|
I’m sorry to point it out, but I can’t help but notice how general and unproductive your posts are, LunarDestiny.
At some point on day1, we should come up with a list of possible lynch and that will encourage those people on the list to speak up 1) Lists are a good way to appear like you are contributing, without actually adding anything.
I want to put pressure on all inactives to speak up and maybe contribution. 2) Pressure is not done in general, pressure is specific to make the player unable to hide. Your list of pressuring “all” inactives is the same as pressuring none.
3) There is a fine line between a plan, and suggestions that make you appear to be active while sending the town on a goosechase. Your plan requires no work from yourself (“we” should do this and that), is very general (“at some point”), and it’s limited to inactives instead of scumhunting, making it mechanic, so even when we hit town, the mafia is not guilty.
In general, the player list is a little more stacked with active players than Pokemafia/HPmafia, so inactives shouldn’t be as much as a problem (even if I just replaced one…)
|
I think the problems with inactives in HP mafia and Pokemafia was largely down to the number of new players. In this player list, there is a fair few veterans, who are used to have an impact on the game, which should help diminish the problems with inactives, and on top of that the gross offenders from those games has been banned.
This thread has so far been more active than both of those games, so I’m with annul when he suggest we scumhunt first, and deal with inactives if we have nothing better. And a wagon on LSB is very different from one on Kenpachi :/
This doesn't mean we can't put pressure on them of course...
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 28 2010 07:40 LSB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 07:34 LunarDestiny wrote:I am following debates between Annul and LSB. There are something I don't get. Annul's conclusion in his first post about why LSB should be lynched. in conclusion, LSB has been making pure nonposts and/or pure informative posts without analysis, with the two exceptions being his insistence on the "kill inactives" theme and his defenses of pandain and mr. wiggles. yet he has like 30 posts up while saying almost absolutely nothing.
my vote is on LSB now. Annul, your conclusion for lynching LSB is because he have about 30 posts. All 30 posts, except 2, are posts that means nothing and pure informative posts without analysis? LSB, are your reasons for lynching Annul in page 17? -1. Giant wall of text that pretends to be contributing -2. He doesn't want to do anything about inactives -3. He makes a faulty analysis that is forced -4. Annul posts without brining anything new I will say what I think of this later, but I want to get these two points straight. Indeed. 1/4 are basically the same thing. How about this. With a bit more explanation. 1) Makes posts that don't do much, but pretend to be contributing. Then congratulates himself of all the contributions that he did. This is a mafia manuver. See LMNOP in WaW mafia 2) Although Annul says inactives hurt the town, he has not done anything to attempt to deal with the problem. He has shot down all attempts at working together a solution without offering a reason, let alone an alternative. This is a decidedly anti-town maneuver, as leaving the inactives alone will lose us the game. See Pokemafia 3) Annul analysis is forced. This is incredibly telling. See my analysis on SR in TMM2, I was mafia and I made a forced junk analysis in order to try to take off heat.
Why would a mafia analysis be forced on day 1? There was noone else pointing fingers of LSB, until annul made his post. If he is mafia he has no incentive to lynch this badly.
Second your reasons for voting annul is pretty weak considering you clearly would rather lynch an inactive. Why do you vote a player without believing in it? Even worse why do you vote omgus?
On December 28 2010 07:47 LSB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 07:31 Barundar wrote: I think the problems with inactives in HP mafia and Pokemafia was largely down to the number of new players. In this player list, there is a fair few veterans, who are used to have an impact on the game, which should help diminish the problems with inactives, and on top of that the gross offenders from those games has been banned. Just to give you an idea. 4 people haven't posted yet. And 9 posters have only posted spam/point out that Pandain is being bandwagoned. That’s not really a lot of inactives on day 1. Why don't you name one at put pressure though?
|
On December 28 2010 08:11 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 07:42 annul wrote:On December 28 2010 07:34 LunarDestiny wrote:I am following debates between Annul and LSB. There are something I don't get. Annul's conclusion in his first post about why LSB should be lynched. in conclusion, LSB has been making pure nonposts and/or pure informative posts without analysis, with the two exceptions being his insistence on the "kill inactives" theme and his defenses of pandain and mr. wiggles. yet he has like 30 posts up while saying almost absolutely nothing.
my vote is on LSB now. Annul, your conclusion for lynching LSB is because he have about 30 posts. All 30 posts, except 2, are posts that means nothing and pure informative posts without analysis? LSB, are your reasons for lynching Annul in page 17? -1. Giant wall of text that pretends to be contributing -2. He doesn't want to do anything about inactives -3. He makes a faulty analysis that is forced -4. Annul posts without brining anything new I will say what I think of this later, but I want to get these two points straight. my conclusion is that, yes, PLUS his insistence on going after inactives instead of scumhunting. it would be very easy for a mafia to know his team all happen to be active and then say "hey kill inactives over all else EVEN IF scummy targets exist" I'm not sure what to make of this annul vs. LSB business. Annul says that LSB may be mafia and knows his team is active, so he wants to divert attention away from them towards the inactives. But to play devil's advocate, one could say that annul may be mafia and knows that his team is inactive and laying low, and would rather portray someone else as scummy and divert attention away from the inactives. I'm of the opinion that if there's a clear target for lynching we should go for it, and if not, pick off one of the inactives, but this whole situation just seems murky. This whole argument seems to be very polarizing and I can already see divisions being made. =/ Polarization is actually not bad. Mafia hate to take sides and would rather soft defend by pointing towards someone else or be very uncertain in their defence. There is no such thing as a clear lynch, especially not on the first day, we have little to go on and mafia has a pletora of options for providing alternative lynch candidates. But if you have a number of explanations, the simplest is usually the right one, which why I don't think annul is mafia.
|
On December 28 2010 16:50 GGQ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 16:40 LSB wrote:On December 28 2010 05:18 LSB wrote:On December 28 2010 05:17 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: LSB; while Annul doesn't have a very strong case against you, your defense was pretty pathetic. I've had a bad gut feeling about you for a while, it's not something I was planning on voting on but Annul did bring out all of the problems I had been having with your posts. I'm not voting you quite yet but I would like you to give more than one line answers whenever someone puts a fos on you. Consider this post a +1 for Annul's case against LSB. I'd like to see you take some time in defending yourself and not just brush it off because there were some good points in annul's post. Give me a point to address then. Bump. Why did you OMGUS vote annul when I'm sure you know that's a common scumtell?
... and why did you vote for him while you kept trying to make town look for inactives? Shouldn't you be trying to convince people to your case if you where certain enough to vote?
In pokemafia, you said "I was very protective of my Shockeyy lynch", when someone suggested another possible mafia lynch. Now you are fine with the town splitting up attention. How would you explain this change in play style?
|
On December 28 2010 16:42 Node wrote: I think between annul and LSB it's actually quite likely that one of them is scum. In Haunted Mafia, DocH and Pandain continually re-iterated the same arguments against each other, making huge walls of text that consumed many pages, and diverted town discussion from important things for like two whole game days. In the end, Pandain was scum. The difference there was that there were no PMs that game, so it was more important to be able to follow the thread well. All the same, I'm sensing echoes of that here, especially since annul seems to want to continue to force the issue. So you argue that one of them is scum, yet reach the conclusion we should divert attention away? This seems illogical. And you vote for the one of them keeping up the pressure?
On December 28 2010 16:42 Node wrote:I'll also say that I find annul's posting to be much scummier than LSB's. The way he's posting reminds me a lot of the way he played Experimental Mini Mafia (which was an interesting experience, as I knew he was scum from the beginning ), whereas LSB's defense and contribution seems a lot more like his posting in Pokemafia, where he was green. In that game annul only posted 1 liners, voted without reason etc. In this game he is providing big analysis and is willing to defend it. How is that the same?
|
He clarifies that he wants to not target an inactive for a day 1 lynch, but wants to pressure them into posting via his list. Which... I don't really get. Why would they post if there was no actual threat of being lynched? Also, I don't think mafia pressuring inactives would actually be bad, as long as . In addition the last time a complete inactive got lynched day 1 (salem mafia w/BrownBear), they ended up being red, though to be fair it was a traitor role, so the mafia wasn't aware of their alignment.
Scumslip?
More comments on the LSB / annul debate. I'm happy to see him voice his thoughts on the matter, though I would rather see an actual position taken instead of just listing the various issues that are guiding the debate. He could be genuinely unsure of which side to take, or it could be the typical wishy-washy mafia. That is exactly how I feel about you after reading your analysis :/ Case in point: Final verdict: undecided
|
Well, after reading LunarDestiny's posts, would you reach a different conclusion? I picked him because he was setting off warning bells in my head, and I wasn't entirely sure why. After doing an analysis, I realized it maybe wasn't entirely warranted, though I will be keeping an eye on him. I found he responded well to my pressure, so I dropped it. If you analysed him and found it unreasoned, why post a long post discussing it back and forth?
And just because mafia does it doesn't mean it's inherently bad for the town. Are you going to tell me it's bad if a mafia incites an inactive townie to start posting and contributing? The reason I find your half edited line to be a possible scumslip is beceause it's a controversial line for a mafia to post, making them think twice about it, while an unconcerned townie wouldn't have had a problem posting it.
|
Sigh what is the point of putting pressure by votes on a player who is clearly afk, this shortly before the day ends?
|
I understand you want to save yourself, but Brocket is the worst scapegoat you could possibly find. He is as scummy as Kenpachi when posting, and now he is even afk. Voting him is the same as abstaining, and really gets us nowhere.
|
On December 29 2010 10:31 Insanious wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 10:24 Barundar wrote: I understand you want to save yourself, but Brocket is the worst scapegoat you could possibly find. He is as scummy as Kenpachi when posting, and now he is even afk. Voting him is the same as abstaining, and really gets us nowhere. Between Brocket and LSB, I would much much much rather Brocket dead then LSB... There really isn't another choice now due to time constraints... Annul brought us to this point, a 1 person bandwaggon is pretty much the worst thing that can happen to the town. 0 analysis can be done concerning votes, mafia can hide where ever they want to when voting for a town... You need at least 2 candidates every day for voting or it might as well just be a random.org vote. LSB has a high chance of being a blue, and killing a blue, especially early is terrible.\ Brocket is most likely green or a lurking mafia... and since there have been 4 people comming out of no where to defend Brocket it makes me think Brocket is even more red. You wan't to save him beceause of a blue claim? LSB is experienced enough to blueclaim if he is mafia. He should also be experienced enough to not omgus vote, and claim he owed it to the town.
The only case where nothing can be analysed from votes, is if you out of the blue pick an afk player to bus. He gets no chance to defend himself, and noone needs to post their reasons for voting him. You are effectively killing the main point of discussion of the day off, and I have a hard time finding something more hurtful to the town.
Brocket is most likely green or a lurking mafia... and since there have been 4 people comming out of no where to defend Brocket it makes me think Brocket is even more red You haven't even let Brocket defend himself, yet you will happily believe LSB's claim, and believe Brocket is mafia?
|
While I know it's my mistake to vote and argue for LSB, it's way too easy to be smart about it after. The only ones that knew he was innocent was mafia. LSB's main policy was to lure out lurkers, so that's the ones I'm looking at, at the moment, and I encourage DT's to do same, unless ofcourse you got something better.
|
TheMango and Shockeyy mind posting your reasons for your votes? Just for later reference.
|
Discussion just died, no way we are getting anywhere like this.
On December 30 2010 18:57 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Alright. So I am tired of this town being wishwashy so much. Tomorrow before I go to work I am going to decide on a lynch target. We are going to kill them, if I am wrong you guys can kill me if you so wish it. The thing is I will chose my target, I will push them relentlessly, and I will be right. I will most likely choose one of the three mentioned before, but it is going to be large analysis followed by a relentless attack until I get my way. I see three candidates going out right now with some shitty stupid reasoning. I will examine every person being suggested right now and decide which one is best. I welcome all who oppose me. I'm not sure we need another all out war between 2 players now, even if you have been right in other games - to be honest this is the first time I have seen you alive by day 2 as town in the 2 games I've played with you.
I'm not entirely sure what the rationale behind voting Insanious is, he was very active throughout yesterday, and would a mafia really have an incentitive to put themselves in the spotlight that much for an innocent? Same reasoning kinda rules out Pandain as scum for me, why would he be so wavering to defend a blue?
I'd like to get some more people's opinion on these targets. LSB's aim was to lure out lurkers, before he got sidetracked by the debate between himself and annul. Honest opinions will atleast give us something to work with.
|
Mr.zergling would you mind posting your reason for voting mr.wiggles? And why you pick hin over the other suggested targets?
|
|
Anyone else with thoughts on option for double lynch? I personally think it's too early yet, atleast untill we get a better idea of targets for today.
|
I find it interesting you appear when called out OpZ. I'm unsure whether you trust RoL or not, most of your posts in the thread has been about something he said. What do you think speaks for lynching Insanious?
|
On December 31 2010 08:34 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2010 05:56 Barundar wrote: Anyone else with thoughts on option for double lynch? I personally think it's too early yet, atleast untill we get a better idea of targets for today. Why would you even bring this up? Day 2 double lynch when we have no good targets? Are you just trying to fill space? I didn't bring it up, but may I ask why you don't want to discuss it? We need to get the town involved, if we want to lure out mafia.
You still suggest we should all post a FoS each?
|
... and annul votes without providing a reason. I would like for some more of the inactives to join the discussion. Brockett what's your thoughts on the current targets? Darthien we still need to see a first post from you. Also maybe you could address some of the points raised against you, Seraph?
|
Vote to extend the day please town. This lynch is critical for us, we don't want people afk or drunk for when it really matters.
|
This post is to prove Mr.Zergling is mafia.
I will show you that firstly, Mr.Zergling plays different than his last game as town in HP mafia, and secondly he cannot be a blue role.
First, notice these posts, some of his first posts with content (my comments are in bold):
+ Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 11:39 Mr.Zergling wrote: My vote has gone to LSB, as his responses to annul's analysis have been weak. However, from HP mafia, LSB seems to always act somewhat scummy (which is why he got lynched last game). Also deconduo's analysis gives some convincing reasons to lynch LSB (for instance: that recommending abstaining from voting is not a pro-town suggestion (also abstaining is against the rules))
Although, no day 1 lynch is ever clear, more of a shot in the dark than anything
(((I love parenthesis))) Wishy washy post. Every argument has a counter argument. On December 29 2010 12:10 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 12:03 Insanious wrote: So LSB fliped blue... here is my current game plan:
1) Vote Paindain because of how he acted when we started to vote for someone that wasn't LSB. This to me seems like the mafia are trying to get a 5th KP by killing LSB a claimed blue who is active. So Paindain looks like the most like a mafia to me.
2) Ignoring Annul for rest of game. He got tunnel vision towards a blue, who even if he was red we shouldn't of voted for right now, we should of voted for in 2 days. He had a bad gut feeling, and ignored when people put forth good reasoning to not follow that gut feeling. Annul is about 99% likely to be a green. So he shouldn't be voted for... just ignored 99% of the time unless he finds something increadibly useful... not likely to happen after this debacle.
- - - -
Also... told you so... Annul listen to me more... I looked at this logically, you were attacking LSB. You were obviously wrong like 15 pages ago.
