EPTTL Mafia XXXV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Why did Flash get knocked out???? Now I'm failing liquidbet | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 23 2010 13:07 flamewheel wrote: Double gaming is not allowed. Quite sorry, you'll have to choose. As brought to my attention though, the mini game is fine. Do you think this game will start before the majority of people in PYP are dead? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 10:25 TheMango wrote: where are my mafia team mates? lets start getting rid of some people. Flamwheel/Incog forgot to send me who my teammates were, can you PM me them? Thanks! | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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:
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. Plan Firstly. DO NOT CLAIM DO NOT CLAIM Good now that we got that out of the way, some other ideas. Generic Blue Activity plan One 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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
That's a claim Let's not do that this game | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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) | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 11:26 ilovejonn wrote: There's already a rule to prevent inactives? Unless you mean you have to post a lot to not be labeled as an inactive. Check out Pokemafia. Basically the entire mafia team, except for DCXLIV and Kavdragon posted once a day, and made sure they voted. That's what lurking is. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 13:24 TheMango wrote: Hmm, shows up for me, are you going to my profile page and clicking on my post count, or doing a search? both show up properly for me :o | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 13:24 TheMango wrote: Hmm, shows up for me, are you going to my profile page and clicking on my post count, or doing a search? both show up properly for me :o Yep, thats what I'm doing. It looks like there is a little time lag between what you post and what shows up in the search function. Maybe this is normal... Haven't actually tried searching for posts this recent before. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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 | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 13:40 seRapH wrote: 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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 13:45 Soulfire wrote: But I will speak for other players who are new like I am, it is difficult to post something that contributes in Day 1 - so yet another thing to differentiate: new players who are lost and can only agree with others, and mafia trying to slip under the radar and avoid modkill. As for new players, don't worry to much about being inactive. As long as you try to play mafia and spend some time thinking and reading the thread, this won't ever be a problem. Just post you thoughts on the person currently being accused. And feel free to ask questions, in thread, PMing the hosts, or any of the Bootcamp helpers, and I'm always willing to help | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 21:02 Ryuu314 wrote: Well if his ban happened before roles were assigned and thus hits could be made, then there's no way he could've made a hit as he'd be in Disneyland. That said, his ban was after roles were assigned I believe so this point is moot. Remember this post? On December 27 2010 13:43 LSB wrote: 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. 40 Minutes Later http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=179875#2 On December 27 2010 14:20 Coagulation wrote: your sister hot? User was temp banned for this post. Not a scum tell per say... but still... | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 18:34 DoctorHelvetica wrote: 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. DTs should be using mouths to claim if someone is red or not, it shouldn't be an issue since we can use PMs this game. 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. Hmm... Never noticed him @LunarDestiny On 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? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 27 2010 19:59 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Your post is: A) Really defensive when I never flamed you. I'm really just worried that joke might be serious, this wouldn't be the first time ridiculous metagame arguments would used against me and whether you were joking or not may not be relevant. I'm pointing out that the IDEA is stupid, not you, so it isn't a flame. B) You aren't lavishing attention on me and you're basically creating an excuse to discourage my posting at all. You're proposing my idea to me and being cute about it in a way that is really irritating. Yeah ok I accept your proposal that has been the thing I've been shouting at people in every mafia game where this happens. I don't really understand what you're trying to imply about me with the last "question" but I'm annoyed by it. The question is whether the defensiveness is because he was a bit touchy, or if it is because he's sweating as Mafia. Note, Meapak has never been mafia yet. And always, someone's first game as mafia is very loose (I should know), and super defensiveness is incredibly telling. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 00:41 annul wrote: okay, hi peeps FOS LSB. analysis to come shortly <3 you too. I want to see the analysis. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
[QUOTE]On December 28 2010 00:40 LSB wrote: @LunarDestiny [QUOTE]On 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.[/QUOTE] What do you think we should do about inactives then?[/QUOTE] 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? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 01:00 annul wrote: "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! 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? Read the thread please 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? 