Team Melee Mini Mafia
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 04:56 Korynne wrote: So there seems to be a bandwagon starting on YellowInk. I don't like it very much... Mainly because I believe that YellowInk is relatively easy to read, so I don't think we'll have a lot of trouble dealing with him in the later days as we would some other people *cough*L*cough*Chezinu*cough*. So I would definitely favour lynching a group of inactives or someone hard to read over lynching YellowInk. Those are my two cents on the matter. I don't even mind seeing bandwagons this early since if YellowInk gets lynched and flips town the DT know exactly where to look. However I do have a problem with bandwagons formed off of stupid logic. Looking at Bill's arguments against YI they are pretty terrible. Saying that since we are out of the RVS (blatantly false), him voting for bumatlarge makes no sense. Doesn't help that him and Chezinu are typing in morse code in the thread when there isn't anything to breadcrumb on Day 1 of this setup. To kick things off I'm voting for them. I want everyone's opinion on this: - Are we voting on the most useless people? Imo we should because inactivity should not be a problem. With the 2 worst players on the same team I view it as getting rid of distractions early. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 05:24 Chezinu wrote: I guess I should post what I know: Radynee/Koryfield anaylsis: + Show Spoiler + On June 22 2010 07:09 Radfield wrote: Get your game on mafia. Inactivity will not be tolerated. Giggidy Giggidy. On June 22 2010 07:28 Korynne wrote: Yay so excited. <3 So yeah, time to get stuff rolling. First day's lynch is pretty randoms, so I will vote for inactives. Gogogo! In terms of strategy, I don't think there's much for us to do other than just talk a lot. xD DT should probably let town know once they find 2 townies or 1 mafia. Medic should not claim anytime soon. Giggdy and excited about their roles... On June 22 2010 08:38 Korynne wrote: Yeah, the whole point is that mafia can narrow it down to 2 setups, and blue roles can narrow it down to 2 setups. On June 22 2010 09:26 Korynne wrote: I picked the classic f11 setup because I figured it would be hard to get twice as many people than we usually do.. On June 22 2010 10:50 Korynne wrote: Did you want to play Incog? Maybe ask flamewheel if he'll stick you into a random team. xP or is Kory excited about the f11 setup? On June 22 2010 22:32 Korynne wrote: It appears that Chezinu has voted for me and Radfield, without the requisite "aka abstaining for now.. because no one else would dare vote for him, right?" We note that he is mafia that game he voted for Radfield, however this time he just said a bunch of di-dah-di-dits instead of the previous statement. For the sake of generating some content on day 1, care to clarify this Chezinu? xD Kory underestimates how random my behavior can be though some aspects remain the same... On June 23 2010 00:34 Korynne wrote: Hmmm... I am trying to decide if Chill would be offended by that statement... He's really more like Light than L most of the time. Did you decide yet? On June 23 2010 02:21 Korynne wrote: BM and Chez... you can PM each other. >.> So like, stop spamming up the thread... *goes to look up the morse code stuff* What is the fun in that? On June 23 2010 02:35 Korynne wrote: YellowInk, I believe BM is referring to a game Caller ran, called the Three Kingdoms Mafia where there was Yellow Turban as a 4th party. I believe he must be mistaking you for someone else because your name is not on the player list. How many games have you researched in the past? That way I can consider killing you or not if I'm mafia. If you know too much... On June 23 2010 03:48 Korynne wrote: Uh, how does this post make any sense? a) If I was mafia, like YellowInk pointed out, I would have twice as many people on my team, making analysis much faster. b) If you're trying to say that as mafia I am crying unfair because mafia is supposed to be the only ones able to communicate to other teams then first of all, you still can't use IRC to coordinate with other teams, and second of all, I don't see how talking in code allows you to coordinate with other teams. Even if you set up an elaborate system with someone ahead of time, how are you sure they are not mafia? Like, it's good that you're putting pressure on YellowInk (I haven't decided if he's scummy yet, he doesn't quite have the green glow from the game he was pardoner but I don't know if that's because he's blue, red, or just being less aggressive because he doesn't have clues) but making stupid accusations is like...wut? (read: being Bill Murray?) Interesting, posts have to make sense... On June 23 2010 03:53 Korynne wrote: OMGUS Why didn't you vote for me then? On June 23 2010 04:24 Radfield wrote: Oh Chez.... Anyways, I agree, despite our lack of a vig, that the dt should claim once he pegs a mafia. There's no millers, so it's a for sure thing. Trading our DT for half of the mafia is a good trade, assuming we are decent players and can do some decent post analysis. The downside of this, is that once the mafia find out there is a DT, they will KNOW if there is a medic or not, and if there IS a medic, they will have a roleblocker, and roleblock the dt for the rest of the game(setup 1). So a dt claiming is either certain death, or certain roleblocking, unless we get lucky and it's the roleblocker who gets lynched(50-50 shot). So a dt who claims has a 50% chance of dying the next night(setup 3) and a 25% chance of getting roleblocked for the rest of the game (setup 1, with roleblocker alive) and a 25% chance of having medic protection for the rest of the game (setup 1, with roleblocker dead) Again, I think it's worth it for the dt to claim once he finds a red(or 2 greens as korynne stated) As for PMing your partners, I have assumed that this is allowed. We need a mod ruling on this ASAP however. I assumed this because Korynne designed the set-up, and I assumed she knew the rules For me the whole fun of this setup is that you get to make decisions as a team, and get to bounce your ideas off of each other about who you think is scummy, or who you think might be blue, etc. This guy actually reads my posts. He is cool. On June 23 2010 04:29 Korynne wrote: Gee Radfield, read the rules, it makes me look bad if you keep making mistakes like that. D= However, he didn't read the rules.. Conclusion: Either Mafia or DT How so. Please give us an actual logical breakdown of how you arrived at this conclusion. Every game you and your ally post nonsense and get away with it because everyone thinks you are useless, ignoring the fact you may be scum. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 05:26 Chezinu wrote: Ace, why has your opinion about me change now that we are playing this game? I've said that you were useless for like what, the past 8 months now? This isn't a new opinion at all. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 05:30 Chezinu wrote: I just know it is a trend that blue/mafia players like to discuss blue roles a lot in mafia games. Blue role would want advice from other on what he or she should do. While mafia would want to give bad advice/discover blue roles. That doesn't mean it's them telling on themselves that they are blue. Both of them aren't typical dumb players that ask questions leading to them being outted. Besides just because someone talks about a power role is not a good basis on putting them in the Mafia or Blue camp. Otherwise for all the games you've played you would have a better scum hunting rank don't you think? | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 05:56 DCLXVI wrote: not to say don't check us, but this logic is wrong. I would think it to be easier to read three people rather than just two. Agreed. I also think the way it works is that Teams check Teams, not players checking players. So checking 1 person out a 3 person team isn't really a significant advantage or disadvantage. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 11:08 Bill Murray wrote: I agree with you on this depending on the person. L casting an OMGUS makes me view him as town moreso. I do the same thing. It is scummy until I am sure that the person does it as town imo. I'm at a loss in this game, but there is more information flowing around than you would expect zyrre for instance is drawing my fos well yes if someone is always known for revenge voting it may be a null tell but it also means they should probably be at the top of the suspect list. Also it depends on the nature of the vote: If you're doing it while building a case then it's fine. If you do it just because you have nothing else to do and crap reasoning then you come off looking squirmish and guilty. Also there isn't that much information flowing around. A lot of it is people poking holes around to see what people say. Like L claiming my team or Radfield's team must be Mafia because his top target sucks: thats ridiculous logic. I'm not sure if it's obnoxious L being sincere or he's faking it but either way it's dumb. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 11:08 YellowInk wrote: Chill good buddy. He may have been gone all day, but he's one of the players that is often considered good at figuring stuff out and organizing. My type of guy. Doesn't mean he's town - I expect he'll be posting a good bit beyond this so that people can get a read on him. I don't really agree with his list as there's a lot being batted around at the moment. I'm surprised no one has voiced to agree with my analysis of bumatlarge. I guess you guys are off the hook for now. That being said, I think they'd be an excellent target for a DT investigation. Since I'm still highly suspect of bum with his continued posting pattern (I will elaborate this on request, but I suspect no one cares at the moment), I lean against voting for BM/Chez. If bum is mafia, BM probably isn't. It's just too risky of a play. But from all the talk of BM/Chez being pretty crazy players, idk. People seem really on the fence about him. If the post counts from some of these teams remain this low, I'm on board with lynching inactives. Whatever else I can speculate, they're still just day 1 loose reads. When the posting content from the inactives come up, maybe there is something there that will read red to me as well and we'll all come to a consensus. No such thing. If X, then Y doesn't apply here unless we have process of elimination. There's also no such thing as a too risky play unless you have perfect information. You don't know their roles so you can't claim what they may possibly do is too risky. Both teams could be scum because no one has been cleared via DT or behavior at all. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 11:26 L wrote: They're not my top target at all. I didn't even post a target. I summarized what was going on in the thread. Yellow/Durak jumped out at me because I read Yellow's previous game and he seemed relatively 'in the game' and active, but his partner is a self admitted zero. Compare that to some of our other teams. We have literally zero teams at that level besides that one, which means that a host would likely have compensated. But seeing as you, durak and YI have all come out swinging against a post which is largely examining a random potential out of a much larger post, I think I got something right. So you accuse people of possibly being scum, they address your argument so therefore something must be fishy? Explain this more. Also you can't assume the host balanced teams. If that's the case then you and Caller would just as likely be Scum if we're going by experience and some level of skill here. It also hinges on the fact that YI/Durak have to flip red. If they don't then your entire argument falls to shambles and we've seen that happen before. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 11:45 L wrote: If people actually addressed the argument, maybe you'd be right. Darth didn't try to address his culpability; he played up team 5's strength. You didn't address the argument. You dismissed it. Durak didn't address the argument. He launched into a "YOU DONT KNOW ME NUH UH" tirade. Only Yellow really bothered to take the time, and given his post's location after mine it seems like he's more trying to patch up an obviously over-inflammatory push from his ally. And no, silly, Caller/Me aren't 'just as likely' when I talk because I have a PM in my inbox telling me I'm green. What you seem to be forgetting is that I'm not calling YI/Durak/You/Darth scum. I looked at the 3 people being discussed and said: "Wow, that team 5 is pretty weak. They'd probably have needed a strong team to balance them out. If they flip red, the other team is likely one of these two." Does that logic tell me whether or not team 5 is red ab initio? No. If I had a massive day 1 eureka and I knew if a team was red, I wouldn't be summarizing what had happened in the prior 3 pages. I would have been pushing for my own target because I DO THAT ALL THE GODDAM TIME. It draws a link in the case that they are. Seriously horrendous deconstruction of what I've said. The 4 people coming out swinging on a very light suspicion, however, seems to be a bit more credible. Rad/Korynne haven't even bothered talking. If you were worried about scum hunting their silence probably would have jumped out at you. The very odd defensive posture you've taken reminds me far more of your low-key mafia play than your green play. For your team? Given Darth's tone and your posts here, I'd say Red or Blue. We do not know you are green. Everyone is going to claim green. That's irrelevant. I addressed your argument. I said you suspecting the host of balancing teams is a fallacy, especially when the host claimed to use a RNG. If you still do then your entire argument hinges on the host lying right? Your argument was that Yi/Durak are a weak team. If they are red, then the other mafia team must be a strong team. You then say it's up to my team or Radfield's team. I told you that IF you argument was sound then you'd also have to include yourself. The rest of the town has no idea about your alignment and saying "my PM says I'm green" doesn't make it any clearer. This is what I keep bringing up : the LOGIC in your arguments don't add up. Also what does Radfield/Korynne being silent have to do with my stance on them? Them not responding to you doesn't make them scummy. Once again your saying I'm taking an odd defensive stance when all I've done is address why your logic doesn't add up. Seems more to me that you are trying to forcefully characterize my stance on your argument into a position which doesn't exist. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 12:12 Bill Murray wrote: @Ace: did you view the argument with YI being town on town earlier? Your argument with YI? I viewed it as you (my strongest scum read so far) arguing with someone I don't have a read on. Only thing I could say about YI was he was trying to start discussion. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 23 2010 12:21 L wrote: Why would I include myself from my own point of view when I know I'm not red? Me being in such a position lets me narrow down the possibilities as much as possible. You can't be certain I'm not lying, but then again that's kinda the entire point of the game, no? If you want to use the logic but don't trust me, feel free to put my name in and take yours out from your analysis' pov. That's kinda how it works. This seriously has to be the most truistic and circular objection to an argument I've ever seen. Why do you consistently waste time on such stupid shit? I can't believe you of all people are accusing someone of circular logic. I'm trying to illustrate to you that saying "I'm green" doesn't remove you from the pool of "strong teams" in your own argument. I know you'll claim green, no shit. I'm telling you it isn't convincing anyone that you aren't scum and repeating it doesn't help either. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 24 2010 01:17 johnnyspazz wrote: i think bm is correct on this one and third votes on a team/person is a legitimate theory for finding scum no its not. It's pretty bad theory and only pans in the most simple of newbie games. The "third" vote idea doesn't even make sense because BM doesn't understand what it meant. It had nothing to do with the 3rd player voting - it had everything to do with trying to catch where a scum would vote without drawing attention aka getting on the wagon but without being blamed for tipping it. Being that scum will vote wherever they think will allow them to escape scrutiny that statement is nonsense. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 24 2010 01:19 Bill Murray wrote: hey, i will be the first to admit i'm not the world's best at scum-hunting, but we have Ace and L here to help us do that. Only problem is Ace's radar must be off if he is honestly thinking I am scum. He must be misreading my improvement as a player negatively I guess. Don't worry, I think L is just as scummy as you are. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 24 2010 01:31 Bill Murray wrote: ace i wish you would pick someone who was actually scum this game so we can have an easy win as town ... you going for me is pointless, trust me this once bro calm down. Like I said I think L is just as scummy as you are. I just refuse to vote for Team 7 because I don't think them being inactive = them being scum. Your team and Ls team just come off as better candidates for a lynch so far. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Also hanging BM/Chez and them not flipping red gives you more information how? Be specific because everyone uses that line. Killing people for the sake of information is one of the scummiest arguments we've seen on this forum (looking at you L). | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 24 2010 07:09 Radfield wrote: Well, lets set BM and Chez aside for the moment. I agree that they've posted a lot of spam, but I think both have tried to contribute more this game then in the games I've played with them when they were mafia. That doesn't mean much though, but I can't help it if I get a bit of a townie vibe from them. Of course I agree with your last two sentences. I am interested to hear your opinion of Team 9 though. Pretend BM and Chez are already dead. Am I off base on thinking they are scum? Are other people scumdars going off when they read their post history? I actually get clueless newbie vibes from Team 9. In fact they are like a clone of Team 7 just less aggressive when confronted so far. I think they really are just not going to post a lot until at he point of damn near inevitable lynch. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Secondly the wagon on T9 never really got going. If you subscribe to the idea that they must be scum because of the vote switch then you should ask yourself why didn't they vote for the other teams that were also in hot water. I think the only reason this is a big deal is because BM/Chez flipped town even though lots of people thought they were scum. I said it like 4 times but the only person even close to their scum level is L. Also saying Chez had the chance to save himself is ludicrous. If he did then he should have voted/persuaded others ages before the deadline. I don't know what he was waiting for but it's just as ridiculous to blame someone for another person's death while said person has the chance to save themselves. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 25 2010 03:48 L wrote: Uh, BM/Chez were never scummy. They spammed a lot but it was pretty obvious they were town. In hindsight do you think that a group would have fake claimed medic as mafia on day 1 under the conditions they did? No. Yes they were. BM spent the entire time of Day 1 pointing multiple fingers at a ton of players. He also elected to talk in code with his partner who was being equally silly. Seriously if those don't scream scum to you it's no wonder why you have a reputation as a terrible player. Then again since you like to accuse multiple people every day I guess you would consider that decent play. Uh, the 'wagon' on both teams was 15 votes. Chez had another 3 votes he could have used to save himself. How is this even relevant? If the wagon wasn't 100% tied, the change of vote would have been irrelevant. The wagon on T9 was never going to tip. Look at how it formed: We went through 3 teams being on the hot box to toward the end of the Day people voting on T9 because they were quiet - not because they were scum. It was a pressure vote. If you honestly think they were going to be killed then I have no idea what thread you are reading. Votes were 15/15 with chez on a third party. Ludicrous? rofl. Its not like BM and Chez weren't active in the thread arguing against their scuminess (like you're pretending they weren't), either. If telling everyone "I'm town because I said so" counts as arguing (it doesn't) then sure. They had no shot at convincing anyone they weren't scummy as you clearly see they got lynched. That's the problem. No one really thought they were scum. Look at the post lynch discussion "oh i got a bad vibe from them, was wrong lol sorry". No one had a strong conviction about it. Teams 7 8 and 9 voted together against chez bm + you. Then Korynne popped in and prevented 9 from reacting. Teams 7 and 9 were targeted BY team 2 for lynch. That leaves team 8, you and Korynne as the sore thumbs. I thought they were scum. "No one really thought they were scum" is a weak premise. If it were true then obviously BM/Chez would still be alive. Do you really think all those people voted them off just because? Then you even say teams 7,8,9,myself and Korynne all had a hand in the lynch. If thats the case then surely some of us really thought they were scum. Also I had to bold the last part to show people how your poor logic works. Team 2 flips innocent. So therefore the people Team 2 "targeted" (which was almost everyone) 7 and 9 somehow get thrown out of the equation and now it's Team 1, myself and 8 sticking out? Do better. Seriously in your conspiracy theories you implicate multiple players without anything to stand on. You pop up after everything goes down to lay the blame on teams while also saying no one really thought they were scum - ignoring how badly BM/Chez played. Like I said you are just as scummy as they were. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 25 2010 04:32 Korynne wrote: Also note that way more people voted for Chez/BM than for T9. I don't know if they just were voting with their team or not (me and Radfield said we'd vote together) but if not then that's a lot more people believing that BM/Chez are scum than believing T9 is scum. I think really Radfield was the only one thinking T9 was scum (didn't check the thread to confirm) but most people were just like yo let's put some pressure on T9 since T7 started talking now. Besides, everyone agrees that BM/Chez spam up the thread like no other. We've all been having real analysis and conversation for the last couple pages since they died, that helps out town in my books. Don't worry that's Ls terrible style of play. If someone that everyone but himself thinks is scummy and playing badly when they flip innocent L will come in turning a blind eye to why the players were lynched and start pointing fingers at everyone. Like I said there's a reason he has a reputation of being a bad player. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
2.) It wasn't going to tip. If it was going to tip then surely SOMEBODY would have voted to tip them right? You're trying to create a scenario that wasn't there. If you want to speak for Chez saying he could have saved himself then speak for him and explain to us why he didn't. You can't. Thanks. 3.) oh, because a tied vote comprising less than 3 normal F11 players apiece means that they weren't convinced? The vast majority of players didn't vote for them and a number of people who voted admitted they did it for reasons other than believing T2 was mafia. QED again. What? This doesn't even make sense. Who are these people that voted for other reasons than believe that T2 were mafia. If you truly believe those people then I'm asking you again what game are you playing. You also forget a vast majority doesn't decide the vote here. So that point is null. Once again you are spouting nonsense to make it seem as if T2 deserved to live despite their scummy play. 4.) Korynne's vote wasn't random - she explained what she was going to do WELL in advance of the deadline. Stop falsifying people's actions. It's not worth looking at because it didn't change anything. T2 had more than enough time - hours - to convince people they weren't scum. They failed. Chez also had a chance to use his vote right? He failed. Don't blame someone else for their death when they had all time in the world to save themselves. Emotional reaction? where are you pulling this shit from? I never even implied that you said teams 7 and 9 are innocent. I specifically said you threw them out of the equation and pointed at the rest of us. How does that even compute? I said I had a pre-game grudge against them? Did I use that as the basis for my vote or did I say BM was throwing around terms he saw on mafiascum.net incorrectly to justify his vote, threw around several accusations wily nilly, spammed the thread, switched votes several times in the day and had no clear idea on who he thought was guilty? Or how about when I said BM and Chez were playing badly by talking nonsense. Oh how about when I called him out for his "theory" on the 3rd voter on a wagon being scum and showed how it was wrong? See once again you are blatantly lying about what's going on in the game. Now you even try to play the "your bad" card that no one will believe. So far I've caught you making shit up, misrepresenting myself and other players' positions on day 1 and trying to stave off T2s bad play as everyone else's fault. Yup, my scumdar is beeping again. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 25 2010 05:08 Korynne wrote: Chezinu was mafia that last game that Incog/me ran. Seems like he was still spewing nonsense in there half the time. The whole idea is that BM/Chez is hard to read because they're so crazy and really, getting rid of them just makes life easier for town in general. Look at the lack of spam these last couple pages! We can definitely get a good read on what me, Ace, L, DCLXVI have said in these two pages compared to like 25 pages of spam before that that. Also Ace, what is your opinion of how scummy DCLXVI is based on his posts during the night? I don't want to call him scummy yet because right now L is definitely #1 in my book. DCLXVI is along the same veins of making up conspiracy theories and motives that don't support what actually happened. Really he could just be confused. The problem here is players don't look at the game as a whole and just isolate events. So they don't understand why certain things have played out the way they did so far. The result? Said players end up jumping into specific points of the game ignoring everything and getting into arguments because they just don't want to understand what has happened so far. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 25 2010 09:35 Radfield wrote: Incorrect, some of Ace's posts seem scummy. Particularly the fact that he pushed hard for Team 2, when I think he should have known better. It's almost like he was surprised they were shitting up the thread. However, I agree with him that L seems scummy. He's near the top of my list, but what really puts me off is Caller quitting. I really don't think Caller would have bailed on the game if he'd gotten a mafia role. It's strange, but this alone gives Team 6 some townie cred. If we do lynch L, and he flips green, I propose we go after Ace. Why? Because it means one of two things: Ace is a mafia and has led us to lynch two townies, or, Ace is town, playing extremely poorly and has led us to lynch two townies. Ace is not a poor player. If his actions and analysis are giving poor results, then he needs to be questioned for it. Teams I'm ok lynching: Team 4, Team 6, Team 9. However, if Team 4 flips red, then Zyrre needs to be held accountable for his above post. If I was mafia what would I do. First, railroad the two spammers, easily done, they basically lynch themselves. Second, go after L, he's inflammatory, he makes occasionally poor arguments, and he'll probably turn everyone against himself anyways. Third hasn't happened yet, but mine would be to pick on whomever the most inactive/newbie team is, and try to convince everyone they are scum. Most newbie teams have a ton of scumtells whether they are mafia or not(See team 9). So far Ace has two checkmarks., but of course if L flips red then Ace is likely green. I wasn't surprised at all. I think you are making a big mistake about my play here: I don't care what a player's supposed normal behavior is. If you play scummy and do ridiculous things I will vote for you. There is no excuse such as "I always play bad when I'm town" and thats how I made my decision. Of course if L flips green/blue you can do whatever you please. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 25 2010 10:02 Radfield wrote: Surely in the interest of hunting scum there should be more to it than that. Yes, if you're confident scum will not be found on Day One then voting off those players who are difficult to read and always seem scummy is a good choice. But I think players who play that way should get their own special category. Yes they always play scummy so they should get consideration for my day 1 vote, but mostly I should ignore them and concentrate on the other players. Using those players who always seem scummy/ridiculous as a fallback. Not at all. Players that always play scummy usually always end up getting killed. Remember the goal of the game is to find scum: In the absence of overwhelming evidence against another team the scummiest players get lynched. But don't think I ignored every other player in the game so far. Just because I don't say anything about other players doesn't mean I'm not paying attention. Better to solve 1 piece of the puzzle at a time. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Lastly bumatlarge I don't know where this came from: I've got a strong feeling that either team 4 or L are mafia. It might not seem like team 4 has done much to warrant it, but I know first hand darth can act completely pro-town, especially in a game with no clues. I'm sure Ace has the ability to play right along side that style of play. Id think L only because hes been so negative in this thread and has acted generally underwhelmed by most everyone's play. But Im not too scared of the prospect of L being mafia. I'm afraid we will definitely lose if team 4 is mafia and not lynched today. I'm going to put my vote on them, as it seems alot of people are in agreement with this line of thought. I'm willing to put the vote on first, as I think this will be a decent time for newer townies to risk themselves against more experienced players. I was fairly cautious as a mafia, but now that we don't have much of an alternative, I'm willing to stay true to the amateur townie habits I've developed. Who are these people? So far the only person who has made more than a passing remark that we may be scum is L. No one else has so how did you even come to that conclusion? | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 26 2010 09:46 L wrote: If you aren't mafia, I'm going to spend a lot of time after the game making fun of you for being horrendous. If you're mafia, I'm going to spend a lot of time talking about how obvious you are. So then how about you stop talking about "if" and do something. Put your vote where your mouth is. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
You'll generally notice 2 similar trends; An attempt to shit on players without providing much in the way of productive work. Ace of all players loves talking about blue strategy, yet he didn't bother talking about potential medic targets; Odd seeing as he's fucking Ace and Ace normally gets shot early. He didn't talk about DTs either, He didn't ask for anyone to be checked. No I don't. It's very well known that I always says Player ability is much more important than Blue roles. That is of all things one of the reasons I'm the best player on these forums - regardless of whatever I flip I'm leading you to scum. Secondly why would I talk about DTs or Medics when we aren't even sure if we have any? On June 21 2010 12:53 flamewheel wrote: Being F11, one of the following four setups is to be randomly chosen and used: + Show Spoiler [Setup 1] + 1 Mafia Goon 1 Mafia Roleblocker 1 Detective 1 Medic 5 Townies + Show Spoiler [Setup 2] + 1 Mafia Goon 1 Mafia Roleblocker 7 Townies + Show Spoiler [Setup 3] + 2 Mafia Goons 1 Detective 6 Townies + Show Spoiler [Setup 4] + 2 Mafia Goons 1 Medic 6 Townies You will not know which setup is chosen. You're saying that because I don't talk about Dts/Medics even though I don't always do it, therefore I'm playing scummy. I've just shut that down. But as usual that's not even the fun part because now I get to trash your silly quoting of Zona's past posts. It seems like his prime focus has been trying to breadcrumb to set up lynches. Ace pushed very strongly against Chez/BM using their posting style as an excuse, much the same way he used judge's claim during the game this is referenced from as an excuse. Wrong. Look at my last post I proved you wrong in which you still haven't answered. I explained why I voted for Bm and Chez. I'll quote it again for you here: I said I had a pre-game grudge against them? Did I use that as the basis for my vote or did I say BM was throwing around terms he saw on mafiascum.net incorrectly to justify his vote, threw around several accusations wily nilly, spammed the thread, switched votes several times in the day and had no clear idea on who he thought was guilty? Or how about when I said BM and Chez were playing badly by talking nonsense. Oh how about when I called him out for his "theory" on the 3rd voter on a wagon being scum and showed how it was wrong? Once again you are making things up. I called T2 out on their play in THIS GAME. Spamming, multiple vote switching, massive accusations, blatant misuse of terms and game theory - all behavior that did not help the town. Generally Ace's mafia play in low number setups to cruise along while attempting to appear active without providing something akin to a forward looking plan. He heaps suspicion on people, then has the rest of his team casually flit in and out of fights he causes. So let's assume this is true (which it isn't) - If my playstyle is to lay low and cruise then why am I so active in this game? I was one of the most active players all Day 1. Hell I was more active than you yourself but yet I was laying low? Another blatant lie. Let's move on because I like the taste of your scum blood: Don't believe me? Check his post history in this thread. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/search.php?q=&t=c&f=-1&u=Ace&gb=date Yes indeed let's look at it. In fact I'll list all of them myself: + Show Spoiler [All of Ace's posts in this thread] + Oh my, what do we have here My first post of the game. My intro into the wonderful world of Mafia Actually I don't get the DT role that often. I don't really like the role that much because most people are terrible when they get it. Me telling Yellow Ink that he was wrong and I don't roll DT that much. I even tell him most people are terrible at it. I think you guys are makign a mistake. Just because a team has two people doesn't mean they will generate more or less content, or that sharing a role means they will act a certain way. I think almost everyone is going to play standard because sharing a role doesn't imply a change in posting behavior. Me discussing the effects of Team play vs individual play. I don't even mind seeing bandwagons this early since if YellowInk gets lynched and flips town the DT know exactly where to look. However I do have a problem with bandwagons formed off of stupid logic. Looking at Bill's arguments against YI they are pretty terrible. Saying that since we are out of the RVS (blatantly false), him voting for bumatlarge makes no sense. Doesn't help that him and Chezinu are typing in morse code in the thread when there isn't anything to breadcrumb on Day 1 of this setup. To kick things off I'm voting for them. I want everyone's opinion on this: - Are we voting on the most useless people? Imo we should because inactivity should not be a problem. With the 2 worst players on the same team I view it as getting rid of distractions early. My first instance of pointing out Bill's logic was faulty against YI. He falsely claimed we were out of the RVS and voted for BAL. Him and Chez were typing in morse code when they can just simply PM each other. Of course you think it's their style when it was clearly spam which multiple players commented on. I even said they can't breadcrumb anything when there is nothing to breadcrumb on Day 1. Notice I even ask are we voting on the most useless people because inactivity should not be problem - throwing away the typical lets lynch inactives idea. Of course you'll say this isn't much of a plan. How so. Please give us an actual logical breakdown of how you arrived at this conclusion. Every game you and your ally post nonsense and get away with it because everyone thinks you are useless, ignoring the fact you may be scum. My response to Chezinu when he made the ridiculous claim that T1 has to be DT or Mafia. This was one of my earliest flags on calling them for faulty logic. I've said that you were useless for like what, the past 8 months now? This isn't a new opinion at all. Chezinu asked me why my opinion of him changed and I answered his question by letting him know I thought he sucked for a while now. That doesn't mean it's them telling on themselves that they are blue. Both of them aren't typical dumb players that ask questions leading to them being outted. Besides just because someone talks about a power role is not a good basis on putting them in the Mafia or Blue camp. Otherwise for all the games you've played you would have a better scum hunting rank don't you think? Chezinu claimed that players discussing blue roles tend to be blue and I said that's not typically true. I also point out that T1 wasn't a team of players unwise enough to do that. Agreed. I also think the way it works is that Teams check Teams, not players checking players. So checking 1 person out a 3 person team isn't really a significant advantage or disadvantage. Me agreeing with DCLXVI about how DT checks possibly work. L and BM: an OMGUS vote doesn't mean someone is scum. Newbie townies do it a lot. Me telling you and BM that you do not know what an OMGUS vote tells. well yes if someone is always known for revenge voting it may be a null tell but it also means they should probably be at the top of the suspect list. Also it depends on the nature of the vote: If you're doing it while building a case then it's fine. If you do it just because you have nothing else to do and crap reasoning then you come off looking squirmish and guilty. Also there isn't that much information flowing around. A lot of it is people poking holes around to see what people say. Like L claiming my team or Radfield's team must be Mafia because his top target sucks: thats ridiculous logic. I'm not sure if it's obnoxious L being sincere or he's faking it but either way it's dumb. Discussing revenge voting with Bill Murray here based on the OMGUS quote. This is also my first response to Ls bad logic which I'll illustrate again in my next post. No such thing. If X, then Y doesn't apply here unless we have process of elimination. There's also no such thing as a too risky play unless you have perfect information. You don't know their roles so you can't claim what they may possibly do is too risky. Both teams could be scum because no one has been cleared via DT or behavior at all. My response to YI's idea of if one player being X then the other being Y. Once again I'm discussing game play ideas and why such and such won't work. Contrary to your idea earlier this is actually the second time I'm discussing Detectives in the game. So you accuse people of possibly being scum, they address your argument so therefore something must be fishy? Explain this more. Also you can't assume the host balanced teams. If that's the case then you and Caller would just as likely be Scum if we're going by experience and some level of skill here. It also hinges on the fact that YI/Durak have to flip red. If they don't then your entire argument falls to shambles and we've seen that happen before. My first time directly calling you on your bullshit. You never admitted to being wrong about the host balancing teams either. So this was your first try at lightweight tagging me that I shot down. I also point out that your premise fails if T5 flips scum. You never even explained it anymore after that. We do not know you are green. Everyone is going to claim green. That's irrelevant. I addressed your argument. I said you suspecting the host of balancing teams is a fallacy, especially when the host claimed to use a RNG. If you still do then your entire argument hinges on the host lying right? Your argument was that Yi/Durak are a weak team. If they are red, then the other mafia team must be a strong team. You then say it's up to my team or Radfield's team. I told you that IF you argument was sound then you'd also have to include yourself. The rest of the town has no idea about your alignment and saying "my PM says I'm green" doesn't make it any clearer. This is what I keep bringing up : the LOGIC in your arguments don't add up. Also what does Radfield/Korynne being silent have to do with my stance on them? Them not responding to you doesn't make them scummy. Once again your saying I'm taking an odd defensive stance when all I've done is address why your logic doesn't add up. Seems more to me that you are trying to forcefully characterize my stance on your argument into a position which doesn't exist. Once again I point out your logical fallacies here. This is pretty much a rehash of the previous post where I tell you your logic doesn't add up and I call you on making stuff up. Your argument with YI? I viewed it as you (my strongest scum read so far) arguing with someone I don't have a read on. Only thing I could say about YI was he was trying to start discussion. BM asked me a question and I answered him here: It was about his argument with YI. I can't believe you of all people are accusing someone of circular logic. I'm trying to illustrate to you that saying "I'm green" doesn't remove you from the pool of "strong teams" in your own argument. I know you'll claim green, no shit. I'm telling you it isn't convincing anyone that you aren't scum and repeating it doesn't help either. More of me disdaining L for his mini tantrums and calling other's logic absurd when he makes the most ridiculous stories up. no problem. I was planning on talking a lot anyway this game so you don't lead the town to depths of hell like you normally do. Guess who this is in reply to? L. Look at the quote here: In general, however, this has been a fantastic way to make you talk more than you would have otherwise, so thank you for taking part on that fishing expedition. So how can you say I'm talking more than I would have otherwise but accuse me of laying low? Blatant contradiction here. Hey I can't stop people from doing what they want. But if you want to argue about who's a better player we both know that won't last long ^_^ My retort to L in which he tried to say something about another game to mock me. I'm scumhunting. I already said I don't believe BM/Chez to be townies. If that's not a blatant accusation along with my matching vote in the thread I don't know what game you're reading. My reply to L in which he accuses me of not scumhunting. Notice right now that both of us have 2 different ideas on what entails finding scum: L uses various pokes and prods and mass accusations to get "results" where as I have multitudes of techniques such as laying traps, lead questioning, heavy behavior analysis and deadly game theory. One of us has an excellent reputation while the other doesn't. why do I even bother This is me just about ignoring Ls nonsense that has nothing to do with the current game. I'm not going to discuss what