Brocket and Paindrain... one of them is Red and I assume its Paindrain. Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 10:48 Pandain wrote:On December 29 2010 10:31 Insanious wrote:On December 29 2010 10:24 Barundar wrote: I understand you want to save yourself, but Brocket is the worst scapegoat you could possibly find. He is as scummy as Kenpachi when posting, and now he is even afk. Voting him is the same as abstaining, and really gets us nowhere. Between Brocket and LSB, I would much much much rather Brocket dead then LSB... There really isn't another choice now due to time constraints... Annul brought us to this point, a 1 person bandwaggon is pretty much the worst thing that can happen to the town. 0 analysis can be done concerning votes, mafia can hide where ever they want to when voting for a town... You need at least 2 candidates every day for voting or it might as well just be a random.org vote. LSB has a high chance of being a blue, and killing a blue, especially early is terrible.\ Brocket is most likely green or a lurking mafia... and since there have been 4 people comming out of no where to defend Brocket it makes me think Brocket is even more red. I vehemently disagree. FIrst off, LSB doesn't have a high chance of being blue, he's claimed everything from vigi to dt, and his supposed plan which no one knows what possibly could be he refuses to tell. Furthormore now your saying that we're forced to either vote brockett or LSB, and previously you had been saying you were voting him because "he played differently." Plus right now we can find out so much from LSB's flip. I know people usually say not to lynch for information but this is a special scenario. IT's all because LSB has claimed blue, and mafia know that, or that LSB is mafia, and they're trying to swing a bandwagon onto brockett to save him. If LSB flips red- Great! We caught probably at least 3-4 scum who tried to swing the bandwagon onto Brockett, in addition to information from posting. Furthormore we caught a scum! IF LSB flips blue LSB is not DT, so we don't have to worry about that. Why? -Claimed very early to be blue, DT wouldn't have done that being most important role. Would've waited. -Revealed pms where RoL said LSB might be DT, and hinted strongly because it was the only role that could fit the plan. Why would DT be so reckless, especially when he seemingly doesn't want to claim? So we don't have to worry about losing a DT. So when, if blue, he would most vigi, then that's not even that bad of a loss. But most importantly mafia would be wanting him dead, since he's blue, and they know it. So people who voted for LSB should be looked upon with suspicion, myself included. But again I would like to stress people that LSB is 99% not blue, that he is 99% red. And I urge you to read my analysis I made of him, and realize whats happening here. Vote LSB. Stop the Bandwagon. mmm This does have me suspicious of Paindain, but would a mafia really be that overt and outspoken about lynching a blue, or would they try and lay low so they are not associated with the impending mess when the target flips blue? Now though, we can look at all previous analysis in a new light Again he won't point fingers without being back and forth. The last line is just filler.
Now compare that to his first posts in HP mafia as town:
+ Show Spoiler + On December 11 2010 12:14 Mr.Zergling wrote: I think LSB is making himself suspicious by proposing a 1st kill voting style that can be easily manipulated He has no problem pointing out what he finds suspecious about other players, without adding a "but maybe it's not". On December 12 2010 15:19 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2010 13:13 Airbag wrote: who would you kill instead of LSB meapak? Why does it matter when meapak says he's gonna have votes on first lynch? Again, straight up posting. On December 14 2010 10:36 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2010 10:24 why wrote: 1) Can Mr. Zergling and Lunar Destiny prove that they are mod-confirmed? Like by breadcrumb? Sorry if this has already been addressed.
2) My interpretation is that 3 death eater hits went out, 1 on Amber, 1 on RoL, and 1 on Beneather. RoL survived the hit, but got taken out by a 3rd-party (quite possibly town-aligned since he was garnering a lot of suspicion). I think RoL got hit by death eater because only 1 person has claimed to be hit and because RoL was playing more scummy than normal. A scum would interpret this as trying to make him a less attractive target (you don't NK scummy players) and NK'ed him anyway.
This makes LSB more likely to be scum as RoL was quite vocal in his denunciation.
3) Kenpachi and LSB = mod-confirmed patil sisters? The only thing I can think of that makes his defense make sense (other than them both being scum, of course). In this case your play is REALLY STUPID Kenpachi. 1)Ummm...Breadcrumb? fill a noob in please 2) I think there was more than one town-hit that went down as Beneather was being considered as suspected scum by some players, and the mafia wouldn't really want to kill a suspected scum as a suspected scum can draw attention away from real scum Asks for advice, but post his thoughts without fear of them being wrong (and indeed he was right) Compare that to his general posting patterns on the forum: + Show Spoiler + I think randoms don't really have that much of an advantage because their race is not shown. Whatever advantage that may give is negated by them probably not being as good with the race they get as someone who mains one race. Edit: Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 09:49 holynorth wrote: Random is already at a disadvantage of having to know more match-ups than you.. Stop complaining about their one advantage.
lol beat me to it. Gives opinion in the same way as when he was playing green in HPmafia. On December 10 2010 09:56 Mr.Zergling wrote: Considering whats been said already, if you have early game ff issues, I find running a small group of zerglings and/or banelings close to their army to make them panic and throw down a lot of ff is fairly effective, repeat until there is no more sentry energy left Another straight up opinion
The posts from this game are much more unclear than his general posting habbits. That made me suspicious of him. For now it's enough to conclude that he has a role in this game. People don’t arbitrary change their posting style from one day to another.
He tuned up the frequency when attention was switched to him. DrH wrote: + Show Spoiler + On December 29 2010 13:16 DoctorHelvetica wrote: i believe mr zergling is mafia, in fact i have since his very first few hosts
he would be a good dt check as well as seraph and insanious
ill reanalyse things when i get home. also why can noone spell "pandain" On December 30 2010 07:19 DoctorHelvetica wrote: We don't need to be discussing who to lynch until tomorrow. I think silence is the best policy during the night, don't give the mafia information with which they can better their hit list with.
That being said I agree with a lot of Pandain's suspects. Mr.Zergling is probably mafia. I wouldn't be surprised if Mr.Wiggles was either. Before those posts, he had posted 11 times. While I wouldn’t read too much into this, the posting amount has increased by 16 since, possibly enhanched by me sharing my thoughts with the wrong people in PM’s. What’s interesting is however when he got called out for lurking in HP mafia, he simply posted + Show Spoiler +On December 12 2010 01:44 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2010 01:14 Thegilaboy wrote: I agree with the notion of voting to lynch an inactive. In most cases they are either a red trying to stay under the radar or an inactive townie who is no good to the team. Either case they've got to go I've only posted once, because I right now feel there is nothing to add to this discussion. , and his posting intensity remained the same.
So far we can conclude that his posting behaviour is different from last game as town. This could either be because he is blue or red.
Characteristic for blues are they will try and blend in, contributing without getting attention to themselves. Characteristic for red is they will want to appear to be contributing, without actually adding anything. With that in mind, let’s look at how much he is actually contributing.
Own thoughts posts: + Show Spoiler + On December 27 2010 12:43 Mr.Zergling wrote: we should lynch inactives, if only to prevent the "paindain" disaster like what happened in HP mafia were we lynched a townie and one vote could have changed it This is good advice, but it follows straight after Pandain said the same thing, and LSB starts questioning Mr.Wiggles of his thoughts on it. On December 31 2010 11:44 Mr.Zergling wrote: I think a double lynch is a bad idea at this point, as we only have two of them for the whole game, and still don't have a clear first lynch target, much less second. I think annul is being a bit hasty in voting for double lynch Again not bad, but it follows straight after I posted On December 31 2010 05:56 Barundar wrote: Anyone else with thoughts on option for double lynch? I personally think it's too early yet, atleast untill we get a better idea of targets for today. ... and annul votes without providing a reason. He doesn’t add anything to this. On December 29 2010 15:43 Mr.Zergling wrote: I am interested in why Pandain went from defending LSB (quite vehemently) to pushing strongly to lynch LSB, I suppose the role claim (which was never really clear) could have affected his view of LSB.
Two scenarios:
Pandain is blue: The unclear roleclaim threw him off and he decided that even though LSB had said he would prove his blueness, Pandain just wanted info (stated)
-or-
Pandain is red: He saw the bandwagon shifting to his possible scumbuddy Brocket, and decided that it wouldn't be too suspicious if he shifted the bandwagon back on to LSB by touting an "info lynch". Also making himself more trustworthy by saying that everyone who voted LSB should be under suspicion (which they should) Thinks of possible scenarios, but it’s based on faulty logic. Only the mafia knew LSB was innocent for sure. Notice the blatant contradiction in the last line. He voted away from LSB himself, does that mean we should look at him more trustworthy? Nothing is gained from the post overall, except: “he thinks pandain is suspicious” On December 30 2010 13:02 Mr.Zergling wrote: Also added to my response a couple posts up:
If you do have strong opinions on day 1 without an obvious scumslip, thats just an awful playstyle, especially if you change strong opinions every couple hours This adds nothing.
He quote other people’s reasons, instead of giving his own, when voting: + Show Spoiler + On December 29 2010 09:24 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 08:58 Insanious wrote:On December 29 2010 08:47 bumatlarge wrote:I am curious as to how people are shifting votes around together very smoothly. Im sure RoL gave a relatively similar arguement on seraph and it pittered out. Now insanious points brocket very reasonably and 5 people shift their votes? Im actually itching to see what LSB would pop now... Sorry if you are a vig buddy Few reasons why. For starters seraph is an active and experienced town player, so losing him as a town sucks. The more experienced players like LSB, seraph, RoL, tree.hugger etc... live longer the better shot town has. Next Brocket is posting vastly different then he did in Pokemafia, which points out different behaviour between his town play and his play now. As well, Brocket is not a strong town voice, meaning between losing Brocket and LSB, Brocket hurts less. Finally, most people have read the case for not lynching LSB now that wasn't there when RoL brough up seraph. Meaning now people are looking for a way to switch off of LSB. There wasn't a good candidate to switch to before brocket. Annul is town Seraph is experience d3 is being voted for by pandrain when no one is really listening to now Then there is Brocket, random inactive who is playing vastly different then he did when he was town. Best choice offered. If there was someone better to vote for I would, and I will be the first to vote LSB come day 3 if he doesn't prove that he is blue. This is a good enough reason for me to change my vote to brocket. Also, on my lurking, I often don't feel the need to post if I fell I do not have anything to contribute to analysis. This is especially compounded by this being the first day. + Show Spoiler +On December 30 2010 12:59 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 12:58 Node wrote: For now I'm voting Pandain, as his antics have done little more the cause confusion and split the vote a bajillion different ways. I'll move it pending a more convincing case. ~snip~ ^^This, and what I presented earlier
Instead of giving reasons he quote others. Because of this, and since he doesn’t contribute, we can rule out blue. This leaves only the possibility of a mafia. With this in mind, let’s try and have a look through some of his individual posts. We are looking for hints that support our conclusion based on the posting analysis above.
Brings up that he likes to lurk, even though noone said he was lurking:+ Show Spoiler + On December 29 2010 09:24 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 08:58 Insanious wrote:On December 29 2010 08:47 bumatlarge wrote:I am curious as to how people are shifting votes around together very smoothly. Im sure RoL gave a relatively similar arguement on seraph and it pittered out. Now insanious points brocket very reasonably and 5 people shift their votes? Im actually itching to see what LSB would pop now... Sorry if you are a vig buddy Few reasons why. For starters seraph is an active and experienced town player, so losing him as a town sucks. The more experienced players like LSB, seraph, RoL, tree.hugger etc... live longer the better shot town has. Next Brocket is posting vastly different then he did in Pokemafia, which points out different behaviour between his town play and his play now. As well, Brocket is not a strong town voice, meaning between losing Brocket and LSB, Brocket hurts less. Finally, most people have read the case for not lynching LSB now that wasn't there when RoL brough up seraph. Meaning now people are looking for a way to switch off of LSB. There wasn't a good candidate to switch to before brocket. Annul is town Seraph is experience d3 is being voted for by pandrain when no one is really listening to now Then there is Brocket, random inactive who is playing vastly different then he did when he was town. Best choice offered. If there was someone better to vote for I would, and I will be the first to vote LSB come day 3 if he doesn't prove that he is blue. This is a good enough reason for me to change my vote to brocket. Also, on my lurking, I often don't feel the need to post if I fell I do not have anything to contribute to analysis. This is especially compounded by this being the first day. There is talk about lurking, and other names are mentioned, but his isn’t. Why does he feel the need to defend himself without being accused? Because mafia feel inherently guilty, and wants to defend themselves before a suspicion is even raised. In HP mafia he wrote the same: + Show Spoiler + On December 12 2010 01:44 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2010 01:14 Thegilaboy wrote: I agree with the notion of voting to lynch an inactive. In most cases they are either a red trying to stay under the radar or an inactive townie who is no good to the team. Either case they've got to go I've only posted once, because I right now feel there is nothing to add to this discussion. But here he is individually targeted. In this game he brings it up himself.
The time incident+ Show Spoiler + On December 29 2010 10:27 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 10:23 Insanious wrote: There is still 2 hours left to vote, its not over yet... we just need to get some people to switch from LSB to Brocket, we have 2 hours... I fail at 12/24hr conversion.........my bad Also PM from paindain: why are you voting brockett tell me here in your own words why What is the relevance of the PM in this context? If he really wants to save LSB he should be relieved it isn’t over? Instead the PM make it sound like there is mafia trying to save LSB, and that we actually should continue lynching him. All it really is, is a diversion.
Illogical voting/scumhunting: + Show Spoiler + On December 31 2010 05:08 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2010 05:03 Barundar wrote: Mr.zergling would you mind posting your reason for voting mr.wiggles? And why you pick hin over the other suggested targets? I thought his last 18min switch to LSB was strange, but thats been noted. I think I am changing to Orgo after reading GGQ's analysis, but I think Ill give him time to respond before i change my vote again Mafia knows that vote switching draws attention. Yesterday he switched away from LSB to Brocket, but why would he be caught lynching a blue? Now he recognises his vote is based on wrong reasons, but doesn’t switch it. If he was scumhunting, he would want to pressure orgolove into posting by voting for him. It doesn’t make sense to state beforehand, that you are going to vote for him after he posts. There is no rationale for this, apart from a mafia’s fear of suspicious voting.
Empty fingerpointing:+ Show Spoiler + Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 14:34 Node wrote: You guys are seriously still having this argument?
At this point, it's irrelevant. The fact that we're still arguing that LSB is scum just makes me think the people dragging it up are suspicious. Insanious, annul, Mepeak arguing just to throw us off? Sounds like a plausible way for reds to be able to deny association if someone gets lynched and flips red. This is distracting us from real scumhunting and making people feel like they need to jump on one bandwagon, thus fracturing the Town, and allowing the mafia to more or less control our lynch The first part of this post is not bad, if it had been to lead the town into more fruitful discussions. But the last sentence is out of context. It is a barely hidden mafia gloat post about yesterday, and it serves no purpose here but as a filler.
And finaly: + Show Spoiler + On December 31 2010 15:26 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2010 15:07 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:lol you say Dude, your post makes it seem like people should be suspicious of the people you bolded. Read what you wrote and how your wrote it. You didn't say "this data means nothing but was interesting" you said "I'm making a spreadsheet to find reds, and look what I found..." you FoS'd people based on how you posted, not on what you said.