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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 01:27 annul wrote: 1. i read pokemafia. still a horrible idea to lynch inactives over active scum [/quote] Here you go http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/search.php?q=&t=c&f=31&u=oceanic&gb=date | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 01:29 d3_crescentia wrote: I thought it said, "we make a list of inactives and then vote on one of them." Yes, this is virtually identical to what we've done in previous games, and you're right that it doesn't work very well. I don't think further elaboration on his part will really help though, as I don't think any variant or extension on the aforementioned plan is what we need to win. Personally, I would like DT checks on the inactives. That could be an easy way to clear people. That does bring up an issue, we should make it so that there is some way for the DT to be able to say what they checked, so that when they die, their information doesn't get lost. What if at the start of every day, people just randomly say a person's name, and a role. The DTs would say who they checked and someone's role. It would look something like this + Show Spoiler + LSB is Townie Infun is Mafia DTA is DT LSB writes I checked Infun, he's medic Infun writes I checked LSB, he's mafia DTA writes I checked Infun, he's mafia And so when DTA dies, we can go back and check out his checks | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Also, once the DT establishes a mouth, this could be a way for the DT to throw off the mafia, by posting false responses in the thread in order to get off the hit list. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 03:02 Mr. Wiggles wrote: The problem with that though, is that it almost defeats the purpose, it's a lose-lose situation for the town. Either the DT says what they check correctly, and the mafia will home in on them, or else they lie to keep them off their trail. Remember, if we pull this off, all thirty people will be telling what's going on. Basically you have a 50/50% of getting someone's role right. (Okay maybe a bit less, but not much). A dt can easily hide within the mass of people getting the roles correct Now as for the fakeout The problem arises when they start to lie. If they are killed, then we would ideally go back and look at what they said peoples roles are, but if they start faking it, we won't know which are real and which are fake, unless there is already an established mouth who comes out and tells us. But then you might get multiple people claiming different things about what the DT told them, which make the DTs claims near useless, as we won't be able to discern truth from falsities. Exactly, the DT will only do this when there is an established mouth. Unless there's something I"m missing, or don't know about how the game is played, this doesn't look like it'll help that much in the end. If this is actually a tried and true method and I look really stupid right now, please let me know. Thanks.  I don't know if this has been tried before. But the issue I'm trying to address is when the DT gets killed before he's able to disclose what he found. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 04:40 DoctorHelvetica wrote: I'm all for pressuring inactives to speak day 1 but no DT's should absolutely not come public with their claims that is a terrible and awful idea and I won't even begin to consider. What do you think of my plan? What do you think about the use of DT mouths? The problem is when we focus too much on inactives we start calling people scum just because they didn't post enough when the far more disturbing trend is posting a lot/posting big posts and saying absolutely nothing helpful: aidnai in exmima radfield in salem kavdragon in pokemafia etc. Indeed I agree that it could be a mafia tell. I do have a few people in mind in this game. However, these people are so much easier to analyze than someone like Oceanic in Pokemafia. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:23 Jackal58 wrote: + Show Spoiler + I voted Jackal for the same reason, but actually am inclined now to vote for someone else with his excuse, but will actively be pressuring him in PM land to contribute more so. Jackal, that's why your being voted. Contribute more and I'll lay off you. It's all good man. I don't feel like you're picking on me. Like I already said day 1 lynch is a crap shoot. Unless somebody really steps on their dick. I've seen it many times actually. Kenpachi/Coagulation (Almost, but we switched)- Deconduo's Don't lose your village game Me/Pyrr- TLMMM 2 Me- Harry Potter Mafia Masq- Haunted Mafia Bill Murray (Almost, but Ace made us switch x.x)- Penalty Mafia And many others... | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:23 LunarDestiny wrote: 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? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:34 LunarDestiny wrote: 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. Yes but we would be pointing fingers at every single inactive. We wouldn't just focus on one (Like how a lynch would work), we would just take notice of people and ask them questions. On a somewhat related note... On December 28 2010 05:33 Jackal58 wrote: And the closest I've seen to that is TheMango. Yet he is not getting any love. Well, there's a few good discussion points right now. Like what do you think of me? As for TheMango, I'll PM him then | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:39 annul wrote: this worries me i already highlighted LSB's defense of pandain. now pandain is defending LSB on my FOS. in and of itself that is fine but his rationale is "if hes mafia, we'll catch him anyway" ... whaaaaaat? Just wondering. What do you mean that "highlight"? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:45 annul wrote: yes, point out, draw attention to, etc. you know when you highlight text in a book? to draw your eyes to important things later when you study? like that Yes... interesting cause when you highlight text in a book, you aren't actually contributing anything. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:49 annul wrote: you mean like you? i think ~24/30 of this game will agree that i have contributed much more analysis to this game than you have. the 6 who wont are you and your five mafia teammates. if there are seven mafia or eight mafia then it will be 23/30 and 22/30 who will agree with this. =\ Let's see what you have done this game. 1. Giant wall of text that pretends to be contributing+ Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 01:00 annul wrote: what is the point of this post? acting as if he is mafia to create the impression he is not mafia? WIFOM surely, but think about it what is the point of this? instant attempt to form a wagon on someone who hasnt even posted yet and the game had just started? two posts to seem active and he answers his own question a minute later. point of this? "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. "DO NOT CLAIM" is good advice, and i would like to say obvious, but given current history and shit it isnt =\ 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. common sense information fair question! ? more "hit inactives" crap - this is bad. also maybe a blue fish? wants to write a day post. uh huh. keep this in mind with the "try to appear active but not" lens. HEY something of content, cool. sort of defense of pandain and blatant defense of mr. wiggles. sadly the rationale of "inactives instead!" is scummy. dunno how to analyze this -- information that isnt common sense (or meant to filibuster) is fine, and even i didnt know