he thinks is or is not scumhunting because I already know he is very bad at it while I'm just that good. I think the reason you two aren't getting a lot of flak is because a couple of players are setting off everyone's radar. Korynne asks why her team isn't getting burned by inactivity and I just tell her a few players are acting so scummy everyone is ignoring them. no its not. It's pretty bad theory and only pans in the most simple of newbie games. The "third" vote idea doesn't even make sense because BM doesn't understand what it meant. It had nothing to do with the 3rd player voting - it had everything to do with trying to catch where a scum would vote without drawing attention aka getting on the wagon but without being blamed for tipping it. Being that scum will vote wherever they think will allow them to escape scrutiny that statement is nonsense. This was an instance of the "3rd vote = scum" theory that I shut down. Notice I explain the basis of the theory and why it was an arbitrary number like 3. By this point I'm pretty annoyed with BM's scummy behavior: That's 2 terms from MS that he has misused in attempt to build arguments against players. Right about now if I was scum why the hell would I want to stop that? As scum I'd be fucking proud that BM is a townie spreading misinformation in his arguments to lynch other players. Don't worry, I think L is just as scummy as you are. BM says my scumdar is off and I assure him I think L is just as fishy. calm down. Like I said I think L is just as scummy as you are. I just refuse to vote for Team 7 because I don't think them being inactive = them being scum. Your team and Ls team just come off as better candidates for a lynch so far. Bill Murray urges me to reconsider my stance on him and I tell him to calm down because I think once again L is just as scummy. I also tell him I don't believe in voting off T7 on the basis of inactivity being a scum tell. Oh trust me I've considered it. While I pegged you as scummy, and chezinu as doing his brain dead act - L has been causing confusion, pointing tons of fingers while Caller has been pretty much lurking. I'm really close to switching my vote trust me. More discussion with BM on my stance with him. Notice at this point I admit I'm very close to switching my vote to L/Caller. I think you're the only one that read bum/lax as scummy. What did they do that was so bad anyway? They aren't inactive and they haven't really thrown around many FOSs. Also hanging BM/Chez and them not flipping red gives you more information how? Be specific because everyone uses that line. Killing people for the sake of information is one of the scummiest arguments we've seen on this forum (looking at you L). This was me asking T5 what was so bad about T3. They were the only ones who read them as scummy. YI also made a logic error in saying BM/Chez flipping red gives him more information. I correctly point out that a lot of people say this as the basis for lynching when it's not always true. L does this lots of times and I point that out. Radfield I don't know how you can go after team 9 when BM/Chez have played more scummy than they have. Yea they aren't posting a lot but the BM/Chez are posting garbage. Lack of effort doesn't mean someone is scummy. Playing like scum usually means the person really is scum. I question RFs decision to go after T9 over T2. I explicitly state that a lack of effort doesn't mean someone is scum.At this point I'm pretty convinced T2 is scum. @YI: No it doesn't. That logic does not hold up. Bm/Chez flipping red/green don't have any basis on bum/laxer flipping red/green. There is nothing to compare between the 2 teams. More talk to YI about the problem with his idea that one team flipping red/green implies what the other team will flip. I actually get clueless newbie vibes from Team 9. In fact they are like a clone of Team 7 just less aggressive when confronted so far. I think they really are just not going to post a lot until at he point of damn near inevitable lynch. Discussion with Radfield on T7 and T9. So no one else has a problem with blatant vote manipulation plans? It's empty statements like that that make me keep my vote on you. BM stop using terms you do not understand. Seriously, just stop. These were statements in response to BM switching his vote around a lot. I thought he was scum trying to push any bandwagon that he could find. Ok if anyone has any fucking sense about what RVS is, and the dumb "3rd voter on a wagon is scum" theory then read Bill Murray's latest posts. Forget bum/laxer - we've got some straight up ridiculous logic right in front of us. Right here I crash the logic party of BM. I sense things may get out of hand and T2 may get off the hook and urge the town to go after them. I've already nailed BM for 3 things by this point: bad theory, blatantly lying about what RVS means and vote manipulation. By this point in the day I'm 100% committed to them. I haven't even pushed a single policy lynch this game. Why are you making stuff up? Find an instance of me calling for a policy lynch. I dare you. BM blatantly lying about me going off on policy lynches. You can read all the previous posts of mines and notice I never even debated policy. If anything a policy lynch would involve me wanting to lynch inactives. Also notice not once have I debated about BM/Chez's playstyle. All my reasoning has been based on what has happened in the thread. I haven't demanded anyone to play a certain way. Once again you are lying about my play this game. My vote on you stays. BM says I'm demanding him of playing a certain way when I've never even tried to. More lying. My vote stays. this much vote switching = an innocent is getting killed. No way actual townies have any reason to switch around votes if their minds are already made up. Right here I point out that the multiple vote swings is going to get an innocent killed. There's no reason for townies to be changing their votes a lot when nothing major has happened yet. Only scum would have incentive to hop on and off bandwagons. I don't see what the big deal is. She explicitly stated she was going to vote for Chez/BM so they couldn't save themselves - obviously at that point she made up her mind. Secondly the wagon on T9 never really got going. If you subscribe to the idea that they must be scum because of the vote switch then you should ask yourself why didn't they vote for the other teams that were also in hot water. I think the only reason this is a big deal is because BM/Chez flipped town even though lots of people thought they were scum. I said it like 4 times but the only person even close to their scum level is L. Also saying Chez had the chance to save himself is ludicrous. If he did then he should have voted/persuaded others ages before the deadline. I don't know what he was waiting for but it's just as ridiculous to blame someone for another person's death while said person has the chance to save themselves. Me pointing out that Korynne is not scummy for closing the vote on T2. This goes on for a while. On June 25 2010 04:26 Ace wrote: Yes they were. BM spent the entire time of Day 1 pointing multiple fingers at a ton of players. He also elected to talk in code with his partner who was being equally silly. Seriously if those don't scream scum to you it's no wonder why you have a reputation as a terrible player. Then again since you like to accuse multiple people every day I guess you would consider that decent play. The wagon on T9 was never going to tip. Look at how it formed: We went through 3 teams being on the hot box to toward the end of the Day people voting on T9 because they were quiet - not because they were scum. It was a pressure vote. If you honestly think they were going to be killed then I have no idea what thread you are reading. If telling everyone "I'm town because I said so" counts as arguing (it doesn't) then sure. They had no shot at convincing anyone they weren't scummy as you clearly see they got lynched. [ I thought they were scum. "No one really thought they were scum" is a weak premise. If it were true then obviously BM/Chez would still be alive. Do you really think all those people voted them off just because? Then you even say teams 7,8,9,myself and Korynne all had a hand in the lynch. If thats the case then surely some of us really thought they were scum. Also I had to bold the last part to show people how your poor logic works. Team 2 flips innocent. So therefore the people Team 2 "targeted" (which was almost everyone) 7 and 9 somehow get thrown out of the equation and now it's Team 1, myself and 8 sticking out? Do better. Seriously in your conspiracy theories you implicate multiple players without anything to stand on. You pop up after everything goes down to lay the blame on teams while also saying no one really thought they were scum - ignoring how badly BM/Chez played. Like I said you are just as scummy as they were. A long summary of basically Day 1 with Korynne's vote. I call L out for at this point accusing multiple teams and making up theories. Don't worry that's Ls terrible style of play. If someone that everyone but himself thinks is scummy and playing badly when they flip innocent L will come in turning a blind eye to why the players were lynched and start pointing fingers at everyone. Like I said there's a reason he has a reputation of being a bad player. I've already made my mind L is Scum at this point. Korynne notes that we all agreed T2 was spamming up the thread and that since they died we've been having real discussion. L is trying to play the blame game. On June 25 2010 04:52 Ace wrote: 1.) I don't care if their standard play when they are town is to play like idiots. If you play badly and play scummy you get lynched - this is not a hard concept to understand. 