But hey look, I even did what you said I did Here is some random trivia Using the words "random" and "trivia" to preface what I said normally indicates that the following information isn't really relevant but somewhat funny nontheless. Dude... I need to mention, the pandain bandwagon was going on before I made that first post that got you all wrapped up in knots. I want to say one thing quick in case anyone else got things mixed up like you did MY ABOVE POST IS NOT MEANT TO FOS ANYONE, IF I FOS YOU, I WILL TELL IT STRAIGHT AND NOT TRY AND HIDE IT. Hey, if the trivia is random, then why include it? Non-Relevant trivia has no place in scumhunting, unless you are trying to FoS someone in a subtle manner. The fact is this "Non-Relevant Trivia" could cause some players to be suspicous in other player's minds. This is an FoS. Why do this when it makes you look incredibly scummy? This post looks very different from all the rest of Mr.Zergling’s posting. It’s sharp, direct, suggests he is scumhunting, and it is intelligent. No more wishy washy tone like in this game, or statement of opinions like in HPmafia. Compare it to this other post: On December 29 2010 12:27 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 12:22 DoctorHelvetica wrote: so pandain is scum because he was wrong? that is a very stupid idea. I was trying to say something more along the lines of: Some people are suspicious of paindain (myself included), but we cannot tell if he is scum based on what we think scum would do. This all sounds better in my head. Is there any doubt these posts are not written by the same person?
Conclusion: Mr.Zerglings posting behaviour differs from his last game as town. He has added little to none individual contribution to the thread, and we can therefore rule out blue. This leaves only mafia.
Lynch Mr.Zergling
|
My new years eve starts now, but we got extended time so we can bag this kill. Please don't forget to vote!
|
I'm in the irc chat. Ofcourse there is going to be mafia in there, but there is no reason to not get more opinions.
On January 01 2011 21:33 annul wrote: what is the difference between using IRC logs and using "PM logs?"
PM logs are just as forgeable and people accept them all the time No matter what you are derailing us by discussing it.
Orgolove I would really like to get some opinions from you on tonights lynch?
|
7. Mr.Zergling-dumb townie+ Show Spoiler +On December 28 2010 11:39 Mr.Zergling wrote: My vote has gone to LSB, as his responses to annul's analysis have been weak. However, from HP mafia, LSB seems to always act somewhat scummy (which is why he got lynched last game). Also deconduo's analysis gives some convincing reasons to lynch LSB (for instance: that recommending abstaining from voting is not a pro-town suggestion (also abstaining is against the rules))
Although, no day 1 lynch is ever clear, more of a shot in the dark than anything
(((I love parenthesis))) This post is very unsure to me. First I note it contradicts his first post about lynching inactives, and if he's unsure about LSB, why lynch him already. Very suspicious to me. On December 29 2010 09:24 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 08:58 Insanious wrote:On December 29 2010 08:47 bumatlarge wrote:I am curious as to how people are shifting votes around together very smoothly. Im sure RoL gave a relatively similar arguement on seraph and it pittered out. Now insanious points brocket very reasonably and 5 people shift their votes? Im actually itching to see what LSB would pop now... Sorry if you are a vig buddy Few reasons why. For starters seraph is an active and experienced town player, so losing him as a town sucks. The more experienced players like LSB, seraph, RoL, tree.hugger etc... live longer the better shot town has. Next Brocket is posting vastly different then he did in Pokemafia, which points out different behaviour between his town play and his play now. As well, Brocket is not a strong town voice, meaning between losing Brocket and LSB, Brocket hurts less. Finally, most people have read the case for not lynching LSB now that wasn't there when RoL brough up seraph. Meaning now people are looking for a way to switch off of LSB. There wasn't a good candidate to switch to before brocket. Annul is town Seraph is experience d3 is being voted for by pandrain when no one is really listening to now Then there is Brocket, random inactive who is playing vastly different then he did when he was town. Best choice offered. If there was someone better to vote for I would, and I will be the first to vote LSB come day 3 if he doesn't prove that he is blue. This is a good enough reason for me to change my vote to brocket. Also, on my lurking, I often don't feel the need to post if I fell I do not have anything to contribute to analysis. This is especially compounded by this being the first day. Says he's going to vote people because of what other people said, without giving his own reasons. Furthormore does the guilt scum tell, where he has to explain himself for his lurking. It doesn't prove anything yet, but I'm noting it. On December 29 2010 10:02 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 09:41 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:On December 29 2010 09:32 Insanious wrote:On December 29 2010 09:26 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: Lemme sum up why brocket should be lynched "ZOMFG, he's posting different than in the last game he played!!111!!! He mus be red lynch himmm!!!111!!!... correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this brocket's second game? Isn't it to early to apply metagame? and the reason why we should vote for LSB being "Annul says he is red. HE IS RED!!!! KILL HIM!!!" Is any better? At least Brocket logic is Brocket is playing exactly like the mafia in the mafia game he last played. Is better logic then LSB spammed and is therefore scum... Actually I'm voting LSB becuse I had suspicions of LSB before Annul even started posting, when he came out with his comments and several people agreed with him it validated my concerns. LSB's defense has only cemented my view of him. More concerns I have is that LSB claims a blue and everyone believes him when it's the oldest trick in the book for a mafia about to get lynched. Another thing I don't like is how all of a sudden people are crawling out of the wood work to accuse people who really haven't done anything to bring suspicion on them other than acting like disinterested townies who are disapointed they didn't get a blue or red role. The case against brocket feels like a mafia attempt to pull votes and save LSB. In short, LSB had me suspicious at the start and has only gotten redder as the game has gone on. But, he has offered to prove that he is indeed a blue role by night 2, thus if he can not satisfactorily prove that, he dies. repeats what others has said, doesn't really give anything new. On December 29 2010 10:22 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 10:19 Insanious wrote:On December 29 2010 10:16 Barundar wrote: Sigh what is the point of putting pressure by votes on a player who is clearly afk, this shortly before the day ends? Its not pressure votes, its votes to have LSB not die tonight so he can prove he is a blue later... and we have a possability of hitting a red. Too damn late, goodbye LSB This is especially suspicious. He's acting like he failed him, also that he knows that LSB is blue, but he hasn't been contributing. He says he contributes if he feels he can, and this post indicates that, but why isn't he doing anything. Also note this is two hours before lsb got lynched, and before and after mr. zergling will not contribute more. On December 29 2010 12:10 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 12:03 Insanious wrote: So LSB fliped blue... here is my current game plan:
1) Vote Paindain because of how he acted when we started to vote for someone that wasn't LSB. This to me seems like the mafia are trying to get a 5th KP by killing LSB a claimed blue who is active. So Paindain looks like the most like a mafia to me.
2) Ignoring Annul for rest of game. He got tunnel vision towards a blue, who even if he was red we shouldn't of voted for right now, we should of voted for in 2 days. He had a bad gut feeling, and ignored when people put forth good reasoning to not follow that gut feeling. Annul is about 99% likely to be a green. So he shouldn't be voted for... just ignored 99% of the time unless he finds something increadibly useful... not likely to happen after this debacle.
- - - -
Also... told you so... Annul listen to me more... I looked at this logically, you were attacking LSB. You were obviously wrong like 15 pages ago.
Brocket and Paindrain... one of them is Red and I assume its Paindrain. Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 10:48 Pandain wrote:On December 29 2010 10:31 Insanious wrote:On December 29 2010 10:24 Barundar wrote: I understand you want to save yourself, but Brocket is the worst scapegoat you could possibly find. He is as scummy as Kenpachi when posting, and now he is even afk. Voting him is the same as abstaining, and really gets us nowhere. Between Brocket and LSB, I would much much much rather Brocket dead then LSB... There really isn't another choice now due to time constraints... Annul brought us to this point, a 1 person bandwaggon is pretty much the worst thing that can happen to the town. 0 analysis can be done concerning votes, mafia can hide where ever they want to when voting for a town... You need at least 2 candidates every day for voting or it might as well just be a random.org vote. LSB has a high chance of being a blue, and killing a blue, especially early is terrible.\ Brocket is most likely green or a lurking mafia... and since there have been 4 people comming out of no where to defend Brocket it makes me think Brocket is even more red. I vehemently disagree. FIrst off, LSB doesn't have a high chance of being blue, he's claimed everything from vigi to dt, and his supposed plan which no one knows what possibly could be he refuses to tell. Furthormore now your saying that we're forced to either vote brockett or LSB, and previously you had been saying you were voting him because "he played differently." Plus right now we can find out so much from LSB's flip. I know people usually say not to lynch for information but this is a special scenario. IT's all because LSB has claimed blue, and mafia know that, or that LSB is mafia, and they're trying to swing a bandwagon onto brockett to save him. If LSB flips red- Great! We caught probably at least 3-4 scum who tried to swing the bandwagon onto Brockett, in addition to information from posting. Furthormore we caught a scum! IF LSB flips blue LSB is not DT, so we don't have to worry about that. Why? -Claimed very early to be blue, DT wouldn't have done that being most important role. Would've waited. -Revealed pms where RoL said LSB might be DT, and hinted strongly because it was the only role that could fit the plan. Why would DT be so reckless, especially when he seemingly doesn't want to claim? So we don't have to worry about losing a DT. So when, if blue, he would most vigi, then that's not even that bad of a loss. But most importantly mafia would be wanting him dead, since he's blue, and they know it. So people who voted for LSB should be looked upon with suspicion, myself included. But again I would like to stress people that LSB is 99% not blue, that he is 99% red. And I urge you to read my analysis I made of him, and realize whats happening here. Vote LSB. Stop the Bandwagon. mmm This does have me suspicious of Paindain, but would a mafia really be that overt and outspoken about lynching a blue, or would they try and lay low so they are not associated with the impending mess when the target flips blue? Now though, we can look at all previous analysis in a new light Does a very common tell, saying "oh look, now we can analyze stuff!" without analyzing it themselves. On December 29 2010 15:43 Mr.Zergling wrote: I am interested in why Pandain went from defending LSB (quite vehemently) to pushing strongly to lynch LSB, I suppose the role claim (which was never really clear) could have affected his view of LSB.
Two scenarios:
Pandain is blue: The unclear roleclaim threw him off and he decided that even though LSB had said he would prove his blueness, Pandain just wanted info (stated)
-or-
Pandain is red: He saw the bandwagon shifting to his possible scumbuddy Brocket, and decided that it wouldn't be too suspicious if he shifted the bandwagon back on to LSB by touting an "info lynch". Also making himself more trustworthy by saying that everyone who voted LSB should be under suspicion (which they should) First I find it interesting that he only said pandain is blue or red. I had breadcrumbed that I Was DT early on(im not though), just to lead mafia off. Maybe they had caught on to that? But regardless of that, the fact he only laid out the two scenarios without commenting on it is very suspicious to me. On December 30 2010 12:56 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 07:11 Pandain wrote: ~snip~ Mr-Zergling: Very unsure in his posts, not making any strong opinions. More importantly when he was under the impression day had ended early, he said "sorry LSB, too late." Besides possibly(note that word) showing that he knew LSB was blue, the fact that before hand and after hand he hadn't been helping. Compare that with his previous post saying he only contributes when he feels he can. The only thing saving him is that its semi-consistenent with his previous play in games, but major FoS on him nonetheless. ~snip~
Hard to have strong opinions on day 1. I really am terrible at 12/24hr conversions (said voting ended at 19:00 PST, I converted that in my head to 5:00 PST, fail on my part). I did believe that LSB was blue, as he said he could show it by night 2. First, just because he said that doesn't mean that you should've believed that he was blue, merely been content to wait. On December 30 2010 12:59 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 12:58 Node wrote: For now I'm voting Pandain, as his antics have done little more the cause confusion and split the vote a bajillion different ways. I'll move it pending a more convincing case. ~snip~ ^^This, and what I presented earlier Still not giving his own opinions.Common trend so far. On December 30 2010 15:16 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 14:34 Node wrote: You guys are seriously still having this argument?
At this point, it's irrelevant. The fact that we're still arguing that LSB is scum just makes me think the people dragging it up are suspicious. Insanious, annul, Mepeak arguing just to throw us off? Sounds like a plausible way for reds to be able to deny association if someone gets lynched and flips red. This is distracting us from real scumhunting and making people feel like they need to jump on one bandwagon, thus fracturing the Town, and allowing the mafia to more or less control our lynch Again suspicious, saying "we need to be scum hunting" but not scum hunting at all. On December 31 2010 05:08 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2010 05:03 Barundar wrote: Mr.zergling would you mind posting your reason for voting mr.wiggles? And why you pick hin over the other suggested targets? I thought his last 18min switch to LSB was strange, but thats been noted. I think I am changing to Orgo after reading GGQ's analysis, but I think Ill give him time to respond before i change my vote again Orgo never responded, yet mr zergling later votes wiggles without really giving reasons why. On December 31 2010 15:28 Mr.Zergling wrote: ^^Also, Major FoS on Meapak now Doesn't say why. So right now I feel that he is either mafia or a dumb townie. So now I'm going to go into his previous games. After looking into HArry potter, he's posting pretty much the same, and he was part of a confirmed circle. Furthormore he also said he doesn't contribute until he feels he can. So right now, I'm saying he's just a dumb townie. You just spend a whole post saying he is suspecious, but you reach the conclusion he is innocent just with a reference to HPmafia? I wrote why he is not playing the same as in HPmafia in my analysis, in that game there was no wishy washy posting. Also he was way less active, but he wasn't dump in that game. As I wrote in my post he was right about several things, he picked out LSB's fishy major proposal, and he picked Beneather was not a mafia hit. How is that dumb?
|
IRC was a great idea, I encourage town to take part in the discussions.
I’m now convinced Pandain is town.
We decided to hold off on Mr.Zergling, at least for tonight, and instead push for Orgolove. His only contribution to the thread is his vote for double lynch.
Annul is a top suspect. He hasn’t added anything apart from getting LSB lynched, and has now gone into lurking.
That said, we should ##vote double lynch for tomorrow. With the knowledge we get from the lynch and the night hits, we should be able to get 2 kills by then. Also it’s an insurance if Orgolove turns out not to be red, since we will need the extra KP.
Please go ahead and join us on IRC
|
I don’t like this. There is no support for Orgolove, mafia seems way too likely to let him die. When Orgolove got pressured hard on day 2 in HPmafia, he spammed a lot trying to defend himself. In this game he doesn’t seem to care. He hasn’t added anything, but he is acting completely different when accused and we have no mafia counter bandwagon.
Therefore I’m going to switch my vote to annul. If he was town he would try and improve from his mistake on LSB, and try to come back in the game. Now he seems like he doesn’t care, and just lurks. This leads me to think he is a mafia who just want to get rid of the attention.
|
On January 02 2011 06:00 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2011 04:41 Barundar wrote: I don’t like this. There is no support for Orgolove, mafia seems way too likely to let him die. When Orgolove got pressured hard on day 2 in HPmafia, he spammed a lot trying to defend himself. In this game he doesn’t seem to care. He hasn’t added anything, but he is acting completely different when accused and we have no mafia counter bandwagon.
Therefore I’m going to switch my vote to annul. If he was town he would try and improve from his mistake on LSB, and try to come back in the game. Now he seems like he doesn’t care, and just lurks. This leads me to think he is a mafia who just want to get rid of the attention. The lack of defense for him could be that he is red, and none of the mafia want to be associated with him if/when he flips red So what do you think of annul?
|
We haven't decided anything. But yeah we are openly arguing about it. My suspects for mafia are at the moment:
Annul, RebirthofLegend, Mr.Zergling and OpZ, Im undecided on the last 2, but mango is a good guess.
I'm openly working with Pandain, and I have no problem hiding it. I trust him 100 % to be town.
Tonight we should aim for annul. This should make the rest of them more discendable.
|
So annul, the fact we where wrong on LSB means we cannot have opinions on who other mafia is? Thats entirely bull, and no reason to stop scum hunting. Plenty of townies voted for LSB, only the mafia knew he wasn't guilty. Thats why it was so important for you guys to paint people who voted for him suspecious.