this one. id say this gets a pass yes, lets lynch people with zero meaningful posts. LSB, you up? or yes lets lynch a modkill target because those are almost certainly going to be town and we want to lynch towns, yes. you too. good idea, i like this, but why sign up and then insta modkill on purpose? if youre replaced its not like you can consider any potential wins by the mafia as wins for you -- you are considered not to have even played the game. seems like something nobody should ever do on purpose and if they do, metagaming at its finest. buuuut then we haaaave..... "DONT WORRY ABOUT BEING INACTIVE LOL" after his entire campaign day 1 was "kill the inactives" -- whaaaat? what is this inconsistency? yes coagulation got a 14 day ban on purpose to "help" his mafia team day 1, this makes perfect sense. ***************** 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. Notice that Annul quotes every single post I made. This is just silly. Sure, I like to spam. But do you really need to point out every single instance? At least put it in a spoiler. The reason why Annul does this is to put some kind of useless contributing so that he can increase his post length. For example take LMNOP in WaW mafia. He just posted long walls of text and came off as green and helpful. He still tries to build this facade of his contributions. + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 05:49 annul wrote: you mean like you? i think ~24/30 of this game will agree that i have contributed much more analysis to this game than you have. the 6 who wont are you and your five mafia teammates. if there are seven mafia or eight mafia then it will be 23/30 and 22/30 who will agree with this. =\ He's trying to set up the fact that he's a good contributor. And then he tries to establish his greenies just because he makes long posts. 2. He doesn't want to do anything about inactives + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 01:27 annul wrote: 1. i read pokemafia. still a horrible idea to lynch inactives over active scum Comming from a game of Pokemafia, I know the damage that an inactive can do. He simply dismisses any discussion over an inactive without much reason 3. He makes a faulty analysis that is forced + Show Spoiler + Well, let's look at how substantial his posts are 2. you could do whatever analysis you please? all i know is you didnt do any Firstly, up to this point, barely anyone had posted anything. Intrestingly enough, I've posted many reasoning on blue actions, and how to deal with inactives. Yet Annul brushes it aside. I've clearly analyzed Pandain. And yet he claims that I have done nothing? 3. evidently you do need to pretend to be active, since you did for ~30 posts I'm pretending to be active. This would be a valid concern, if I did nothing but spam. However, I have pleanty of posts that arn't spam, and far more than Annul. 4. it says you are defending pandain? i dont understand what you are asking me to do Note: He doesn't analyze my actions At all. All he does it point out spam. From his 'analysis' we can see a few things. 1) His reasoning is incredibly flawed. He ignores all meaningfull posts and focuses on the spam 2) This analysis is probably forced. There are many inconsistancies he can't explain so he simply ignores it. 4. Annul posts without brining anything new + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 05:39 annul wrote: this worries me i already highlighted LSB's defense of pandain. now pandain is defending LSB on my FOS. in and of itself that is fine but his rationale is "if hes mafia, we'll catch him anyway" ... whaaaaaat? basically pandain is saying "so what if he acts scummy day 1, if hes mafia he will act scummy days 2-X and we can lynch him then" <--- am i missing something here when i call this horrible logic? on point: i am not so sure public claiming of being hit is 100% the smart play, but am willing to be persuaded on this strategy debate. note that even if LSB turns out correct and this is the proper strategy, it does not acquit him of scumminess. second, "mistaking jokes for real content" makes me scratch my head. can anyone just out and say "JUST KIDDING LOL" if someone calls them up on something? i think a big part of my case against him is in the spammy nature, as you call it. he posts a lot without actually posting a lot, you know what i mean? its that plus his case against inactives that bothers me. Lets take a look at what he said 1) I said stuff before 2) I feel that not claiming being hit is a good idea. wtf? Remember, always claim if your hit. The mafia knows who they hit. The town doesn't. Why not share the information? 3) Let's talk about something irrevelent 4) LSB spams As you can see. He did not post anything new. All he did was re-highlight points he made before. And then describe his feelings. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 06:22 Jackal58 wrote: Was a rhetorical question. Unless I'm missing something on TheMango you guys all know about him, I believe him to be mafia along with his PM buddy LSB. Mango Hasn't responded yet x.x So what caused you to change your opinion of me? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 06:26 annul wrote: point 1 above is pretty lol, insofar as you call a PBPA "giant wall of text pretending to be [contributive]" if PBPA is a spam maneuver then i really need to quit this game because i must not know a thing about forum mafia + Show Spoiler + What's PBPA? And the key point I'm making is that, I did not ignore or brush off your analysis. The key point is that if I can respond to every single one of your points in a post that is a fraction of the length http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=179009¤tpage=14#275, it means that your analysis is fluff point 2 is a false classification of my position. i want to lynch scummy targets, not inactives. LSB wants to fire on inactives exclusively. it is correct that where there are no other scummy targets, an inactive is a fine kill. but where there is scum, there is no reason whatsoever to leave them alone in favor of inactives, which is what LSB advocates. right now there are scummy targets and there are places to analyze that do not involve inactives. No it is not. You still do not have any solution to deal with inactives. We've been talking about plans, however your voice is suspiciously absent. We cannot just ignore inactives. We ignored inactives in Pokemafia and we lost the game You are asking to "worry about the inactive at a later date". This is not taking a position point 3, spoiler 2 is false. "yet annul brushes it aside" -- yes, i clearly brushed aside you telling us what you want to do to inactives. clearly. What about my analysis of Pandain? You have not address this in any point. In fact you ignore it right here point 3, spoiler 3 is sort of false. perhaps they are not "spam" in the