2.) It wasn't going to tip. If it was going to tip then surely SOMEBODY would have voted to tip them right? You're trying to create a scenario that wasn't there. If you want to speak for Chez saying he could have saved himself then speak for him and explain to us why he didn't. You can't. Thanks. 3.) What? This doesn't even make sense. Who are these people that voted for other reasons than believe that T2 were mafia. If you truly believe those people then I'm asking you again what game are you playing. You also forget a vast majority doesn't decide the vote here. So that point is null. Once again you are spouting nonsense to make it seem as if T2 deserved to live despite their scummy play. 4.) Korynne's vote wasn't random - she explained what she was going to do WELL in advance of the deadline. Stop falsifying people's actions. It's not worth looking at because it didn't change anything. T2 had more than enough time - hours - to convince people they weren't scum. They failed. Chez also had a chance to use his vote right? He failed. Don't blame someone else for their death when they had all time in the world to save themselves. Emotional reaction? where are you pulling this shit from? I never even implied that you said teams 7 and 9 are innocent. I specifically said you threw them out of the equation and pointed at the rest of us. How does that even compute? I said I had a pre-game grudge against them? Did I use that as the basis for my vote or did I say BM was throwing around terms he saw on mafiascum.net incorrectly to justify his vote, threw around several accusations wily nilly, spammed the thread, switched votes several times in the day and had no clear idea on who he thought was guilty? Or how about when I said BM and Chez were playing badly by talking nonsense. Oh how about when I called him out for his "theory" on the 3rd voter on a wagon being scum and showed how it was wrong? See once again you are blatantly lying about what's going on in the game. Now you even try to play the "your bad" card that no one will believe. So far I've caught you making shit up, misrepresenting myself and other players' positions on day 1 and trying to stave off T2s bad play as everyone else's fault. Yup, my scumdar is beeping again. Me slamming L for his multiple lies. This was addressed earlier and I'm going to bring this back up in a later post. Bill your dead. Delete your posts and move on. Bill Murray had posted something and I told him to stop posting after death. I don't want to call him scummy yet because right now L is definitely #1 in my book. DCLXVI is along the same veins of making up conspiracy theories and motives that don't support what actually happened. Really he could just be confused. The problem here is players don't look at the game as a whole and just isolate events. So they don't understand why certain things have played out the way they did so far. The result? Said players end up jumping into specific points of the game ignoring everything and getting into arguments because they just don't want to understand what has happened so far. Discussion with Korynne about L and DCLXVI. At this point I'm already sure L is scum. I just don't want to reveal it as me being 100% sure yet because I'm not too sure about T1 either. I also don't want to force my hand to early - I sometimes like to let scum dig their own graves. Last time L and Dr.H were scum I caught both of them at the same time because they made some pretty bad logical arguments and tried to force them through.Not surprisingly this is happening again. I've illustrated my case on L the past few pages. If you need it to be more clear let me know. Korynne asks me to make a convincing case about L and I point out I have one on the previous page. I wasn't surprised at all. I think you are making a big mistake about my play here: I don't care what a player's supposed normal behavior is. If you play scummy and do ridiculous things I will vote for you. There is no excuse such as "I always play bad when I'm town" and thats how I made my decision. Of course if L flips green/blue you can do whatever you please. I correct Radfield because he thought I was surprised about T2's play. I point out I definitely was not. I just nailed them for playing scummy. Not at all. Players that always play scummy usually always end up getting killed. Remember the goal of the game is to find scum: In the absence of overwhelming evidence against another team the scummiest players get lynched. But don't think I ignored every other player in the game so far. Just because I don't say anything about other players doesn't mean I'm not paying attention. Better to solve 1 piece of the puzzle at a time. More discussion with Radield on it. On June 26 2010 09:01 Ace wrote: I don't think it's fair to claim that my team being alive means were scum. There's a lot of WIFOM in that assumption and no one knows for sure why T1 was popped except scum. Instead of trying to attribute the possibility or us being scum to our survival maybe you should realize if we're that good there's a chance the people doing the hits were scared of medic prots. Lastly bumatlarge I don't know where this came from: Who are these people? So far the only person who has made more than a passing remark that we may be scum is L. No one else has so how did you even come to that conclusion? Discussion and response to BAL saying because we're good we must be scum. So L where are all my 1 liner's and tossing shit at people? Point them out. I just posted every one of my posts in the game with explanations and you can't find an instance of it.Once again I caught you lying. . You said I didn't bother to "unpack any ideas" - I just pointed out discussions with Bill Murray, YI, Radfield, Korynne and Bumatlarge where game theory, implications of a lynch, who's bullshitting, logical misleaps, vote swinging behavior and even your bad play were examined. What are you reading? BM/Chez reacted to it; See here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=131987¤tpage=23 BM flat out nails Ace: Ace isn't doing shit for the town. Read the entire page. Its pretty telling. Ace complains that BM is lying when Ace's narrative has been that BM/Chez style play will get you killed. Ace says that statement is a lie despite: What? First of all let's be straight here - Bill Murray says a lot of things. He claimed I didn't help the town when the entire time I was discussing strategy or pointing out logical fallacies. How is that not helping the town? Where on that page do I say anything about BM/Chez's playstyle. Quote it!. You can't because it didn't happen - once again you're lying. The fact that it isn't. Ace does the same with me at a later point. But those are kinda just little peanuts ontop of the sundae. The main scoop is here: The problem here should be obvious. We have 7 people alive. After a lynch on me we'd have 5 people alive. 3 town. 2 mafia. Lylo. If Ace is town and he's cool with being lynched, we lose the game. No townie would gladly accept being killed in Lylo because it's a loss. Ace is cool with it. Probably because Ace is trying to garner support for a push. Even if Ace is red, being able to kill me today is optimal for him; he's controlled 2 of our lynches and from this point all his other team needs to do is stay moderately active. Both teams are free to breadcrumb around to their heart's content because killing Ace in a 3-2 scenario if he's red just leads us to another 2-1 Lylo which means town has a less than 25% chance at victory with random choice. Put simply; Ace is doing what he normally does as mafia. He throws shit around at targets that he thinks he'll be able to target safely and sits back making pithy one liner chaff posts. Good thing Ace has done that twice in the past 5 posts. Once again a blatant lie. I'm definitely not cool with being lynched. Where did I state that? Radfield is discussing implications of what it means if one of us die. I make it clear that if you flip innocent then they can do as they please. In both of our posts neither one of us talk about me getting lynched so where do you get the idea that I'm cool with being lynched. It doesn't exist. Secondly lets get to LYLO. Barring Medic protection we already know if we mislynch today we go into that tomorrow. You make the assumption that I gladly accept to be killed in a LYLO when that was disproved in the previous paragraph. Once again I caught you grasping for straws. Now you claim I'm doing what I "normally do as mafia." Let's be clear here - nothing that Zona tagged me for being Mafia in the 1 past game has happened here. I've proved you wrong by quoting all my posts in this game: 1.) You said I was laying low - wrong. 2.) You said I was throwing shit at players - wrong 3.) You said I've been throwing around "pithy one line chaff posts" - wrong. I've got tons of quoted posts showing me in discussion and all my one liners are in response to player's questions. I don't have a single chaff post except my very first post in the game introducing myself to the thread. See. Once again I've bagged you for falsely representing my position. Blatant lying. You're definitely getting my vote but in my next post a couple of hours from now I'm going to implicate you in shooting T1 last night. You're definitely scum. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