Town alligned people didn't need to go into hiding beceause of a failed lynch. Only mafia did.
|
THIS game though, i gave the town what it needed: activity. otherwise it would devolve into a normal TL mafia town with a bunch of nothing happening. i got shit moving, even if i was wrong in the end. if i were red i should just let town self-implode like it tends to do, yes? i decided to actually, you know, play the game. and hope others followed along. You didn't give it any activity. You distrubted day 1, and then you went into hiding.
On January 02 2011 07:53 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: alright, after my hiatus from activity I will return. First off I know we only have 4 hours left for voting so I am going to say this. Everyone vote annul I will explain my reasoning in a post within the next hour but it is important that anyone on now starts voting for him. I will begin my analysis shortly.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank RoL for confirming my suspicions. He is not a blue. He is the godfather. Since mafia has given up on annul, this means we get to lynch red tonight.
|
I wasn't talking about you. My only doubt left on RoL was the possibility of him being blue. Now I know he is not.
|
Loving the show RoL and annul. Town lynch annul, and enjoy the show
|
Nah they sacrificed him. Thats what the whole RoL vs annul fight was about.
|
On January 02 2011 12:01 annul wrote: grats on the equivalent of a day 1 and 2 red lynch. how lucky Thank you . Pandain deserves the credit though. Your mistake was you let town settle down and start having discussions amongst themselves without mafia interference. Made it too easy to find people to trust.
|
It was announced super early that it might be a possibility. But yeah no way we would have gotten one of you otherwise. For the record RoL was in irc the whole time lurking
|
On January 02 2011 12:12 annul wrote: i really cant win when my teammate doesnt care enough to vote for anyone other than himself and/or vote at all. its utterly ridiculous. it ruins games.
we would probably play on if we were only down one. but two? Argh don't concede please. Still need to find 2 of you
|
We already proved Mr.Zergling is mafia. Here is the post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=179009¤tpage=44#870
RoL is our second kill tomorrow (if a vigi doesn't take him down first). I will post a more thorough analysis of why I suspected him later, but the actions by him and annul during the last few hours should be pretty self explanatory.
DT's there is a number of people I'm unsure of. Will post who tomorrow, but TheMango and Tree.Hugger is topping the list.
weee
|
Ah that explains your constantly asking for medic prot!
|
Mini analysis of RoL
This is more of a statement of why I suspected RoL in the first place than a proper analysis. For a real analysis see http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=179009¤tpage=44#870. I put a lot of time and effort into that.
First let’s start out with some basic facts on RoL: First class player, awesome scumhunter and a veteran of TL mafia. For this reason he rarely sees day 2. Examples: HPmafia: Mafia learns RoL is a vet, and decides to spend two their night vigi hit on him as well as a normal hit night one. Pokemafia: RoL gets sniped within hours of substituting in to the game, before he even make his first post. ExMiMa: RoL instantly coins Aidnai, and has to be substituted out since he even picks up on DrH possibly admitting he is right. Both DrH and bumatlarge was veteran snipes. While this is admittedly an unfair shortcut, the fact that mafia leave him be on first night hit, and instead aim for a blue snipe on Deconduo, is no good for my thoughts on RoL’s alignment. Next let’s look at what he actually does on day 1. First post: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 04:35 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 18:34 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Meh I'll just start now, I have some time. We need to very carefully consider the framer role. It is often advised to detectives, by mafia, that a big town target should be checked to get "information". DT's should check the targets they think are most likely scum based on post behavior and that's pretty much all there is to it until later in the game when a lot of information actually can be gleaned from an alignment check. Framer Strategy: mafia railroads/advises DT to check a big town target with a lot of attention (for an example of this level of attention look at me in insane mafia) and then simply frame them. Pandain was effectively framed on day 1 of haunted and a DT checked him, because Pandain was an active poster but there was nothing scummy about any of his posts. It was a bad check. So beware of attempts to railroad you into checking certain targets especially if it happens in PM. I imagine myself, Pandain, LSB, and RoL will all be strong frame targets that is if they aren't going to be hit since they are likely to be checked. I'm not saying don't check veteran players, I'm saying check people you think are scum. Also DT's shouldn't claim if they find a red and definitely not in PM either. Build a case on that person. Read through their posts and seriously consider them. Read them as though they are mafia, what are they doing to hurt/mislead the town and does it make sense? They might be a miller (there are probably 2, that is the normal count) and they might also have been framed. When you checked someone and now they are mafia or are nearly certain you build a good case to get them lynched, you don't claim straight away because it's still possible the mafia won't hit you and if they do it become immediately apparent why you pushed so strong for a specific lynch which means the mafia have to do a lot of damage control especially if they tried to spread distrust/attack that DT. On December 27 2010 18:25 Ryuu314 wrote:On December 27 2010 17:57 ilovejonn wrote:On December 27 2010 17:46 Ryuu314 wrote: Probably. I don't see how else the game could run otherwise.
7. Editing posts. Editing posts is not allowed for any reason. Anybody can see if you edited a post, and if you are caught, you will look suspicious. Editing will result in a warning. After that, you will be owned. I do have close connections to people who can check pre-edited material if you are truculent. Please do not edit; this is the one part of the site where it is okay to be double posting, even triple-posting. While I ask for everybody to post as concisely as possible, post again if you have to edit anything. Make sure you read all the rules. =) Oops x[ I remembered after I edited hahaha. I \was basically gonna say that Coag probably couldn't be mafia as the timing of his ban would probably prevent him from making hits? But then I looked up the time of his ban and it disproves my theory. The timing of his ban should have nothing to do with what role he may or may not be. Or rather what role I may or may not be. I'm gonna say this about vig's: don't shoot until night 3 or night 4. As the game progresses it gets easier and easier to find mafia and that's when efficient town KP use becomes super important. Don't blow your hit early, you'll more than likely miss. Your goal is to not get killed. As far as this Pandain bandwagon Idon't see why that is. This isn't a mafia thing it's just stupid but he did roleclaim village idiot to me in PM before the game started, not sure what that means. Probably nothing because he's just bad. If he's scum I'll catch him pretty quickly so I'm not worried about him at all. LunarDestiny's posts so far come off as the most scummy but that's just barely, no good target has presented itself yet to me for the lynch so I'll vote for myself. My work schedule is unpredictable and I don't want to get modkilled for it. As an addendum to the first part of this post. I don't think DrH hit it just right. Don't waste your time checking "big name" players. Since a GF is chosen you will get back a blue/green role on them pretty much no matter what. The way I play a detective role can be seen slightly in HP mafia. There were people I thought very likely to be scum, but there were two players I couldn't decide on, but was leaning towards mafia or jackass. OpZ and Orgolove. Night 1 I decided to Orgolove, but either check would of been adequate for my criteria. Usually a host RNG's the player list and makes mild adjustments for balance. The odds of a more recognized/good player getting into the mafia is increased and therefore they are likely to be the godfather. The only game where I would say the "veteran" player IMO wasn't GF was in Salem. They chose SouthRawrea over Radfield, but that could of been because of PM's and knowing where the check was going, or because radfield knew he was going to be inactive. So when you are a DT check someone who is playing aggressively/scummy and someone who you can't quite decide on their alignment. With a framer the odds are increased that you will get a bad check on a "veteran" player because they will either be godfather or framed. On that note though, the only real check we can use is a medic. If a medic protects someone and the day post is mafia KP-1 they can be almost 100% sure they protected someone good, especially if they are a "veteran" player. Anyway, I don't like making it seem like the DT role is so important which this seems like, I in fact view DT as a handicap that clouds a persons judgment. I would rather trust my behavioral analysis over DT checks any day of the week. I urge the utmost caution in using DT checks in this game, because I don't feel like having SouthRawrea 2.0 after I die and everyone becomes too stupid to realize who the leak was. Anyway, I got work in a little bit I will probably be back around 10ish. This is not the RoL I’ve seen in other games. He doesn’t need to give out good advice, he blatantly finds scum and hunt them relentless. I wrote this to DrH straight away, but my concerns actually got dismissed when he posted: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 04:54 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 01:15 LSB wrote:Firstly, pointing out that someone isn’t on topic isn’t analysis. It’s just plain distracting. Why don’t you include my two posts at the start of the game? Their spam too! On December 28 2010 01:00 annul wrote:On December 27 2010 11:11 LSB wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I wanted to wait for the day post before posting this but w/e All right, in many games there was an uneventful first day. Lets not make this one of those games. A few things to talk about: - Should we lynch an inactive day one? Assuming of course, there is no good alternative
- Plans for the roles
Inactives:A big problem in every mafia game is inactivity. I don't want another drag_ being able to squeak by with barely any posts. We should immediately show it is not okay to be inactive. Inactive players hurt the town as they waste lynches down the road as the town will need to try to separate the mafia from the inactives. We should therefore push to lynch an inactive day one. This will force the assassins to discuss and not be able to turtle, increasing the chance they will slip up. The key is that we have to make sure the town knows it is not okay to just simply sit back and not do anything. This way, hopefully everyone will be active and we won't need to lynch an inactive. PlanFirstly. DO NOT CLAIM DO NOT CLAIM Good now that we got that out of the way, some other ideas. Generic Blue Activity planOne plan that would work is to use the blue roles to promote activity in the town. The DTs should check the inactive people and the lurkers, as it is incredibly difficult if not impossible to tell the difference between a bored townie and a lurking mafia. The Medics should protect active players, this way the mafia won't be able to take out the people who are contributing the most to town, so people won't be scared of trying to put forth their opinions. Framer Issue: Framers are much better put to use framing the important townies. So any attempt by the mafia for framing the inactives would be a waste. "should we lynch an inactive?" <-- probably knows mafia is most likely to at least pay attention to the thread enough to evade being labeled inactive. probably knows even if there are mafia inactives, he can choose any other town inactive and maintain the aura of "hey im helping out town" the rest of this is informative sure, but common sense? but the line "We should therefore push to lynch an inactive day one." worries me. much better to hit an active scummy person and LSB should know this. Please read Pokemafia. "DO NOT CLAIM" is good advice, and i would like to say obvious, but given current history and shit it isnt =\ Thanks! On December 27 2010 11:25 LSB wrote:On December 27 2010 11:20 TheMango wrote: Isn't that part of the game? assuming you're using it strategically, and not just for fun/out of boredom? Of course. There's a few cases where claiming is okay. 1) You are about to be lynched. Don't expect this to save you, but it would be nice to tell the town what happens 2) DT checks you. The DT then messages you and say that "I know your role is [insert green/blue role here]. This is mainly used when the DT finds a red, and also finds a green. The green becomes the "DT Mouth" and tells the Town what the DT found out. 3) The Medic successfully protects you. Assuming that it wasn't a hit from the mad hatter, if the medic protects someone, that person probably isn't mafia. 4) The town thinks of some super awesome plan. The issue is when blues jump the gun and start claiming before they confirmed someone. That's a great way to get our blues sniped. (See Salem Mafia. For a short summary, look at the article in the Pony Express) 1 and 2 are fine, 3 is not - you don't claim here, you just admit to being hit - preferably to town circle if you know where it is. 4 is a catch-all sure, but claiming day 1 to a "super awesome plan" is a horrible idea. that said though, LSB is providing pure information (some of which is sketchy) and no analysis. this early it is usually fine but consider it in the light of his earlier postings? it is like he wants to be active but isnt contributing valuable stuff. Help me then. What analysis could I do at that point? On December 27 2010 12:37 LSB wrote:On December 27 2010 12:35 Mr. Wiggles wrote: If he is of the belief I'm spamming, I've just been posting somewhat short responses because there hasn't really been anything worth discussing up to this point.
What do you feel about lynching inactives / spammers? What do you feel that the blues should do? more "hit inactives" crap - this is bad. also maybe a blue fish? Read the thread please On December 27 2010 12:43 LSB wrote: Can I write one then? On December 27 2010 12:43 LSB wrote: That was at Incog/Flamewheel wants to write a day post. uh huh. keep this in mind with the "try to appear active but not" lens. Do you seriously think that I need to pretend to be active? On December 27 2010 13:26 LSB wrote: I don't believe Pandain is mafia just because he fingered Mr. Wiggles.
Clearly at the time Mr. Wiggles did not contribute anything, and Pandain just voted to accent his point.
Indeed, as Ver put in his town guide, spamming can be detrimental to the town.
Now, I don't belive we should lynch Mr. Wiggles. It is far to early to tell anything about him, and also I'd rather lynch a lurker/inactive than a spammer. HEY something of content, cool. sort of defense of pandain and blatant defense of mr. wiggles. sadly the rationale of "inactives instead!" is scummy. Why don't you analyze my defense of Pandain, what does it say? in conclusion, LSB has been making pure nonposts and/or pure informative posts without analysis, with the two exceptions being his insistence on the "kill inactives" theme and his defenses of pandain and mr. wiggles. yet he has like 30 posts up while saying almost absolutely nothing.
my vote is on LSB now. Nice ‘analysis’ yourself btw. Back to pointing fingers like in other threads. Good ol’ RoL, and part of why I suspected LSB. But then:
+ Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 05:12 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I got my defense wrong! I have a strange idea. I think both annul and LSB might be mafia, this little tiff is exactly what annul/KJ did in ExMiMa although this is a little different. I know LSB is a better player than to attack his attacker AS mafia, its kind of an odd tell. My first thought was that he is probably town and just thought the analysis was scummy. But the analysis seems fine to me. The arguments almost feel a little forced too if you read through it. This is definitely something to keep in mind. Wooops back to being different. Suddenly changed opinion, and feel the need to publicly doubt himself? Day 1 in HPmafia he was confident lying to town that he actually found LSB to be green, while pushing for his own lynch on Aidnai behind the scene. RoL doesn’t need to publicly doubt himself.