common way of thinking about it, but what you post are pure informative posts without almost any actual analytical contribution. yes, you do bring some things to the game, like the pandain/wiggles defense (and, after the FOS post, your attacks on me). but the vast majority of your postings -- as can be found in my PBPA -- are not analytical at all. All right. Tell me what I should have analyized then? Should attack you because you haven't posted yet? No! I did not make any analysis in the first few hours of the game because you cannot. It is impossible to deduce who the mafia are from a simple day post. And when I did make analysis, it was when a lot of post had gathered up. But you chose to ignore this point 3, spoiler 4 is unfair, because i asked you a question that you did not answer. you said "what does my defense of pandain SAY?" and i told you what it said, asking for more information on your question because there had to be more to it than that; there had to be some underlying question i wasnt seeing. you never clarified and now you seek to use this as a point. unfair at best. This is not unfair. This is me pointing out what happens. Read above for point 3 non-spoiler 2, show me the inconsistencies please? i will be more than willing to analyze whatever holes you think exist in my case. if i miss something its entirely an error - not an unwillingness to get on the record about a topic. show me what you want me to talk about (SPECIFICALLY) and i will. 1) I analyze Pandain. You pointed out that I analyzed Pandain. 2) You say that I didn't analyze anyone. the rest of point 4 is laughable. It's laugable because it's your attempt at posting nothing. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 06:26 annul wrote: point 3, spoiler 3 is sort of false. perhaps they are not "spam" in the common way of thinking about it, but what you post are pure informative posts without almost any actual analytical contribution. yes, you do bring some things to the game, like the pandain/wiggles defense (and, after the FOS post, your attacks on me). but the vast majority of your postings -- as can be found in my PBPA -- are not analytical at all. I went back and looked at what point you were reffering to. What analysis can I do within 60 Minutes of the game start? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Before you go vote for me. Go through my posts. There are clear examples of me taking positions and analysis. There is a big difference between what Annul wants you to believe, and what I said. Probably most of it is from a misunderstanding. I don't provide analysis in a game for a while. Annul probably saw the tail end of my Shockeyy analysis. However, that happened on day two. I'm not letting up on Annul. But just trying to keep the thread focused on inactives. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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. 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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 07:47 annul wrote: 1. "no u" defense again. this is precisely what i called LSB out on in the first place. we wouldnt even have these pages of debate if not for FOSing LSB. couldve just sat back and let pandain fall, very easy right? So why didn't I just let Pandain fall? I could have attacked him 3. "forced" how? i couldve sat back and let pandain hang, right? why am i calling you out specificallly if i didnt think you were scum? the only way is if pandain and i are both mafia and i am trying to save him, and while i am not clear on pandain, i do know his wagon makes no sense. i realize saying this will mean i hang if he turns red but =\ you are scummier than he is right now. Btw, why is Pandain scum? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 08:04 Barundar wrote: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2010 07:40 LSB wrote: 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? I'll just copy-paste one of my PM conversations with Pandain since I don't really want to retype this Original Message From LSB: Normally I don't defend myself. Harry Potter Mafia? I only defended myself since it was horrendously bad. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: obviously you would defend yourself. But annul thought that everyone would just ignore it? why would he be so bold on day 1, at the very start, just to "gain town favor" and hope its ignored. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: Nope, I defended myself and put pressure on him. That's why he's continued to post. This is what pressure is. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: So he made a long thing analysis, even saying beforehand "Guys im making analysis of LSB"(thus bringing more attention), then has continued to do this because he wanted it to get ignored? ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: He wants to win the town favor by making a long post and hoping that it gets ignored. That way he can go back and say "Look at all the analysis I did!". And indeed he has done that. Also, check this out. Take out my arguments with him and his analysis of my. What else does he have left? Not much. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: why would he force himself to do an analysis on you so early? don't you think if he was really red he wouldn't be this so much out in attention? ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: Yeah. His analysis is forced. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: do you really think he's red? That’s not really a lot of inactives on day 1. Why don't you name one at put pressure though? I've prodded Mr. Wiggles, and also Jackle58. How about prodding TheMango? He hasn't really done much at all this game | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
5. Brocket 6. TheMango 7. Mr.Zergling 8. why 15. ShoCkeyy 17. ilovejonn 19. Orgolove 21. bumatlarge 23. GeorgeClooney 26. deconduo 27. Soulfire 29. Ryuu314 30. ~OpZ~ | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 08:33 LunarDestiny wrote: -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. My best explanation of this has to do with how I acted in Harry Potter Mafia and Pokemafia. There was this giant bandwagon on me day one, and I didn't really do much about it. In Pokemafia I just dismissed analysis against me and didn't do much about it. This game is different as Annul's analysis was horrendious and sparked some alarms. I then sat back and watched as Annul kept it up. This is why I'm openly attacking him now. + Show Spoiler + Well... Harry Potter Mafia, I didn't bother with the bandwagon because the plan was basically to get me lynched.... thanks DocH x.x | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
