to accidentally hit a protected player without completely uncoordinating in public, it’d also provide a threat to not be checked early on which means the Neapolitan mightn’t be wasted on polarising slots too soon.
For the most part, however, this is a moot point as a majority of the game will be vanilla led. Evils would never openly claim to choose vanilla ahead of time if they were at risk of being checked, and attempting to wrangle everybody’s actions — whilst perhaps optimal — will only lead to dissent and ruin, as evils either continue to protest and so they are executed in turn without the night check at all, or the coordinator themselves or just the players themselves lock in Chocolate selections readily to save themselves. The worst case scenario would be Mafia killing and nullifying the Neapolitan in one fell swoop immediately tonight, before claiming it themselves in F5 or so.
The mechanically optimal outcome would include having one player go Chocolate, and then being checked the following night every time, then. Tutuu’s convinced me, donezo.
Ice Creams in general probably wish to become Chocolate in order to vote whom to protect, right? Rather than asking who wants to get checked tonight, I think it’s easier to ask who are willing to remain as Vanilla instead. After all, “wanting to get checked” doesn’t necessarily guarantee a check.
(How smart could the Mafia possibly be…?) Hm… The idea I had in mind is an information hazard, so I guess I will keep it as a last-resort nuclear button. (I… don’t like where this is going.)
a lot of players seemed to have the same ideas from the start so thats good! i think we have about as an excellent start as we could have. cool! nice! onwards to glory!