+ Show Spoiler + On December 29 2010 05:26 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Alright so I finished catching up. I am really unsure about this whole LSB/Annul thing. But one thing I am sure about is that we CANT risk losing ANY blue role. We have no chance as winning as a town if we are throwing blues away day 1. The reason we aren't all green is because we REQUIRE blues to win. Judging by his initial claim LSB is a vigi but tried changing what he said because he didn't want to be so obvious with his claim but it doesn't matter. With a vigilante claim the mafia has a real incentive to kill him tonight to get rid of mafia KP, so we will know whether or not he is mafia in 2 days. There is NO reason to kill him now, since we can hold him off as a "sure thing" day 3 if he hasn't killed someone by then or is not dead. Now for RoL's badass analysis of the game, raping Red's day 1. SeraphShow nested quote +On December 27 2010 10:28 seRapH wrote:On December 27 2010 10:25 TheMango wrote: where are my mafia team mates? lets start getting rid of some people. Hey guys this is an obvious slip-up, we should lynch TheMango. Town wouldn't want to "get rid" of people Also DrH because there's always a high chance of him being mafia. A nothing post, just the pregame jovial attitude usually shown by mafia. Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 10:54 seRapH wrote: I highly doubt there's any more than 1 framer in this game, but we should keep rolecheck candidates to 4 or 5 to minimize framer/miller influence. One of my favorite little tells that a lot of people give off is format speculation early on, he is one of the first to discuss it. Seraph and LD. Although a LOT of people have done it in this game because their was a new role I think we can view this as an additional circumstance to his "mafia" behavior since a lot of people exemplify this strait. Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 13:31 seRapH wrote: Since we're discussing lynching inactives (which at this point I mostly agree with unless something drastically better pops up) what are we using to define "inactive"? <5 posts? No meaningful posts? And how will we pick the inactive? Or should we all pick our own inactive to lynch? At this point he gets on the"lets lynch inactives" train and trying to figure out how to define inactives. First off I am going to say this right now. Fuck lynching inactives. It is such a stupid plan most of the time, lynching an inactive does two VERY anti town things. One it provides ZERO information because generally there is no vote split on inactives its usually a unanimous decision among the town, and on top of that since there is NO information to decide on who we are going to lynch because they are inactive the mafia have a huge influence over just which inactive guy we decide to kill. In summary lynching inactives makes Day 1 a day we get NO information and on top of that the lynch is more readily swayed by the mafia, yielding our daily KP to them. It is just stupid. What annul did is exactly what I would do. Just start throwing shit and see who comes out of the wood work. Ideally though you aim to target someone who you believe is red. But either way the important thing is we are getting information. Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 13:36 seRapH wrote: Inactives with zero posts or votes will be modkilled/replaced, so I guess what I meant was lurkers. How will we determine who are lurkers and how will we pick which to be irradiated? Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 13:40 seRapH wrote:On December 27 2010 13:37 LSB wrote:On December 27 2010 13:31 seRapH wrote: Since we're discussing lynching inactives (which at this point I mostly agree with unless something drastically better pops up) what are we using to define "inactive"? <5 posts? No meaningful posts? And how will we pick the inactive? Or should we all pick our own inactive to lynch? + Show Spoiler +Disclaimer: I don't believe that we'll actually lynch an inactive. How about Zero meaningful posts? If all they have is spam and one vote with an explination of "I agree". That would be an inactive Or if we seriously have no idea what to do, we could lynch someone about to be modkilled, a way to essentially abstain Except they could be replaced, not necessarily modkilled. Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 14:04 seRapH wrote:On December 27 2010 13:43 LSB wrote:On December 27 2010 13:40 seRapH wrote:On December 27 2010 13:37 LSB wrote:On December 27 2010 13:31 seRapH wrote: Since we're discussing lynching inactives (which at this point I mostly agree with unless something drastically better pops up) what are we using to define "inactive"? <5 posts? No meaningful posts? And how will we pick the inactive? Or should we all pick our own inactive to lynch? + Show Spoiler +Disclaimer: I don't believe that we'll actually lynch an inactive. How about Zero meaningful posts? If all they have is spam and one vote with an explination of "I agree". That would be an inactive Or if we seriously have no idea what to do, we could lynch someone about to be modkilled, a way to essentially abstain Except they could be replaced, not necessarily modkilled. Hmm... I wonder if the mafia would try to modkill one of their own members in hopes of getting the person replaced by DoctorH Ace did that back in insane. Well, we forced the mafia to find their own repacements, and Ace choose L. Bah DrH is our only replacement right? I kinda wish there were a few more but whatev =\ We are going to see a recurring trend with Seraph, He doesn't really ever stop talking about inactives and mod kills at all. Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 14:22 seRapH wrote: I don't want luck to have any more to do with this than it has to. Early vig hits is much too risky, and has just as much if not more chance of hitting blue than it does of hitting red. Sure reducing KP is important, but keeping our number of blues is even moreso. Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 14:53 seRapH wrote:On December 27 2010 14:35 LunarDestiny wrote: Vigs can only hit on or AFTER night 2 Right, so this isn't something that's exactly urgent, is it? Day 1 lynching, however, is. Now one big thing to notice here, he advises against using KP and uses a TERRIBLE argument. This is a giant redflag to me. Why the hell would there be a better chance of hitting a blue then a red with a vigi hit? If we hold off our vigi hits there is a better chance the mafia will kill the vigi and we lose that KP too. That's roughly equivalent to telling mad hatters not to place bombs until night 3 because chances are they will just bomb a blue. It just chances us wasting our KP that we shouldn't be. On top of that if a vigi is doing ANY amount of behavioral analysis then they should be able to hit a god damn red by night 2 if they choose to, MAYBE hold it off until night 3. I generally would not recommend holding off your hit because it increases the chance of the town losing it. And on top of that Seraph says we have more important things to discuss then vigi's, like the day 1 lynch. Alright, I can agree with that but seriously what the fuck is there to talk about if you are lynching an inactive? Exactly, nothing. Its just basically RNG whichever person not posting the mafia approves of and unanimously killing them. Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 15:00 seRapH wrote: Well given that it's day 1 we're mostly waiting for people to check in. So people should be pitching in about their stances on the following issues: Day 1 lynch- Inactives or suspects, and then who? Role of PMs in this game
Any questions you guys may have should also be asked, an informed town is a good town ^_^ Alright let me get this strait. By your agenda we should be lynching inactives and searching for them but we need to wait for people to check in day 1...? Pretty much self explanatory. So far we have seen a good amount of anti town posting from Seraph on top of a bit of spammyness. Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 07:49 seRapH wrote: It's pretty obvious that the Pandain wagon makes zero sense, so if you were mafia trying to establish credibility letting that go through would be stupid.
Annul my vote is going on you now because after reading through this thread I also think your analysis has been forced.
Also I'm keeping an eye on meapak. This is one of the posts I found really interesting. The pandain wagon did make no sense and Seraph says what I think he is trying to do. We can just label it wifom. At the same time he discredits Annul saying his argument is forced Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 08:55 seRapH wrote: A forced argument is when you try to conjure up something out of nothing. Then explains what forced means! But seriously, how is Annul's analysis forced? I read it, it felt pretty natural to me. Annul remains dedicated and keeps going for his lynch of LSB and LSB OMGUS him back which is a really shitty way to play and incredibly anti town. The thing is I also believe that could just be a blue tell from LSB believing his role to be important for town victory. The last thing he does is FOS on Meapak but not saying ANYTHING about why. At least give some reason. Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 11:54 seRapH wrote:On December 28 2010 11:52 why wrote: Hi everyone, just got off from work and caught up with the thread.
It seems to me that the annul vs. LSB debate is distracting from the issue at hand, hunting inactives. This is clearly the way to avoid an apathetic town.
The list that LunarDestiny suggested isn’t the best idea. If there are 10 people on the list, then no one will feel pressured to respond unless everyone else on the list is responding. They will just be lurking amongst the people on the list who aren’t responding on the list.
The best way to pressure inactives is to vote for them and actually intend to lynch them unless they contribute something useful.
As such, I'm going to pick someone that hasn't posted yet and put my vote on them. If they come to the thread and contribute then I'll move my vote off them. My pick is GeorgeClooney. I like that you're going to help us with this inactive thing, but we shouldn't be lynching someone who's about to get modkilled for not showing up. Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 17:17 seRapH wrote:On December 28 2010 16:42 Node wrote:I think between annul and LSB it's actually quite likely that one of them is scum. In Haunted Mafia, DocH and Pandain continually re-iterated the same arguments against each other, making huge walls of text that consumed many pages, and diverted town discussion from important things for like two whole game days. In the end, Pandain was scum. The difference there was that there were no PMs that game, so it was more important to be able to follow the thread well. All the same, I'm sensing echoes of that here, especially since annul seems to want to continue to force the issue. I'll also say that I find annul's posting to be much scummier than LSB's. The way he's posting reminds me a lot of the way he played Experimental Mini Mafia (which was an interesting experience, as I knew he was scum from the beginning ), whereas LSB's defense and contribution seems a lot more like his posting in Pokemafia, where he was green. For now, I'm putting my vote on annul. I'm also going to be analyzing LunarDestiny, as I think his posting has been... strange, to say the least. Gonna work on that now. Just clearing this up, but you do mean Insane Mafia, not Haunted, right? Seraph then stresses that we go back to lynching inactives while clearing up such a trivial issue between insane/haunted mafia. The running trend with Seraph is anti town play, just focusing on lynching an inactive and really not committing at ALL on the annul/LSB situation. This could be because he doesn't want to be associated with supporting a bad lynch of either of them, or not wanting to side at risk of being exposed when his ally gets lynched. With that being said, I strongly believe Seraph is mafia and we should lynch to kill him and hold off on the LSB/Annul situation because of how important blue roles are to a town victory. On top of that if/when LSB fails to prove his claim we get another free mafia kill that we can make a vigi use. LSB is claiming to be able to PROVE his alliance by night 2 and if he can't then well I am sure we can do something about that can't we? We just need to stay focused and get him killed then and not get distracted by other "better" targets. This is a great post, but there is 2 problems with it. The first problem is he advices town to hold off on killing LSB, because if LSB can’t prove he is blue, we can just lynch him later. This is solid and sound reasoning, and I was an idiot for not realising this myself. The problem is he leaves it like that. In all his posts the rest of the day, he doesn’t actually push the point: + Show Spoiler + On December 29 2010 05:59 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 05:20 Insanious wrote: Wow... we get nothing as town from lynching LSB at all 0.
No info:
Anti LSB: - Annul
Pro LSB: - Me
Annul = town, easy to see Me = town, because I know I'm town :/, hopefully my posts speak for me.
LSB turns up green: - We have no suspects to look at
LSB turns red: - We look at me... awesome?
want to know how I know LSB isn't red...
No one is trying to divert the lynch, if LSB was red, the mafia would be trying to throw up another name to be lynched instead of LSB. Is that happening? NOOOOO
Mafia are throwing LSB under the bus because... LSB isn't mafia.
People, if he was mafia we would be having a lot more discussion rather then
Annul: "LSB is mafia" LSB: "No I'm not" Everyone else: "I don't know who is mafia, lets bandwagon LSB"
This is just bad town play, and for one, I am disappointed...
We are voting for:
1) An active player 2) A player that might be blue 3) A player that no one is really defending 4) A player that if he turns red, there are no other posters to look at if he flips
LSB is a terrible lynch... False logic. There is a VERY good reason that LSB is not getting defended if he is mafia. Look at ExMiMa. I accused Aidnai HARD day 1 and was pushing him relentlessly waiting for other mafia to show themselves by trying to defend him. KJ/Annul kept their cool until I got replaced then slowly diverted the lynch. It is WAY too risky to try to launch a defensive or diversion campaign of a mafia on day 1, especially if you fail. On December 29 2010 06:03 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: @Opz
24 hours of conversation can change an opinion. The reason I felt their tiff was forced was because I thought LSB would be too experienced to respond in such an aggressive manner. I may have been wrong. On December 29 2010 06:05 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2010 05:59 Node wrote: I don't buy that LSB is being bussed. At this point in the game, with the votes in as many places as they are, it would be just as easy for annul or OpZ to be in the lead if that was what mafia wanted.
That said, I think RoL brings up a good case against Seraph, but I'd rather see annul / LSB resolved before we focus our attention elsewhere. As I explained a post above, I don't believe its feasible for the mafia to try to protect one of their own from such a volatile situation. It can only reveal themselves if they do it directly and it fails. Its why anyone focusing on lynching inactives or avoiding the conflict between annul/LSB should be heavily scrutinized. On December 29 2010 06:48 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: night 2 would not change from day 2 btw. No more actions can be done between those times, unless you mean AFTER night 2. At which point you COULD be a vigi, but if you really mean the start of night 2 you can't possibly be a vigilante, and you could also prove the same thing during the Day phase while we still have the option to lynch you!
The second problem is he proposes to lynch Seraph, but he doesn’t actually push for it. This is uncharacteristic of RoL, and he knows it himself: In summary lynching inactives makes Day 1 a day we get NO information and on top of that the lynch is more readily swayed by the mafia, yielding our daily KP to them. It is just stupid. What annul did is exactly what I would do. Just start throwing shit and see who comes out of the wood work. Ideally though you aim to target someone who you believe is red. But either way the important thing is we are getting information. This is my favourite contradiction of the day. He launches Seraph as a counter target, but does nothing for it. How is that consistent with his normal town play?
Come day 2, he also stated On December 30 2010 18:57 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Alright. So I am tired of this town being wishwashy so much. Tomorrow before I go to work I am going to decide on a lynch target. We are going to kill them, if I am wrong you guys can kill me if you so wish it. The thing is I will chose my target, I will push them relentlessly, and I will be right. I will most likely choose one of the three mentioned before, but it is going to be large analysis followed by a relentless attack until I get my way. I see three candidates going out right now with some shitty stupid reasoning. I will examine every person being suggested right now and decide which one is best. I welcome all who oppose me. Well I waited for this. And it didn’t come.
There is a few other points about his posting that I noted, but is a little harder to put clearly. First of all he gets defensive and withdraws when people question him. There is several examples of this. Secondly he tries to act like he is way too good, “ruining scums day”, when fact is he hadn’t actually done anything.
Lastly, there is the whole “scumhunting with mad hatter bombs” failure. Instead of lying low, like a veteran who are most likely going to get hit, he actively scumhunts during the night by trying to place hatter bombs. This is so silly I won’t even go into it.
Now, even with all of this I was still doubting my conclusion of him being red. There was a slight possibility of him being blue. But when I knew we hit the nail with annul, since Mr.Zergling came out to soft defend, he posted this:
On January 02 2011 07:53 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: alright, after my hiatus from activity I will return. First off I know we only have 4 hours left for voting so I am going to say this. Everyone vote annul I will explain my reasoning in a post within the next hour but it is important that anyone on now starts voting for him. I will begin my analysis shortly.
This post was all I needed to confirm my suspicions. This is the situation at the time of his writing: we got a strong case on annul, and several of us are pushing for him. 2 mafia are already exposed trying to soft defend annul (Mr.Zergling and OpZ). Time to abandon ship.
Now RoL has been entirely out of the discussions since his morning post, declaring town was wishy washy and that he would pick a target to push relentlessly. This never happened. Again, the question for me is, is he blue or red.
The golden rule is, blues are scared, red are hesitant. (<3)
So is RoL’s sudden activity a sign of one or the other? We already provided all the shooting power to take down annul before RoL shows up, yet now he thinks is a good time to write an analysis? If he was blue all he needed to do was to agree with us, and help us indirectly by making sure people voted. Instead he decides to get attention by writing his own analysis. This all points away from scared. When annul starts attacking him openly while ignoring the rest of us, it smells like mafia trying to earn town credit!
The rest of the day is history. RoL and annul stage a fight, trying to make it appear like RoL did something for the lynch, when all he did was show up late, and realise the train had left the station.
|
On January 02 2011 12:22 Barundar wrote:We already proved Mr.Zergling is mafia. Here is the post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=179009¤tpage=44#870RoL is our second kill tomorrow (if a vigi doesn't take him down first). I will post a more thorough analysis of why I suspected him later, but the actions by him and annul during the last few hours should be pretty self explanatory. DT's there is a number of people I'm unsure of. Will post who tomorrow, but TheMango and Tree.Hugger is topping the list. weee I would like to add GGQ to the list.
Confirmed townies (these are the people that has been providing enough content behind the scene for me to trust them): Pandain (obviously), Mr.Wiggles, Jackal85, LunarDestiny and Node. However, if you aren't on my list for DT checks or mafia (RoL, Mr.Zergling and OpZ), I consider you town.
|
On January 03 2011 03:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I can actually explain all that. Mr Barundar, I actually think you are probably town but I am going to spend my time when I get home from work going over your errors with that post. I don't actually consider your analysis a threat to me since I can't see anyone getting behind it. It does make for a nice fairytale however.
The one thing I will say now is look at how Annul posted towards his death. The guy is pissed, especially over activity. On top of that he was the godfather which made no sense at all. Judging by his anger and him being godfather, I would say chances are most of his mafia comrades are lurkers, which the exception of maybe 1-2 posting a little more. One of the most glaring errors in your argument is this. If I am mafia, and annul was mafia. Then why am I not the godfather if I am so good? Actions speaks louder than words. People just need to revisit the last few pages to see you are mafia.