QUOTE SPECIFIC POSTS L. Where is the evidence? Literally this is what you do: 1.) Say I did or didn't do something. 2.) Claim because of 1, I must be scum. 3.) Tie it into an argument that doesn't exist. Example: Me railing on BMs playstyle, me making 1 liner chaff posts, me not scum hunting. My previous post proved you wrong. Secondly Zato's analysis of that game doesn't fit this game. Where are the chaff posts L? Where are the posts that say nothing? You can't find them. Your making shit up and I got you running now. You STILL haven't responded to my post earlier in the game in which you mis-represented my position and you're doing it again. "Of course if L flips blue/green you can definitely do what you want" -> me being cool with being lynched. I'm going to put a stop to your shitty logic. Your getting lynched and I'm going to go all out to make sure every townie sees what we do. Unlike past games where I had to damn near vote for everyone to get you lynched I've got an ally in DTA here so it's going to be much easier. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 26 2010 13:15 bumatlarge wrote: Im very glad we have 48 hours for lynching, as we now have to really read into what ace and L have posted so far. I suggest everyone do the same. Not trying to make people ignore the other teams, but everyone should comment on L and Ace, to imply they read into it. Basically. I want everyone to read these past 2 pages and discuss it. And make damn sure if you're confused read the entire thread all over. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Line by line post PROOF of me railing on BM/Chez because of their playstyle. Don't give us a link to a search result: POST IT. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF L. Where is the posts of me sitting back not doing anything? How come you didn't address where I called you out for contradicting yourself? You said when I'm scum I sit back and and watch the town devour itself but earlier in the game I pulled a quote of you saying your glad I'm talking alot. Come on, I'm pulling your lies and contradictions up left and right and you have no answer except to post the same junk. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF L SHOW US. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
ebwop = edited by way of post jeep = a player on ms who had a list of tells. These are outdated tells that will point you to Scum. These only work in newbie games because after playing with decent players no scum would be dumb enough to do some of those things. Also the tells were bashed because a lot of them coincided with things townies do also. A lot of people throw these terms around as "evidence" to support their arguments without even knowing what they mean or the background behind them. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Where are the jeep tells pointing out I'm scum? Where is it MAN POST IT. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 26 2010 13:41 L wrote: Where are the jeep tells pointing out you're scum? LOL. IF YOU HAD BOTHERED FOLLOWING THE CONVERSATION, YOU'D KNOW THAT THE THIRD VOTE IN THE RVS PHASE THAT BILL MURRAY WAS TALKING ABOUT IS A JEEP TELL. THANKS FOR ADMITTING YOU ARENT DOING ANYTHING MORE THAN BEING AN ANNOYING PISSANT. As for the posts you're looking for, I already pointed you to them :3. Now be a big boy and read my posts instead of getting your slobbery vagina tears all over the mafia thread. Got ya! Here is the tell right here: http://67.222.17.61/wiki/index.php?title=JEEP's_Tells_for_Finding_Mafia # Third person on a wagon is likely to be mafia (+15) So if you are using this as a basis for me being scum show me where I'm the third vote on a wagon. Go ahead. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 26 2010 13:57 L wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=131987¤tpage=23#451 Got ya! Its not a random theory. Its a jeep tell. You tried to hound bill on his 'faulty logic', but he was pulling one of the most standard pieces of analysis. Weak Ace. Now you're thinking I'm applying the Jeep tell to you? Herp Derp. I'm talking about the You/Bill spat, champ. Get with the times. Get those cataracts removed so you can read the text in front of you before getting smug. It's me saying that Bill Murray was WRONG and he was. He didn't even know that the RVS doesn't just end whenever he feels it does. Hell people still didn't even vote at that point. I told you that tell is outdated. In fact here let's go back look at past games (not taking out the strike marks): MM 3: nemY: (3) Chezinu Ace Vivi57 Amber[Light]: (3) redtooth Ace Chezinu Amber[Light] Scamp Vivi57 Chezinu Scamp: (1) redtooth Chezinu redtooth The "theory" holds true in 1 out of 3 cases. Chezinu was scum. In the other cases the third voter was town. MM2: vx70GTOJudgexv: (5) RebirthOfLeGenD Ace nemY mikeymoo Chezinu Malongo: (4) Zato-1 vx70GTOJudgexv L HeavOnEarth Chezinu mikeymoo: (1) Vivi57 Scamp Chezinu Chezinu 1 out of 3 again! MM2 continued: Chezinu: (3) Ace vx70GTOJudgexv mikeymoo mikeymoo: (6) RebirthOfLeGend Chezinu Scamp Vivi57 Zato-1 L 1 out of 2! MM1: JimTudor: 3 Foolishness Pyrrhuloxia Qatol SatuoxKisei 6 Foolishness Qatol Chezinu Zato-1 Infundibulum Pyrrhuloxia Infundibulum 5 Foolishness Qatol Pyrr SugiuraMidori Zato-1 Vivi57 3 Pyrr Qatol Foolishness Zato-1 1 for 4. I just listed 3 Mini Mafia games where the Jeep tell would be best applied since they are in similar structure to this game. And like I told BM he was wrong and did not understand the tell - the #3 isn't the issue. The basis behind it was where scum would likely feel safe to vote without being blamed but looking active: the results from these tests? Out of 12 listed vote checks a whopping THREE fit the theory. Yes a 25% chance. Pitiful. Like I said I know Bill Murray was misusing stuff he read on MS. If you want to take one of worst players on this forum's word over one of the greatest Mafia players of all time then do so: but don't be surprised when I call you out for being wrong. Guess what? You just got proved wrong again. GG scum. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 27 2010 11:30 L wrote: Offered your ally a chance to kill T9. He bit. Meh. He must have really believed someone's argument then. I still peg you as their scum ally then. till don't like that agreement between you, YI, and DTA to swing vote. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 28 2010 09:54 L wrote: I can't make up my mind because I still think you're scum? Dang. You're an idiot. didnt you just post some crap yesterday about T7 or Team 8 saving Team 9 in the previous day's wagon? Or was that just to get votes off of yourself which would of course be totally understandable. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 28 2010 11:11 BrownBear wrote: And yeah... fuck. Should have protected Team 3, my bad. For what it was worth, I was convinced Team 4 was town until the last page, when Ace's stubbornness made me start to wonder. I was taunting you lololololololololol. I could write a book as to how to dupe the town. There were so many bad bad bad logic leaps and arguments this game. Jeezus christ. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On June 28 2010 11:16 L wrote: No one bothers reading posts anyways. Half the town got modkilled during the day we had to push you. Your posts on Day 2 were so terrible why would they. You made a ton of mistakes that I'll be sure to point out after I finish watching the BET awards. Seriously you should have learned something about arguing against someone you are 100% sure is scum by now. | ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
| ||