There are two lurkers/inactives that have voted so far. 6. TheMango- I consider him a lurker as he hasn't offered insight on anything. 30. ~OpZ~- Hasn't done much in thread. He has PMed me, but I don't know if he is actually active. If why/Brocket/GeorgeClooney gets around to voting/posting, we could switch the lynch. But currently we should push to lynch the people who actually aren't in danger of being modkilled. People probably with say that I have a conflict of interest with TheMango since he voted for me. So I'm find with voting off ~OpZ~ On December 28 2010 11:41 LSB wrote: ##unvote ##vote ~OpZ~ | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
I want to see if you all actually read what I wrote or just mouthing information from Annul. As for the OpZ inactive lynch, he has posted a bit now. But he hasn't really said anything besides what other people had posted. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Bump. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 17:18 Barundar wrote: ... 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? OMGUS: The point is, lets say I do an analysis of you, and its all lies. Wouldn't you be suspicious of me? It would be selfish of me to not do anything about it. As a townie I have a responsibility to attack Annul, even though it may be a bit scummy Inactives: In case you haven't noticed, I've been dealing with the inactives using blue roles. I proposed we deal with inactives by a combination of DT checks and mass cover by everyone allowing the DTs to safely . The thing is, this plan was immediatly dismissed by people who probably didn't read the thread. All they say is "well, lets not rely on DTs". In addition, as I've said, we should lynch an inactive only when there iw no obvious mafia canditdate. Given that I found a obvious mafia candidate... | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 28 2010 17:39 Barundar wrote: 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? Besides responding to my posts. What else has Annul contributed? Not much besides an Albus Dumbledor claim | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 02:03 annul wrote: that claim happened before the game even began - you cant count that stuff in analysis. obvious HP mafia reference, too. and what have i contributed? i dunno, 90% of the fodder of day 1's debate? More like 50% of the LSB and Annul debate. And I the other 50%. You have completely ignored the inactive issue and the blue issue | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 02:06 annul wrote: so you hint at vig but then scale it back, making it not vig because you cant kill until night 2, so no "maybe earlier" what could you be hinting to here? hatter? you could only "prove" that upon death. medic? can't "prove" that "without a doubt" anyway unless you get lucky with hits. I can prove it without a doubt. I'm not going to provide clues on my roles because of an obvious fishing attempt | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 02:11 annul wrote: furthermore you say its fishing but i mean you just came up to the water surface with a giant open mouth, as if you want to swallow that bait. you are claiming blue, essentially, to save your lynch so i want to know what you are. convince me and i will drop my attack until the time comes when you say you can prove it and cant actually prove it. I am claiming blue. Just not what role. As for convincing you. It impossible since your attack is forced and you left reason a long while ago. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 02:09 annul wrote: we can all prove it without a doubt in like 10 hours when you flip and i meant that without my catalyst posting, 90% of day 1 wouldnt have happened. i know you contributed to half of it once it began. lol So why are trying to claim everything when so much more went on in day one besides the LSB vrs Annul debate? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 02:15 annul wrote: then you will flip, because you are lying. If I'm lying just Vig hit me then after night 2 or lynch me | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
The point is, the fact that you are willing to lynch one of your blues means that this lynch has become something else to you. It no longer is about helping out the town, it's about proving to yourself that you can get someone lynched. It's time to abort. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
wtf? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Right now, all the votes are split. What we need to do is refocus the votes on a few candidates. I propose the candidates be Me, annul or OpZ. If you want to vote for a blue who can confirm himself, go for it. It will help us find scum on day 2. As for Annul. I feel like with the mass of people voting me, we should refocus onto OpZ, or we won't get enough votes. OpZ is the inactive vote. He hasn't done much this game besides reiterated points that people have already spoken. I'm up for redirected the inactive vote to someone else. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 02:57 annul wrote: im saying i assume you are red, not blue, but if you want to prove otherwise, you need to do better than "ill prove blueness on day 3" given the harms to that if you are actually not blue (1-2 more deaths) Your Rhetoric was: I think your red. Prove that your blue. Now since I can prove that I am blue, your rhetoric boils down to: I think your red. I don't have any reason. But I'm going to lynch you to prove that you are blue. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 03:18 annul wrote: in sengoku, i claimed guerilla. i said i would PROVE it the next day, if they decided to take their lynch off of me. they did. it was the smarter move to not blow the power the next day, so i didnt. they still had no idea if i was guerilla or not. The difference is that I can, and I will prove that I am a blue. And Sengoku we redirected the lynch because we didn't want to lynch a blue. You see, in that game, the town cared about winning. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 03:28 annul wrote: in sengoku i breadcrumbed early so it was somewhat believable... ... but my point is i could have been or i could have been scum, town has no idea. if LSB is a blue he can make a believable claim on day 3 "HEY the smart move is to stfu about my power" ... and town has no idea if he is being sincere or if he is mafia and unable to prove himself. so the point of this is to question whether you believe the blue claim, in light of all the happenings, not to make an automatic "get off the blue" decision. every single mafia in this game would be smart to claim blue in the situation LSB did whether he is or is not blue. that is my main point. I am not stupid. I know how to prove my role, and I can prove my role. Right now, mafia wants to lynch me because they know they will not be able to take me out at night since medics will probably protect me. So they will try to take me out before it gets to night 2. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 04:38 annul wrote: there is no role you can PROVE (outside of death - see hatter, etc) before the end of night 2. Yes there is. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