Judging by his anger and him being godfather, I would say chances are most of his mafia comrades are lurkers, which the exception of maybe 1-2 posting a little more. If your team is lurking, how come you got them to change in time?
|
On January 03 2011 13:00 ilovejonn wrote: and lol@Barundar thinking RoL was mafia. =/ My thoughts exactly.
|
I don't have much confidence in my analysis of Mr.Zergling then. My initial thought of Meapak was something was off with him, but I shrug it off as blue. He claimed green though. Will go back and look it over...
|
On January 03 2011 12:13 Insanious wrote: So do we have 0 vigilantees or did everyone just attack RoL? Because wow...
Vigilantees should of hit lurkers DTs check lurkers
We should lynch Meapak and Mr.Zergling and thats how today should go...
BTW, anyone who through RoL was red was a dumbass...
RoL spearheaded the lynch on Annul, no mafia would kill their own godfather thats just stupid... so either the mafia double hit RoL or we have a Vig who killed the strongest town left alive...
/rage, and I wanted to go comotose on this game since we got two mafia by day 2... but apparently I need to keep playing now, thx a lot RoL... wait...
wtf were our medics doing? RoL was an obvious hit, why did no medics protect RoL... wtf is this town doing...
/RAGE RAGE RAGE RAGE... *cries*
Alright back to the game, I guess, time to actually go back to looking at what people have been saying since I analyzed meapak and everyone ignored it. Another rage post on how stupid town is?
|
Well if I have to mention something positive, both LunarDestiny and Pandain who pushed for annul with me survived. If OpZ did vigi, then I guess that is atleast 3 people I consider confirmed townies...
|
On January 03 2011 12:40 Mr.Zergling wrote: There go two of our best players. I don't think there is anything I can do to convince you that i am not red, so you all are going to waste one of the lynches on me, at least its double. Choose your second more wisely. You could start helping out. What do you think of the meapak vs insanious debate?
We got a double lynch. I feel we should atleast devote 1 of these to a lurker. The people who actually add in with opinions are going to be more valuable in this game for us, mafia or not.
|
Darth my vote on you is since you and your predecessor has been very inactive. Would you mind contributing some of your thoughts to the discussion?
|
On January 03 2011 23:28 TheMango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2011 23:24 d3_crescentia wrote:On January 03 2011 22:53 Brocket wrote: You mean the barundar that suspected RoL and paindain who was himself suspected of being mafia?
Despite your good intentions I will not join your circle.
I'm pretty meh at the moment, we have all these role calls which I've never seen before. =/ I guess it's a good thing, but it gives advantages to both towns and mafia. The mafia really need all the help they can get and I'm not keen on throwing them a bone.
@Insanious: right... Kinda like that time LSB got the mewtwo (serial killer) to kill me 'just because I didn't agree with him'. Except it's exactly the same. De ja vu except I like LSB more than you because you make no effort analysing me.
FoS on you.
You mean me? I should've just gone with my gut instinct that game instead of listening to retarded people like LSB. Time to trust my gut instinct again. I get a pretty good read off of Barundar for town; the point he made about the timing of RoL's analysis just turned out to be RoL being semi-afk. That was bad play on RoL's part, but I think there's some merit in what he had to say with regard to looking at lurkers. Thus I'm going to turn my attention to GeorgeClooney's most recent post: On January 03 2011 11:59 GeorgeClooney wrote: I'm a big fat green, like I have been in the last game of mafia. I agree with RoL that the current mafia are most likely lurkers, BUT I AM NOT ONE OF THEM LOL. This guy spams like Bill Murray and posts equally as meaningless content. I don't think it makes any sense for Barundar to have pushed for RoL and then had him killed during the night. I am still pretty suspicious of Meapak and TheMango, especially since Mango's voting both Barundar and Meapak. That makes no sense. If you are suspicious of meapak, then you should at least see why id be suspicious of barundar (he paints meapak as blue/green), hence my vote. Actually that's wrong. I said I found Meapak was posting different, but I had been brushing it off as him being blue. When I confronted him with that assumption on irc, he said he wasn't blue but green.
Point is I feel he is posting different from HPmafia. And this is not beceause of a blue role. How is this painting him as a good guy? He hasn't actually contributed at all as far as I can see.
|
On January 04 2011 00:07 Brocket wrote: Guys can I get a 2nd person to pick for the double lynch that will actually count?
Not that keen to vote meapak just because Barundar is giving him a lot of heat.
Instead of basing your thoughts on what I think, why don't you make up your own mind? You did that with RoL, and it turned out to be right. Your opinion on Insanious and me matters, and so would one on Meapak.
|
On January 04 2011 00:31 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: Ok to explain my last second voting drama. I was in irc with pandain, and everyone else who is cool enough to hang out there. Barundar and I are talking and then pandain just jumps all over me with questions about orgolove and annul (at this point I think pandain was still voting orgo). I'm like ok whatever so I answer but he wont respond when I ask him questions. Pandain was trying to get me to vote orgo through pm and irc but I thought orgo was innocent based on the fact that there was never a counterbandwago. Pandain didn't like this reason and he's getting pretty aggressive and then he switches his vote to annul saying something like "I wanna control this lynch" this sounded so scummy to me so I checked the votes and saw that this put annul one vote ahead of orgo. I didn't want pandain to have hammer power over the whole lynch so I switched to seraph because at this point I didn't want to be part of that mess. However after subsequent discussion with Barundar, a desire not to be left out of the action and a conviction that Orgo was town made me switch me vote back to annul.
I don't think pandain is scummy anymore and I'm 100% sure barundar is legit so my vote is going on mango because I've always found him to be inexplicably scummy along with his vote for barundar. And mr. zergling who is probably the most obvious scum we have right now. I don't like that you place your defense so much on me. I can confirm that what pandain said came out scummy even to me, but I also recall you being very upset that we changed our votes to annul in the first place.
I can't help but notice that RoL suspected both Seraph and Insanious alot, and neither of you switched to annul. Care to explain?
|
On January 04 2011 03:31 DarthThienAn wrote: guys, don't waste your time on me. zzz. Believe me, I don't want to. Didn't you afk your way to get mislynched by DrH in Salem? Don't make it so hard on towns that wants to win please
|
About trusting me I have been open on who I'm working with. If you want to be sure of the people I trust, you can kill me and see for yourself. I'm not telling anyone what to do, but after I switched my vote to annul, LunarDestiny PM'ed me he would help me push, on his own initiative. Pandain I'm working close with, not exactly hiding that.
I was wrong on both OpZ and RoL, making me less confident in my analysis of Mr.Zergling. But when Zergling came out after we started pressuring annul, thats when I thought we where right about him. It feels counter-intuitive to let zergling go now for those reasons, would mean we just got lucky on annul. And he still doesn't actually contribute.
|
On January 04 2011 14:29 Mr.Zergling wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 13:18 Barundar wrote: About trusting me I have been open on who I'm working with. If you want to be sure of the people I trust, you can kill me and see for yourself. I'm not telling anyone what to do, but after I switched my vote to annul, LunarDestiny PM'ed me he would help me push, on his own initiative. Pandain I'm working close with, not exactly hiding that.
I was wrong on both OpZ and RoL, making me less confident in my analysis of Mr.Zergling. But when Zergling came out after we started pressuring annul, thats when I thought we where right about him. It feels counter-intuitive to let zergling go now for those reasons, would mean we just got lucky on annul. And he still doesn't actually contribute. I made alot of posts after annul died, because lunar was pressuring me How many times do I have to repeat myself? You only come out to defend yourself, or in the case of annul, to question our reasons for switching to him. You aren't responding to my PM's. If you are town please stop acting up, and give me something I can work with.
Contributing is not the number of posts. It's the ammount of reasons, opinions, input and ideas you come forward with. It has nothing to do with activity.
|
On January 04 2011 14:38 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: Ok we need to consolidate our votes on these four people, Mr. Zergling, Darth, TheMango, and Seraph. I know a lot of people aren't going to unvote me but Insanious TheMango, Brocket, Pandain need to unvote their junk lynches and work on the reds we have. Also we should vote for double lynch again. We're going to get a red today possibly two if people unvote me. However if I do die this should prove several more people as town. People need to work with opz, he's confirmed. People should also work with Barundar and Pandain. Other than the people I've already mentioned as confirmed, I believe why and orgolove are also town. Our DT's and medics should double claim to both opz and Barundar/Pandain to ensure that the information is in safe hands. We've almost completely forgot about the MH role in all this excitment but who ever this is should have bombs on any of the four people above. If we lynch a red today, and the MH moves a bomb onto our two or three remaining suspects and then we double lynch tomorrow we can kill the MH and the remaining mafia if assuming there are four (and assuming the MH has his bombs placed well).
I know I'm going to get jumped all over by Insanious for this post but when I flip town people will go back and read this and I'll be vindicated.
I'd also like everyone to know that I will not change my vote from any of these four however I will change amongst them if I have a chance to save myself. I fail to see how you dieing proves me?
|
On January 04 2011 15:26 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:20 Barundar wrote:On January 04 2011 14:38 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: Ok we need to consolidate our votes on these four people, Mr. Zergling, Darth, TheMango, and Seraph. I know a lot of people aren't going to unvote me but Insanious TheMango, Brocket, Pandain need to unvote their junk lynches and work on the reds we have. Also we should vote for double lynch again. We're going to get a red today possibly two if people unvote me. However if I do die this should prove several more people as town. People need to work with opz, he's confirmed. People should also work with Barundar and Pandain. Other than the people I've already mentioned as confirmed, I believe why and orgolove are also town. Our DT's and medics should double claim to both opz and Barundar/Pandain to ensure that the information is in safe hands. We've almost completely forgot about the MH role in all this excitment but who ever this is should have bombs on any of the four people above. If we lynch a red today, and the MH moves a bomb onto our two or three remaining suspects and then we double lynch tomorrow we can kill the MH and the remaining mafia if assuming there are four (and assuming the MH has his bombs placed well).
I know I'm going to get jumped all over by Insanious for this post but when I flip town people will go back and read this and I'll be vindicated.
I'd also like everyone to know that I will not change my vote from any of these four however I will change amongst them if I have a chance to save myself. I fail to see how you dieing proves me? It doesn't "prove" you in the strictest sense however you will have a dead green (me) and a dead red (whoever else gets lynched) to vindicate your position to the people who are voting you, same goes for pandain. I'd also like to add an addendum to my earlier post and say that I think Mr. Wiggles and LunarDestiny are town as well. Problem is, I don't trust you. I agree with Brocket when he sais you seem desperate. If you actually had an interest in confirming me, you wouldn't have a problem dieing.
Difference between me and you vs. me and Pandain is, that me and Pandain are actively working together. You and me aren't. If I die, my circle is cleared of suspecion, and I'm fine with that since I'm green.
If you are red however, you pointing out my name, and several of the people I trust, flipping you will make everyone mistrust us.
Again, I have no reason to believe in you.
|
On January 04 2011 16:06 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: lol if you're afraid of looking red because I flip red then jump on board my bandwagon, we're serving cheap beer 99¢ nachos and the dance floor is open till 2 am. If you are honestly that afraid of me flipping red then there's no better time than now to vote Meapak_Ziphh and lock in your townie guarantee at the phenomenally low price of one green. But seriously dude, to you and all the others who say I look desperate, would I be that desperate to call out me whole scum team? If you don't think these people are scum then by golly who do you think is? Aside from me of course. Actually this goes to anyone, do you have a better target than any of these four I named? Rofl, 180 switch. Now I'm actually mafia together with the people I trust, the people who helped me bring down annul? If people actually had any doubts to my allignment they could lynch me, and decide on the rest of the people I trust from there.
Nice job confirming yourself as scum.
##Vote Meapak
|
Hm you are right, i misunderstood your post. Thought you where refering to me, pandain, lunardestiny and wiggles, as per your post above it. Am I getting paranoid over your trust in me? Yes a little. Do I like that you have made it your life goal to defend me? No.
But go ahead, and give me a reason to believe in you. Your major contribution to this game has been posting a voting ark. That in itself is not a contribution without analysis. You don't actually make any thoughts on what we can use the voting list for, you just look at who people voted for, and decide if they are scummy or not from there, and thats not scumhunting.
So what makes a vote stay out to you? What are the votes to look for on day 1, and what are the votes to look for on day 2?
In my opinion day 2 is easy, you removed your vote off annul, and didn't reapply it untill all hope was lost. But what about day 1?
|
I agree with Orgolove. Lynch Meapak as scum and either Shockeyy or GeorgeClooney as lurker.
|
No point lynching darth over gc in my opinion. We get nothing from gc, hardcore lurker.
|
Guys please unvote Meapak. As Pandain sais he has tried, and he has made mistakes, but that alone doesn't make him scum. He also turned down an offer for medic protection.
|
I find it kind of interesting how I and other townies are so concerned with proving our own innosence. Meapak wrote me he trusted me completely and would fight for me, and that feaked me out.
We brought it down on annul, I really don't need other proof than that. That annul rage on Pandain, just underlines a point. I trusted Pandain before this, simply for what he brought to the table and the way in which we exchanged opinions.
Shockeyy you are acting like an idiot. Start following or I'm gonna assume you are dumb or mafia. And I don't think you are dumb.
|
People really don’t want to play this game :S More non participants posting than actual players.
On January 06 2011 06:40 ~OpZ~ wrote: shockeyy, seraph or daarth. darth has only been saying he will contribute later and has not contributed. check his posts. they all almost say tomorrow. even his pm to me. im fine with his lynch, and seraphs.
either there are no blues or they arent paying attention. or they just dont believe me I don’t think Darth is mafia based on how uneventful yesterday’s vote was. But then again lynching the godfather was uneventful.
Here are my PM’s with Seraph. He is willing to discuss with me, and puts forward his own thoughts. I don’t believe he is mafia, but please make up your own mind and post it in thread. + Show Spoiler + Original Message From seRapH: About your votes, fine, your call.
I was about to go to sleep but I'll read the PMs if you want me to.
----------------------------------------- Original Message From Barundar: I'd rather let Pandain decides if he insist. He nearly got us to lynch orgolove yesterday, but I don't see my opinion on anyone as being more important than his. And I fucked up badly on RoL.
I've been pressuring Meapak in PM's, and I'm not sure I like his answer. On one hand I find he is acting completely unreasonable. On the other hand it just seems too stupid to be mafia. Do you want to give me your opinion on them if I send them to you?
----------------------------------------- Original Message From seRapH: I think he's the lesser of my two votes. Are you planning on switching off Darth or going through with supporting Pandain?
----------------------------------------- Original Message From Barundar: I'm leaning towards your votes myself. Darth is just me supporting Pandain. What do you think of meapak?
