Mini 188: Texas Holdem Mafia - GAME OVER!

[kristocker]

I don't think we should be concerned with the people that post a lot - we still need to be on lurker watch. I know this is my first post, and I am not calling for a lurker vote. Both mafia and town benefit from many posts, but lurking is still a mafia trait. I will post more later, I am in the middle of a move and will be able to post more tonight.

(FYI, I graduate on Saturday, so posting this weekend, especially Saturday, will be difficult.)

[kristocker]

EmpTyger, there is an advantage for people who are pro-town to have high chip counts: they can't go all in unless they have the same or more chips than the scum they are going all in against. So yes, the chip mechanic should guard against lurking, but I see no reason to go after someone simply because they post a lot.

But there should be consequences of not posting content. THIS IS NOT AN OMGUS VOTE. Dranko20 has basically said nothing over the course of three posts in order to get his chip count up. I don't think it is bad for people to post frequently, but to post only for chips is not good - especially when you say that is why you are posting. Say

something

when you post Dranko. You will get your chips and we will all be happy that you shared your insight and wisdom with us.

Vote: Dranko20.

[kristocker]

I'm finally starting to get the A/B mechanic proposed. But I'm still not sure what I think about it. The pseudovote seems to be a plausible way to pick who would go all-in. I know that I have a primary, secondary, and tertiary scum choice right now, so it doesn't seem to be a too far-fetched way to choose an all-in victim. We need to be careful to allow time for claiming. If the doc or cop is chosen to go all-in against an innocent, we will be in big trouble.

(Since the hectic pre-graduation week is over, I should be able to post more now. Posting will be erratic this next week due to the New York trip, but I will try to keep up.)

[kristocker]

I have been re-reading the thread, and there seems to be a consensus that this game is to be played like a real Texas Hold'em game - with a small blind, a big blind, and a dealer. That is how we play at my house. But we don't have waitresses at my house. If you want a drink, you have to get your butt out of your seat to get it. This must be a Vegas-style game, not a friendly game next door. In Vegas, the house is the dealer, not a player. There may be post restrictions on the blinds, but I doubt there is a dealer.

One thing I have noticed is that we are all working on the mechanics of the game and not on finding the mafia. Wait... *lightbulb in head.* If we are in Vegas, wouldn't the big shots all be mafia, not the 2-7 off-suits? 2-7 off-suit works in going all-in sense (since you generally cannot lose playing against that hand), but wouldn't the mafia, the people in power, try to rig it to where the flop was something like 2-7-7. In all this rambling I am trying to say that as we figure out the mechanics, we need to realize that just because the cop had a good hand, doesn't mean that all good hands belong to good people. I could be wrong about this, but right now, it sounds right to me.

As for the suggestion that everyone buys a drink, I'm not sure about it. Although it plays into the game somehow, I am going to keep my few chips until I either find out how or figure out a good reason for wasting a chip. Maybe it buys favor, maybe it is a way to lose your chips. I don't know yet. Mod, if I ask for a water, do I have to pay a chip? If it is free, I would like one. This is the best way I can think of how to get a drink without losing a chip. Plus, it is what I would order anyway.

[kristocker]

I too am willing to vote for Iammars, but want to allow him the chance to speak. I said earlier that the only real way for a 7/2 hand to win is if the flop is 7/7/2 or some other unlikely sequence of numbers against another bad hand. And it does seem that the town was blessed with better hands than that. Therefore, I second the request that Iammars use his last post of the day to tell us why a 7/2 hand is pro-town.

[kristocker]

<snip>the request was originally that Iammars tell this whenever he made his second-to-last post, which he didn’t really do.

Okay, I don't get it. By asking Iammars again to do something he didn't do when asked I am trying to rescue him? I want to know how a 7-2 hand can benefit the town. We have basically all agreed that good hands are pro-town. I want to know how this hand can help the town.

Thesp, I don't think someone should go all-in against Iammars. How would we choose who it would be? If we randomly choose, a power role might die to a townie - not that I think Iammars is a townie, but you get the drift. We might ask for volunteers, but then, as previously stated, scum could simply vig one of their own to try to prove innocence.

On the flip-side, Iammars can vig one of his scum buddies. It would not prove to us he was innocent; it would give him more chips to try to get out of range of having someone go all-in against him.

Also, can we get an updated vote count? I believe my last vote was for Dranko, so I

unvote.

Not placing my vote on Iammars until he gets his chance to answer my question.

[kristocker]

i think we should try to convince the people with lower chip counts to go in. if a scum lynchs thier own person then we dont have to worry about it "proving thier innocence" because we are going to be suspicious of who ever does go all in.

I have one of the fewest chip counts, so if we decide that I should go all in against Iammars, that makes me suspicious? I don't understand how you can say on one hand to "we should try to convince people...to go all in" and in the next sentence say "we are going to be suspicious of who ever does go all in." Sounds like you are trying to set someone up.

[kristocker]

Page 4 has most of the Iammars suspicions outlined. The themes seem to be that he has a post restriction and has been underutilizing his posts - one only had six words - and that he has a bad hand. I had asked him to clarify why a bad hand would be good for the town, but I didn't realize this would leave him without the ability to go all-in. I wondering where we should go from here - let him use his last post for content, let him go all-in against someone, lynch him now, or tell someone to go all-in against him? I know that some of these options are out the control of the town, but I'm just wondering....

[kristocker]

Bamboomancer, it will save you the need to ++ to get chips.

What does this mean? Is it a typo or some sort of shorthand I am unaware of?

[kristocker]

I've never played in a game with a hider role before, so I don't realize how someone I protected died the same night as me. My death wouldn't stop the protection, would it? Or does the hider die if the person they hide with dies? If so, why would a doc's protection not protect them in that instance?