----------------------------------------- Original Message From seRapH: Why are we lynching Darth? + Show Spoiler + Original Message From seRapH: Show nested quote +Just quickly looking at the voting I think Shockey is fine, soulfire is a little suspicious and darth is a lotta suspicious. I can't agree with this at all, seems like the exact opposite to me. But if he were mafia I don't really get why he'd want Darth dead so bad unless he thought Darth was blue. And to be fair you never pressed the question, but that is something to be looking for. I've just looked over TheMango, but for now Meapak strikes me as less scummy than the following: Mr.Zergling TheMango Soulfire I'm not afraid to lynch him, especially since he's claiming green. Also why is he so confident that why is Pro-Town? There's probably some PM contact between them but the thread doesn't say anything. ~snip~[my PM’s with Meapak]
Lastly Shockeyy. I have no PM’s with him, but this is what he has done in the game:
Contribution:+ Show Spoiler + On January 05 2011 13:26 ShoCkeyy wrote: Ok here how it goes. Pandain claims DT and no one counter claims cause they're scared of actually getting killed by mafia. Then Pandain ask for DT's to claim so early on in the game, why? Because since no one counter claimed him, the mafia weren't able to figure out who's a blue and since Pandain is a mafia, of course he wants the blue to claim so they're easier targets... Since pandain has everyone thinking he's a DT of course no one will go after him... On January 04 2011 09:57 ShoCkeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 09:20 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:On January 04 2011 08:58 ShoCkeyy wrote: And of course this "town circle" is the rest of the mafia. They're trying to confuse you guys by saying they're doing good and instead they're not. And about Annul, it's pretty easy to go attacking the very own mafia member to not seem "scummy" How is attacking the godfather a good idea? If you really think they're scum prove it. At this point they're some of the only people scum hunting in the thread. Until you start pitching in I'd say pandain and barundar are way more town then you. Because the godfather was going down either way... Might as well as jump in on the bandwagon and just play along to not be considered "scum"... On January 04 2011 08:58 ShoCkeyy wrote: And of course this "town circle" is the rest of the mafia. They're trying to confuse you guys by saying they're doing good and instead they're not. And about Annul, it's pretty easy to go attacking the very own mafia member to not seem "scummy"
Tunneling Pandain:+ Show Spoiler + On January 04 2011 08:53 ShoCkeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2011 22:21 Pandain wrote:Alright also, me and baruder have started a town circle, including those we know are confirmed townies. DT(s), if you have checked someone who was green, as long as it wasn't annul, they are confirmed town. Feel free to claim to them.Furthormore I am opening up an idea for the town to discuss, and before anyone does anything we should discuss it in thread.
I have started a town circle with a few select individuals. I am willing to accept role claims. Now, there is a chance that I am not "confirmed" yet, despite the fact I have been roleblocked, and despite the fact I helped get annul lynched, and despite the fact that I have been one of the most active individuals in the thread. But I feel that for the reasons above, I am basically confirmed. Furthormore, unless a vigi claims whether to me or in thread that they shot node/RoL, opz is confirmed as well. Should we claim to him? Should we claim to me? I AM in a town circle with Opz, but this must be thought out before anything else. If I have medics with me, I can coordinate who to protect(so then not everyone protects me for instance, + Show Spoiler +or maybe they will, you can't tell mafia! . In addition, I'd like to point out that if DT's feel uncomfortable claiming to me, we can also have people they checked claim to me, and we can work from there. So, what do you guys think? Ok, I can't believe you guys are letting Pandain get away... He's asking for blues to roleclaim... He has everyone believing he's a blue, which clearly he's not imo. Why do you go asking blues to roleclaim it's pretty easy to stack hits as a Mafia member and just kill off pandain, but of course he hasn't died because he's one of them. If the mafia really wanted to kill off blues, they already know one right here. Pandain isn't a blue. Heed my warning. On January 03 2011 05:50 ShoCkeyy wrote: And I put money on it that Pandain is a mafia. So I'm going to keep sticking it to Pandain. On January 03 2011 05:51 ShoCkeyy wrote: He has gotten out of two day lynches some how and I'm still confused as to how you guys are not noticing this at all. On December 30 2010 12:48 ShoCkeyy wrote: I vote for Pandain he keeps sending me messages and harassing me while im working.. I don't get home till tomorrow after 1pm, so I won't be able to keep up as much till then or be even able to post cause like I said, reading/posting on my phone is terribad.
Reason for lurking:+ Show Spoiler + On January 03 2011 05:49 ShoCkeyy wrote: Meh, I'm not as active cause of holidays and work. Also when ever I'm active, I always end up dying first and since I'm a townie in this game, no point of trying to start analyzing in the beginning so I can just die the next day... So I've just lurked from my phone while I worked and posted when ever I needed too... But now that the night post will happy soon, we'll see what happens. I'll start being more active since I don't have to work crazy hours and stuff. IMO this raises red flag. A green that is afraid of dieing?
And what to think of this?: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 22:42 ShoCkeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 20:15 Node wrote:Analysis of LunarDestiny so far (my comments in blue):+ Show Spoiler +On December 27 2010 10:51 LunarDestiny wrote: Lets discuss about the game. Framer is the only role new to me and the role is damn powerful. If we focus on a small group of people, the framer can easily frame someone who dts will check. We should try to focus on a bigger group of people so the framer could not misled the town easily.
On December 27 2010 11:03 LunarDestiny wrote: I think the framer role encourages dts to use check on lurkers. On December 27 2010 11:10 LunarDestiny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 11:08 Mr.Zergling wrote:On December 27 2010 11:03 LunarDestiny wrote: I think the framer role encourages dts to use check on lurkers. why would it do that? Because it is unlikely that mafia would frame a lurkering town. So if dts check lurkers, then it will reduce the risk of them mischecking a framed target. He spends his first few posts addressing the framer role, and how it should affect DT checks. I'm not a big fan of directing blues, but I'm not about to call this scummy posting. When people start asking blues to take specific actions (ie put bomb on this guy, check this guy, protect so-and-so), then it sets off alarms.On December 27 2010 12:25 LunarDestiny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 11:50 Pandain wrote: WHAT TO DO FOR TODAY I say to do this ery day, I say to do this now. Town should lynch inactives. This is actually a somewhat complicated process. Right now in the beginning I will just begin voting people(pressuring) until they make enough of a meaningful post and then I’ll vote someone else. Now, the point is to lynch those who “contribute without really contributing” not those who are just going to get modkilled. That is why at the end it’ll end up being one of the “semi lurkers”, not the dead ones. SUMMARY 1.Contribute without spamming 2.Be active, make well thought out posts. 3.Lynch the semi inactives, inactives for now.
Contradiction? Pandain say we should lynch inactive for day1 then vote for Mr. Wiggles? Pandain, please explain. He calls Pandain out on voting Mr. Wiggles. IMO Pandain's vote was justified by his post, but I don't have a problem with this. On December 27 2010 14:17 LunarDestiny wrote:Since there are many new players in the game, they will probably base their night actions, if they have blue roles, on advices of others. Pandain did give out many good advices but I'll nitpick this one: Show nested quote +Vigi- I still think this should really be a town decision who to shoot. There are so many times when town is going to need that extra certain kp in situations in the future, in addition to the fact that most likely you will shoot a town. Only shoot if we tell you too, or(and I’m being very cautious on this) you just know I like the idea that vig's shot should be decided by town. Unless vigs are veteran, the town are better figuring out who is scum. Also, shots from vigs aren't wasted if more than one shots at the same person are made. I also want to discuss should vigs use their shots early to try to get lucky and kill mafia? Reducing mafia KP is very important and we also have two double lynch to compensate for lack of vig in the later in the game. Continues to advise blue roles, this time focusing on vig. I think it's a terrible, terrible idea to base the town's night kills on luck, enough that I'd call it scummy to ask for it. He also notes that newb blues are likely to base their action on town advice, which is exactly why I'm beginning to find it a bit weird just how much advice LunarDestiny is giving. Any mafia influence over special town roles is good for them.On December 27 2010 14:33 LunarDestiny wrote: Vigs can only hit on night 2. At that time, we will most likely have multiple suspects. These suspects are likely to be our main lynch targets on day3. So if they are not killed, we have to deal with them anyway. The risk is that they are town and can be proven innocence on night 2 by a dt. But the existence of the framer discourage dts to check on suspects. So dt checks on suspected people returning town aren't convincing information.
Also in most of the games I played, vigs are killed before they were able to make shots. More blue advice.On December 27 2010 14:55 LunarDestiny wrote: I was trying to give people someone to discuss. There is no better topic that I can find. I find it hard to believe that there's really nothing else to discuss, but I'll let this slide.On December 27 2010 17:00 LunarDestiny wrote: People will ask what your opinion is on something and it is safe to respond on these pm. Just don't tell anyone your role. If you strongly sense that someone is trying to fish out your role, you should tell town since it is good indication that the person is mafia.
After night 1, dts would have checked some townies and pms are encouraged between them. There is a slight chance that a mafia will take the risk to fake the dt role, but it would be hard for them to do since they have to predict but role that person is.
I don't like the idea of pressuring a certain person to speak up one at a time. If the mafia choose to pressure a townie and that townie is afk, then we are falling into mafia's trap. We should consider all inactive. When day1 is half way over, we should come up with a list of people who are inactive/all spam/suspected and discuss who to lynch. Maybe then, those people on list will speak up and defend themselves. More blue advice. Also, he wants a list made rather than pressuring inactives on an individual basis -- which other people have mentioned isn't the greatest of ideas.On December 28 2010 03:43 LunarDestiny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 00:56 LSB wrote:EBWOP On December 28 2010 00:50 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 28 2010 00:40 LSB wrote:@LunarDestinyOn December 27 2010 17:00 LunarDestiny wrote: I don't like the idea of pressuring a certain person to speak up one at a time. If the mafia choose to pressure a townie and that townie is afk, then we are falling into mafia's trap. We should consider all inactive. When day1 is half way over, we should come up with a list of people who are inactive/all spam/suspected and discuss who to lynch. Maybe then, those people on list will speak up and defend themselves. What do you think we should do about inactives then? Can you read his post? It doesn't do anything about inactives. It just says we make a list of inactives and see what happens. We've done this practically every single game. Does it work? Not really. LunarDestiny, can you elaborate a bit more then? I don't like the idea of pressuring a certain person to speak up one at a time. If the mafia choose to pressure a townie and that townie is afk, then we are falling into mafia's trap.Looking at the voting thread, there are 3 people that were voted. Mr.Wiggies quickly responded after pandain voted on him. Pandain also respond after the mass vote on him. But Jackal had yet to respond after being voted by pandain. Accusing someone encourages participation from that that person. But what if that person is afk? He won't be able to respond. Also, IF pandain is mafia, then town will be sidetracked. Other inactive mafia will go under the radar. We should consider all inactive. When day1 is half way over, we should come up with a list of people who are inactive/all spam/suspected and discuss who to lynch. Maybe then, those people on list will speak up and defend themselves.I am saying that we should not target inactive (afk/spam/suspect) at a time for day 1 lynch. At some point on day1, we should come up with a list of possible lynch and that will encourage those people on the list to speak up. Again all of the above is for day 1's lynch when town have almost no information. I want to put pressure on all inactives to speak up and maybe contribution. He clarifies that he wants to not target an inactive for a day 1 lynch, but wants to pressure them into posting via his list. Which... I don't really get. Why would they post if there was no actual threat of being lynched? Also, I don't think mafia pressuring inactives would actually be bad, as long as . In addition the last time a complete inactive got lynched day 1 (salem mafia w/BrownBear), they ended up being red, though to be fair it was a traitor role, so the mafia wasn't aware of their alignment.
I don't agree with this post, but I'm more inclined to say that his thoughts come from a town point of view.On December 28 2010 04:08 LunarDestiny wrote: Also, I somewhat don't agree with Dr.H that dts should check the people they think are the most likely to be mafia. The people that seem to most likely to be mafia are a combination of:
-Lurkers who post bare minimum to stay alive. There is a lower chance that framer will framer a lurking town. I encourage dts to check these people. There is the downside where these people are more likely to be modkilled because they might be people who lost interest in the game. Without more people as replacement, dt checks might be wasted. So dts have to judge between lurkers who lost interest in the game and those who are posting minimum to stay alive.
-People who have taken a huge stand on issues and are in long debates with others. These people are most likely to be framer's target since there are, at most, a few of people in this categories. The probability of successful framing of these people is higher than probability of successful framing on lurking town. And even if a dt check says that a person of these categories comes out to be mafia, this information is useful, but less compared to other mafia games where there are no framer
To summarize, dts should use checks on lurkers to avoid framer. But should judge between real lurkers and discouraged players. Again with the blue advice.On December 28 2010 04:53 LunarDestiny wrote: I am not saying that we should go after inactive all game. On day 1 where very few information is available, we should pressure all inactive to speak up. Because this game have the role framer in it, we should let dts deal with inactive and discourage dt checks on people are suspicious because they are in heated debates.
I agree that behavior analyze is important. Especially in this game, mafia check by dt on people who are in long debates are less convincing compared to other games because they are likely to be a framed townie. On December 28 2010 05:20 LunarDestiny wrote: Yes, my posts are general and are related to how should we play this game because of minor difference (framer) compared to other mafia games.
@1)I want to ask you how should we put pressure on specific player to contribute. It would be bad if a mafia is calling out inactive townie. Also, who should we choose? Go to a list of inactive and randomly pick one of them and say "xxxx, please contribute."
@2)If the list is short enough (less than 10 people?), then the list is convincing enough to pressure people to speak up.
@3)Again, I am not trying to post to make me look town. Heck, I could have lurked from the beginning and not attract attention to myself. By my "plan", I assume you mean me saying "who should dts check" and "on day 1, we should pressure inactive to speak". Yes, both requires almost no work on my part. The first is advice to dts and the second is relating to generating discussions.
As of now, I do not have good point of why or why not anyone is mafia. I do not want to accuse anyone without good point. Here he's defending himself after Barundar's post accusing him of not posting much in the way of content. I'll go through point by point.
1. I already stated how I disagree with not pressuring players individually. And it's not like a list is going to be particularly persuasive in the way of getting inactives more active, unless people actually act on it. That requires votes.
2. See #1
3. Anyone could say this. Of course you don't have to post anything helpful, but it certainly assists your own case if you're mafia.
Altogether, an inconclusive post.On December 28 2010 05:34 LunarDestiny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 05:23 LSB wrote:On December 28 2010 05:20 LunarDestiny wrote: @1)I want to ask you how should we put pressure on specific player to contribute. It would be bad if a mafia is calling out inactive townie. Also, who should we choose? Go to a list of inactive and randomly pick one of them and say "xxxx, please contribute."
@2)If the list is short enough (less than 10 people?), then the list is convincing enough to pressure people to speak up.
What's the difference between the two scenarios? In both we are putting pressure on people to contribute. In both we need to make a list of inactives. Because if we do something like "xxxx you have not been contributing and that makes you look mafia, please contribute." We get contribution like Mr.Wiggle which is good. But if the mafia is the one pointing fingers, then other mafia will be left alone. Also, we are targeting a smaller group of people compared to having a list of people. I also like to say that I am not discouraging pointing fingers at non-inactive. Having debates between active players especially useful since it is the best way to find mafia because a mafia dt checks on these people are less convincing than other mafia games. So, it's okay to point fingers at active players because it encourages debate, but it's not okay to do so at inactive players because they might be afk. Again, I disagree, but that's a common theme at this point.On December 28 2010 05:46 LunarDestiny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 05:26 LSB wrote:On December 28 2010 05:23 LunarDestiny wrote:On December 28 2010 04:57 Barundar wrote:I’m sorry to point it out, but I can’t help but notice how general and unproductive your posts are, LunarDestiny. At some point on day1, we should come up with a list of possible lynch and that will encourage those people on the list to speak up 1) Lists are a good way to appear like you are contributing, without actually adding anything. I want to put pressure on all inactives to speak up and maybe contribution. 2) Pressure is not done in general, pressure is specific to make the player unable to hide. Your list of pressuring “all” inactives is the same as pressuring none. 3) There is a fine line between a plan, and suggestions that make you appear to be active while sending the town on a goosechase. Your plan requires no work from yourself (“we” should do this and that), is very general (“at some point”), and it’s limited to inactives instead of scumhunting, making it mechanic, so even when we hit town, the mafia is not guilty. In general, the player list is a little more stacked with active players than Pokemafia/HPmafia, so inactives shouldn’t be as much as a problem (even if I just replaced one…) My respond is above. (Thought I could post right under without quoting) Okay, now your post makes a bit more sense. But the point still stands. Why is it so bad to put pressure on one person and then move? Why is this better than RNG? I think I answered your first question in my post above. For your second question: The list is better because it will affect more inactive. Now I think RNG people to pressure them can be use in combination with having a list because I don't see why we can't use them together. To rephrase what I was saying, only RNG people and accuse them is not a good choice to pressure inactive. Having a list will pressure on a bigger group of people. You can RNG people and pressure them, BUT the list is needed because RNGing people is not enough. More pushing for the all-important inactive list. Why Insanious ended up making it instead of LunarDestiny is beyond me. On December 28 2010 05:57 LunarDestiny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 05:51 d3_crescentia wrote:On December 28 2010 05:34 LunarDestiny wrote:On December 28 2010 05:23 LSB wrote:On December 28 2010 05:20 LunarDestiny wrote: @1)I want to ask you how should we put pressure on specific player to contribute. It would be bad if a mafia is calling out inactive townie. Also, who should we choose? Go to a list of inactive and randomly pick one of them and say "xxxx, please contribute."
@2)If the list is short enough (less than 10 people?), then the list is convincing enough to pressure people to speak up.
What's the difference between the two scenarios? In both we are putting pressure on people to contribute. In both we need to make a list of inactives. Because if we do something like "xxxx you have not been contributing and that makes you look mafia, please contribute." We get contribution like Mr.Wiggle which is good. But if the mafia is the one pointing fingers, then other mafia will be left alone. Also, we are targeting a smaller group of people compared to having a list of people. I also like to say that I am not discouraging pointing fingers at non-inactive. Having debates between active players especially useful since it is the best way to find mafia because a mafia dt checks on these people are less convincing than other mafia games. Everyone has to point fingers. Even mafia point fingers at their own for weak posting or inactivity, but they will rarely push for a lynch. It should be our job as town to make sure that all of the necessary people are brought into the spotlight and to lynch those we find lacking. As posted above, I think pointing finger is good but a list is needed because pointing finger is not enough. Also, the list thing is most useful in day1 since that is the day with the least information. After day1, I suppose that the lynch will be based on behavior analysis like other games. Also, I want to ask Pandain to stop voting at random people to pressure them to talk. If we are also pressuring random inactive, then the same person must not be the one pointing fingers. I find this post in particular especially strange. Pandain is getting results and encouraging discussion, and apparently that's a bad thing. The last sentence is garbled, but by the sound of it he means inactives should not be the ones to pressure inactives. Um... okay. So how else can they contribute?On December 28 2010 07:34 LunarDestiny wrote:I am following debates between Annul and LSB. There are something I don't get. Annul's conclusion in his first post about why LSB should be lynched. Show nested quote +in conclusion, LSB has been making pure nonposts and/or pure informative posts without analysis, with the two exceptions being his insistence on the "kill inactives" theme and his defenses of pandain and mr. wiggles. yet he has like 30 posts up while saying almost absolutely nothing.
my vote is on LSB now. Annul, your conclusion for lynching LSB is because he have about 30 posts. All 30 posts, except 2, are posts that means nothing and pure informative posts without analysis? LSB, are your reasons for lynching Annul in page 17? -1. Giant wall of text that pretends to be contributing -2. He doesn't want to do anything about inactives -3. He makes a faulty analysis that is forced -4. Annul posts without brining anything new I will say what I think of this later, but I want to get these two points straight. Finally he gets involved in the discussion that the town has been most concerned with lately. But whatever happened to pressuring inactives? In his whole post history, he has not actually called anybody out, or even commented on the list he wanted. Also, despite being quite active in the game so far, he hasn't cast a vote, even though he emphasizes pressure.On December 28 2010 08:33 LunarDestiny wrote:I also think that Annul's initial post about LSB being mafia is illogically since the town will definitely not lynch a veteran like LSB because he have some meaningless posts. LSB actually have way more than 2 good posts before annul's accusation. Annul's second reason on p.18 Show nested quote +insistence on going after inactives instead of scumhunting. it would be very easy for a mafia to know his team all happen to be active and then say "hey kill inactives over all else EVEN IF scummy targets exist Well, we know that there is a lot of inactive in this game. I also assume there must a some mafia inactive in this game so LSB going after inactive doesn't say much about him being scum. What I don't understand is why Annul accused LSB without good evidence why LSB is mafia. -I don't think Annul accuse LSB to save Pandain because the bandwagon on Pandain is a joke and there is no good reason to lynch pandain. -LSB also mentioned that Annul do the analysis on LSB to make himself look good by using it as a reference that he did lengthy analysis. But LSB also say that annul want his post to be ignored. I have to question why would annul choose LSB to accuse if he want his post to be ignored. It makes no sense. If annul want his post to be ignore, he could have analyze someone other than LSB, because pointing finger at LSB would certainly result in some lengthy responses that annul can't slip by. More comments on the LSB / annul debate. I'm happy to see him voice his thoughts on the matter, though I would rather see an actual position taken instead of just listing the various issues that are guiding the debate. He could be genuinely unsure of which side to take, or it could be the typical wishy-washy mafia.
So, final thoughts. LunarDestiny, up until commenting on the annul / LSB debate is all about lurkers and blues. Blues, lurkers, blues, lurkers. DTs should check them. We should pressure them this way, not that way. It's a good idea to lynch one. So on and so forth.
Final verdict: undecided. I'm going to leave it at 50/50 for now. His thoughts aren't inherently scummy, but I really wish that he would get a bit more specific and actually start pointing fingers instead of encouraging others to do so. I think what made me suspicious of him was how many of his points I disagreed with. I just think the inactive town list, asking Pandain to stop doing what's clearly working, and the desire to control blue actions are all misguided notions. The key here is that we don't actually know anything about him -- it would be quite easy for a scum to be behind these posts and say "I'm contributing!" even though everything he has said could be summed up in a few sentences. It's true that for most of the game he's been re-iterating the same thing over many posts.
If he is town, I think he could do better. Ok, what im wondering is, why would you go off posting who's blue, if he is or isn't. You're just making it easier for mafia to pick and choose on who to kill. Explain as to why you did this? If he is a blue I want to know why you did an analysis on him if he's really trying to help the town and hasn't posted scummy at all. I have my FoS on you. On December 28 2010 22:46 ShoCkeyy wrote: Ahh i read that wrong... this is what happens when you get 2hrs of sleep and are reading/posting from a phone. _.
Anyways, fosing myself cause im an idiot.
And finaly: + Show Spoiler + On January 05 2011 17:19 Barundar wrote: Shockeyy you are acting like an idiot. Start following or I'm gonna assume you are dumb or mafia. And I don't think you are dumb. … On January 07 2011 00:09 ShoCkeyy wrote: He's mafia themango...
|
If you want to butcher active towns people, atleast start with me instead of the unopposed DT claim...
|
Most likely 12 v 3 tomorrow. This means we can afford a mislynch, so at this point if it can shut the discussion up we can kill our own unopposed DT claim.
It would be completely retarded ofcourse.
That Brocket is mafia means the people who switched to him day 1 are most likely town. These are: why, Mr.Zergling, Mr.Wiggles, Soulfire and Jackal58.
Orgolove is quickly popping up on my radar again. He was strictly opposing IRC, and so far not one person who has been on there has been mafia. Before annul got lynched, he posted:
On January 02 2011 11:06 orgolove wrote: Again, as the time draws near, I can't help but notice that, just as in my case, none has stood up for annul's defense. I would think the reds would try to cover for him at least a little bit.... He is actually the only one questioning the annul lynch.
He was one of the driving forces behind getting meapak lynched: On January 03 2011 14:40 orgolove wrote: One of the my votes is still on Meapak based on his highly, highly suspicious voting pattern vs annul, which he still has not fully explained.
On January 04 2011 17:21 orgolove wrote: Hey. I've been busy.
First, Meapak is almost 100% scum considering his voting patterns around annul. ~snip~
But when Meapak was innocent, orgolove posted:
On January 05 2011 23:00 orgolove wrote: Ugh. What pathetic idiocy. He acted so scummily as to leave us no choice, but turned out to be a town. Wow. Saying we had no choice. Would be nice for a mafia to remove doubts as to his own involvement in the lynch?
On January 07 2011 06:27 orgolove wrote: ~snip~ Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 05:43 Pandain wrote: People I think are mafia IloveJonn-from weak thoughts to excuses for not analyzing, from making contradictions like saying we shouldn't just follow what other people think and then vote someone based on what someone else said, for weak vote reasons, this guy is suspicious. Orgolove-Come on, it really can't still be considered "the holidays." Mr Zergling Has been playing really scummy. For example, said in beginning we should be lynching inactives and then hasn't voted for an inactive sent. Defended Annul, and did a soft attempt at keeping the bandwagon on Orgolove. Right now really the only thing saving him is that he's playing similar to his last game as town.
How nice of you to put your thoughts in your list. Now we know who NOT to lynch. Hint: you contributed to four lynches so far, and you hit 2 blue and 2 green out of it. The only lynch you tried to dissuade people from - annul - we actually hit a red. Coincidence? I think not. Let’s not forget who it was that actually did the only attempt of diverting the lynch...
On January 08 2011 02:18 orgolove wrote: Ugh. Again. I see that we have no counter bandwagon forming vs Seraph. The reds are not worried at all about him dying. I think it points towards seraph -not- being a red. Again - I think we are following Pandain's lead into lynching another green. Why are we still trusting this fool... ~snip~ Tries to blame Pandain for the Seraph lynch. Handy if you know he isn’t guilty, and want to lynch a DT, right? And afterwards:
On January 08 2011 13:53 orgolove wrote: I fucking told you. -_- Well gratz on being right on Seraph, but wrong on annul and Meapak.
|
There is ofcourse things that points away from Orgolove being mafia:
- Most important annul trying to save himself by voting for Orgolove
- Second most importat: orgolove posting his PM from mr.zergling, pretty much clearing him.
I would much rather lynch Shockeyy, who has been allowed to get away with really terrible play this game.
|
On January 08 2011 18:29 orgolove wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 17:15 Barundar wrote:Most likely 12 v 3 tomorrow. This means we can afford a mislynch, so at this point if it can shut the discussion up we can kill our own unopposed DT claim. It would be completely retarded ofcourse.That Brocket is mafia means the people who switched to him day 1 are most likely town. These are: why, Mr.Zergling, Mr.Wiggles, Soulfire and Jackal58. Orgolove is quickly popping up on my radar again. He was strictly opposing IRC, and so far not one person who has been on there has been mafia. Before annul got lynched, he posted: On January 02 2011 11:06 orgolove wrote: Again, as the time draws near, I can't help but notice that, just as in my case, none has stood up for annul's defense. I would think the reds would try to cover for him at least a little bit.... He is actually the only one questioning the annul lynch. He was one of the driving forces behind getting meapak lynched: On January 03 2011 14:40 orgolove wrote: One of the my votes is still on Meapak based on his highly, highly suspicious voting pattern vs annul, which he still has not fully explained. On January 04 2011 17:21 orgolove wrote: Hey. I've been busy.
First, Meapak is almost 100% scum considering his voting patterns around annul. ~snip~ But when Meapak was innocent, orgolove posted: On January 05 2011 23:00 orgolove wrote: Ugh. What pathetic idiocy. He acted so scummily as to leave us no choice, but turned out to be a town. Wow. Saying we had no choice. Would be nice for a mafia to remove doubts as to his own involvement in the lynch? On January 07 2011 06:27 orgolove wrote: ~snip~ On January 07 2011 05:43 Pandain wrote: People I think are mafia IloveJonn-from weak thoughts to excuses for not analyzing, from making contradictions like saying we shouldn't just follow what other people think and then vote someone based on what someone else said, for weak vote reasons, this guy is suspicious. Orgolove-Come on, it really can't still be considered "the holidays." Mr Zergling Has been playing really scummy. For example, said in beginning we should be lynching inactives and then hasn't voted for an inactive sent. Defended Annul, and did a soft attempt at keeping the bandwagon on Orgolove. Right now really the only thing saving him is that he's playing similar to his last game as town.
How nice of you to put your thoughts in your list. Now we know who NOT to lynch. Hint: you contributed to four lynches so far, and you hit 2 blue and 2 green out of it. The only lynch you tried to dissuade people from - annul - we actually hit a red. Coincidence? I think not. Let’s not forget who it was that actually did the only attempt of diverting the lynch... On January 08 2011 02:18 orgolove wrote: Ugh. Again. I see that we have no counter bandwagon forming vs Seraph. The reds are not worried at all about him dying. I think it points towards seraph -not- being a red. Again - I think we are following Pandain's lead into lynching another green. Why are we still trusting this fool... ~snip~ Tries to blame Pandain for the Seraph lynch. Handy if you know he isn’t guilty, and want to lynch a DT, right? And afterwards: On January 08 2011 13:53 orgolove wrote: I fucking told you. -_- Well gratz on being right on Seraph, but wrong on annul and Meapak. Just look at how Meapak acted. Right when annul hit the vote mark where his total was even with me, he immediately switched his vote from annul. It was 99% a red who first voted for each other, but then realized they might be the deciding vote so changed it when it became close. The sealing deal was reports by people that mentioned he yelled at people in the stupid IRC to stop voting for annul. Tell me, what else would any of us have thought if you had acted like this? I was 100% certain that he was red. And if I play another mafia game and see someone acting like that again, then I will have no qualms voting him as a red. You can't just lynch based on voting, the only ones knowing whos red are the mafia themselves. If it was only down to mistakes made by people, then the whole town would be mafia.
It's the same with lynching Pandain. He has made a ton of mistakes and his opinion has changed way too much just before the lynch. But that alone doesn't make him mafia. He has actively contributed, he has lynched the godfather and he has an unopposed DT claim - objectively speaking he can't be mafia. Try and look at it from an outstanders point of view. What is the evidence against him really?
This quote pretty much sums up what the town degenerated into yesterday:
Can you all just stfu and vote seraph. If we aren't putting reason behind our choices, and only lynch to place blame for mistakes we won't win, simple as. It's not about hurt feelings, it's about the truth we can collectively discern from the events in the course of the game.
|
|
I fully expected to be dead by now, tried to leave plenty of hints for people before i died every night but obviously they must consider me pretty bad, or they just expect town to lynch me. I was getting nervous that tree.hugger was still alive as well, since he was an experienced player, but i guess thats clear now. He pressured for darth yesterday btw.
Im willing to put some pressure on soulfire, can still change it before tomorrow, and the fact im still alive might mean im wrong on shockeyy, sigh...
|
I find it incredibly frustrating to be dealing with this much inactivity, and that's why I'm barely posting. I still have no clue why you didn't kill Soulfire yesterday. We've tried to hunt inactives since LSB tried to put focus on them, but when there is so many townies amongst them as well, and we just hit green after green, it's very demotivating.
|
Just want to say thanks to ver and foolishness for taking the time to answer stupid theories and give advice. I think town lost it when we stopped analysing and started to hunt based on votes/mistakes and activity level.
|
|
|
|