At the start of night 2. I will post my proof of being blue. If you're not satisfied, just call a vig hit on me. Deal? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 05:03 annul wrote: then im wrong, and so are all the people who see what i see. also means his defense to my attack was pretty horrible More like you choose to pretend my responses aren't their and perpetuate a dumb argument. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 05:11 LunarDestiny wrote: I don't have any reason that LSB is being mafia as of now. I'll post more if I find any after I reread some posts. LSB said he can prove his innocence on day3, but this is also an excuse I seen many mafia who are being lynch used. Can you post a link for me? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Don't worry. I'll forward this PM chain before I get lynched . I'm not telling anyone my role. If you want, just Vig me at the start of night two if you don't like my plan. I need to claim early because I was clearly going to get lynched. Look at who is voting for me. annul- Obvously won't switch TheMango- Inactive Mr.Zergling- Inactive orgolove- Inactive DoctorHelvetica- Mad because I prodded him Meapak_Ziphh- Summy Soulfire- Inactive Brocket- Mad because I didn't listen to him in Pokemafia Barundar- Dunno ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: why can't you tell me if you won't die anyway? I'm posting an analysis on you. I need to know now. answer second question too mmkay? ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: I can't tell you how I'm going to prove that I am blue. Also, tell the Medics to Protect DocH. If I can tell his role, mafia can certainly tell. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: how can you prove your blue medics will protect you if you tell me now also why did you claim so early? there were still like 15 hours left Someone has been fishing hard for my role  | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Why do I talk about inactives? There's more to the game than just me and Annul. When most of the town is doing nothing but making one or two posts saying "I agree" this is a big problem If you do not deal with inactives now, the town will lose Why Claim Early? Well I addressed this in PM already. Read the post above | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Where? No mafia has stated that they can prove without a doubt that they are blue. but can you disprove by showing games where an active mafia is lynched on day1 and they did not say they can prove their innocence. Harry Potter Mafia Yours truely In addition, find a game where a mafia being lynched and they claim vanilla townie. Hesmyrr BC Lots of people here | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 05:42 annul wrote: rofl it was a bus of course you arent going to claim blue because you are being bussed! your goal was death. So do you think I'm mafia? It doesn't sound like it. Kenpachi/Coagulation (Almost, but we switched)- Deconduo's Don't lose your village game Masq- Haunted Mafia Bill Murray- Penalty Mafia | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 05:45 deconduo wrote: I'm quite happy to lynch annul if LSB turns up blue. It will discourage people from tunnelling in future games. All I will say is that I have a 100% correct rate when I tunnel. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
By tunnel, I mean lynching tunneling. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
I can prove my alignment without a doubt at the start of night 2. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 06:45 Pandain wrote: Even better, LSB should say what his plan is to be 100% confirmed at the start of day 2, since it's not like mafia are going to kill him during the day. So then we can even lynch him if he never really had a plan. Everyone should unvote LSB. Night 2, start of night 2. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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! I can tell you about it at the start of day two. However, the amount of people I can reveal it to has to be pretty small. I can only provide proof at the start of night two. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 06:56 TheMango wrote: I think LSB is lying about being vigilante. Makes no sense from a townie perspective. How would we even know at the start of night two? If he kills someone as vigilante that we choose, he could just as easily be mafia killing someone, no? Someone correct me if I'm wrong... I have not roleclaimed. And there is multiple ways to confirm a role. I will say that I'm not the hatter though. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 07:15 LunarDestiny wrote: I was about to change my vote from LSB because I don't find good evidence against him. But wtf Pandain. i am 99% sure he's mafia, but there's really no harm in waiting just one night just to be 100% sure. Wana lynch Pandain? He fished pretty hardcore. + Show Spoiler + Don't worry. I'll forward this PM chain before I get lynched . I'm not telling anyone my role. If you want, just Vig me at the start of night two if you don't like my plan. I need to claim early because I was clearly going to get lynched. Look at who is voting for me. annul- Obvously won't switch TheMango- Inactive Mr.Zergling- Inactive orgolove- Inactive DoctorHelvetica- Mad because I prodded him Meapak_Ziphh- Summy Soulfire- Inactive Brocket- Mad because I didn't listen to him in Pokemafia Barundar- Dunno ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: why can't you tell me if you won't die anyway? I'm posting an analysis on you. I need to know now. answer second question too mmkay? ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: I can't tell you how I'm going to prove that I am blue. Also, tell the Medics to Protect DocH. If I can tell his role, mafia can certainly tell. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From Pandain: how can you prove your blue medics will protect you if you tell me now also why did you claim so early? there were still like 15 hours left Btw. Annul sounds like Pandain back in Deconduo's Don't Lose Your Village Game. At that time, we had a good play. The best play for the town would be to lynch Coagulation, and then move on depending on Coagulation's role. Pandain then kept on insisting that we go for the '100%' confirmed scum, Gabriel. Turns out that Pandain was just mafia, and he was trying to divert the lynch. Likewise in this game, it clearly is in the towns favor to let me live. Yet Annul is for some reason keeps on insisting that I'm "100% confirmed scum" and keeps on trying to kill me even though it clearly is a bad idea. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 07:31 Insanious wrote: It is in the towns interest to keep LSB alive... right now I can't decide between voting for: Annul - He keeps pushing, and he needs to stop. If he is going to be like this all game, he is going to hurt the town a lot. Might even be mafia trying to kill an active Blue seraph - RoL's analysis Now I can throw one more in here: Brocket - As town he was SUPER SUPER active, most active poster in Pokemafia. In this game, he has 1 post and 1 vote, not talking at all. Exact opposite... very fishy. Good point about Brocket I don't consider this an actual post On December 28 2010 20:41 Brocket wrote: LSB made a huge mistake in pokemafia but he turned out to be a townie. So he's playing a bad townie again or he's mafia. No regrets flipping LSB here. So Zero Posts, and 1 vote? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 07:39 annul wrote: you do not seem to understand math if there is a "99%" chance he is mafia, the only thing you can gain is 1% certainty by waiting. in exchange for this 1% certainty, assume we attack someone on RNG basis. we give up 80% certainty today and, in exchange for ONE PERCENT chance to save a blue, we take a ~33% chance of randoming a "different" blue. an actual blue. Look at your reasoning for I'm mafia. It literally is "I feel that he is mafia". You have a 6/30 chance of feeling correctly. IE RNG. That's 20% btw, a lot lower than 99% | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 07:39 annul wrote: you do not seem to understand math if there is a "99%" chance he is mafia, the only thing you can gain is 1% certainty by waiting. in exchange for this 1% certainty, assume we attack someone on RNG basis. we give up 80% certainty today and, in exchange for ONE PERCENT chance to save a blue, we take a ~33% chance of randoming a "different" blue. an actual blue. On November 18 2010 10:45 Pandain wrote: Agreed LSB, and again, that just proves furthormore what shoudl be obvious by now, Glasse is frickin lying. For example, I've shown that really the only two-three cases are either 1.Me and Coag are mafia(again, you did bring up he voted me pretty darn quick.) 2.Glasse is mafia alone or even 3.Glasse and Coag are mafia(coag protected glasse, glasse MCED him.) Lynching Glasse is the safest choice in all of those, especially when you start to use your noggin  . Sounds familiar? Someone telling us to ignore all the cases because they are so so sure that someone is red. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 07:43 annul wrote: i do not play this game RNG. if this game was entirely RNG then what is the point of playing at all, of analysis, etc? i do not have a 6/30 chance of feeling correctly. my "feelings" are not RNG-based. All right then. How are your "feelings" 100% pointing to mafia? Have you compared my current play to my previous play? Have you considered if I actually was mafia, how I would act? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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 Because Brocket posted only once, and people realize if we don't deal with inactives, the town will lose. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 08:39 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: I'm getting a strong sense like there is an attempt to save LSB underway right now. We've had several different attempts to switch attention to people who I don't feel are remotely suspicious (i.e opz or brocket). These people are lurkers but I don't think they are overtly scummy. This really feels like a last minute attempt by the mafia to take the heat of LSB. Go read the thread. I claimed blue. Of course there is a strong attempt to divert the lynch | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:09 Pandain wrote: Never should town lynch a total inactive. Town needs to be going after the lurkers, not the inactives. Not only do we gain nothing from Brockett's list, but add the fact that there are better people who are either showing signs of true scum or are seeming to contribute without actually contributing, unlike Brockett who isn't doing either. Scum usually want to seem to contribute. Isn't Brockett lurking? He didn't contribute anything at all with his 1 post | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 09:13 Pandain wrote: No he's inactive. That's different from lurking. Lurkers are those who follow the thread but don't post, or who post but don't contribute. Brockett is just inactive. I'm still up for a D_3 lynch, but since that doesn't seem to happen anytime soon I guess I'll settle with LSB. The difference is that inactives will forget to vote and will get modkillled. Brockett won't do that. He's a lurker | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
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? Apply metagame to your analysis of me. Eh? Something doesn't jive. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
FOS RoL, Pandain and OpZ Strangely they tried to divert the lynch off of OpZ RoL and Pandain have been fishing my role hard FOS Meapak and Annul Annul with his horrid analysis and tunneling a blue Meapak because he's been playing very weirdly and more of a yes man | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
He's either Red or the DT. Medics please protect him + Show Spoiler + All right, if you don't want to share your results, fine. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From DoctorHelvetica: you could read my posts in the thread to know that ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: Wait... So what do you think the DTs should do with their results? Nothing? ----------------------------------------- Original Message From DoctorHelvetica: i dont even see the point in that ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: What about the everyone post in the thread at the same time idea? ----------------------------------------- Original Message From DoctorHelvetica: and im not against dt's checking inactives, i'm against them claiming/publicly announcing their finds + Show Spoiler + If he's new, he's probably not red, as he's posting way to much for a newbie mafia. Interesting that you're bringing up such a big deal about this. It actually leads me to believe that I'm on the right track. Yo, my plans are gold, pure gold when I'm town. And I tell you, this plan is pure gold. DTs are a great way to sort through the inactives. Just look at Pokemafia. Sure we might be able to pick off Kavdragon and DC with analysis, but there was wayyy to much inactives to deal with everyone. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From DoctorHelvetica: It's too early to say but Mr.Wiggles seems to good to be true. I think he's more likely mafia than a smurf. Information that can not be ignored? lol it's 100% absolutely inconclusive and irrelevant, it is just speculation that can't be built upon so thinking about it is a waste of time. most hypothetical "scumtells" are a complete waste of time. No I think talking about the framer role is important becuase it's just another reason we shouldn't worship DT's and Blues. RoL is right, analysis is much better and more important and trying to get DT's to claim is just stupid. No I don't think you're scum, you always have a stupid plan it seems when you're town. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: Just saying, your little "let's discuss" the framers wasn't very informative either. I'll keep an eye out on Lunar Destiny then Mr. Wiggles doesn't seem to be a smurf. His posting history is ligit. I'm getting a green read from him. As for your replacement... It's not a scumtell, yet it is information that can't be ignored. Common, you guys should have known something was up when L suddenly entered Insane when he hadn't played for ages. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From DoctorHelvetica: Not much really, but 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 + 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. Just because it sounds like something I'd say if I were mafia to pretend i'm participating. Also Mr.Wiggles seems almost too "informed" for a newbie, which makes me worry. Also you're too smart to honestly believe that me being a replacement is a scumtell, are you serious? ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: Hey, what was scummy about LunarDestiny? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
The mystery intrigues me. I will give you your salvation, because I can always kill you later. Also you have to be a DT now. If you can give me your evidence by the START of night 1 it means you only have 2 roles you could be. A medic (which you are sure you will do a successful protect) or a DT where you are guaranteed some amount of information. You will get your stay of execution, but I will have you killed if you don't follow through. I know the general mafia claim strategy. Try to make people forget and focus on "better" targets always staving off that "sure" kill. But I don't forget Mr. LSB. I never forget. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: You see. I don't go around telling people my role. You already learned that from Harry potter mafia. The reason why I ordered a double stack on you in Harry Potter Mafia was because you hinted that you had an extra life. I will give people proof at the start of night 2. If I do not provide the proof, just bomb me or Vig hit me. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From RebirthOfLeGenD: So your not a mad hatter, lets narrow this down. Give me your role and your plan in the next PM or I am just going to put the last nail in your coffin. Right now I think you could be blue or red, I am just trying to see how you are going to make sense of this. I want a reason to kill someone else just give me something. But seriously, I don't have much time left to write up a post and convince people so I need your plan and your role now, or we will find out in 7 hours. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: I'll just say my role is one of the four 1. Vigi 2. Doctor 3. Vet 4. DT Each I can think of a way to prove my role. Some more shaky, but I guarantee I will be able to prove my role. Lynching a blue is stupid anyways. I don't expect you to do that. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From RebirthOfLeGenD: Then expect yourself to die. Do you honestly think I am red? If you don't claim to me I can't save you. Honestly how many people in this game right now do you think can take the focus off of you and put it on someone else? Give me some sense to keep you alive and I will make it happen. ----------------------------------------- Original Message From LSB: I'm not going to roleclaim... you know better than to expect me to do that. But this is one of my good plans ----------------------------------------- Original Message From RebirthOfLeGenD: So what role can you prove by day 2? That is impossible. Nothing can be proven in this game. If I don't hear a damn good reason/plan I am getting behind your lynch. I have work in 3 hours and when I get back you will be dead so I need an answer asap. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
1) DTs check the inactives. There is a lot this game. Most of the activity comes from a few people. Although it may seem like the thread moves fast, there are a lot of people not posting 2) Check out Annul, Meapak, RoL and Pandain a bit more closely | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
W/e people are still going to lynch me. I'm going to continue my dump. FOS= Finger of Suspicion. = I think he's mafia EBWOP= Edit by way of Post = I can't edit, so I'm making a new post that has the edits (Hmmm for my 2000th post, I might as well make a list of mafia terminology) | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
People voting Annul. Please switch your votes to Brocket! Annul isn't going to be lynched anytime soon. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 10:24 Barundar wrote: He is as scummy as Kenpachi when posting ? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 10:30 annul wrote: seriously the brocket vote has to be the dumbest idea possible at this stage in the game why are we effectively giving up our day 1 vote? this is such a horrible idea it isnt even funny. what will killing brocket gain us? what information? none. none whatsoever. taking down LSB however will give us a multitude of information. When I go down, I want Annul to be lynched. I'm thinking he's red on a suicide mission to take me down, and then hoping that the town will let him loose as they dismiss what he did as 'tunnel vision' | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 10:47 Barundar wrote: 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. What's the deal with omgus being bad? Firstly mine wasn't an omgus. Secondly. If your going to blindly assuming that everyone attacking bad analysis is red... well... I have no words | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 10:48 Pandain wrote: 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! Just to give you something to chew on. Last time I was red and I got pushed day one. That was pokemafia And it was completely orchestrated. Everyone who attacked me was either mafia, or working with me. Everyone who defended me was town. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 29 2010 10:55 Pandain wrote: And was there a huge counter bandwagon at the last second? I can also share an example. insane mafia, me and ace are about to be lynched, and we're both mafia. At the last second I swing a massive bandwagon onto KtheZ. There actually wasn't a huge counter bandwagon. It just consisted of Meapak (the mayor) deciding not to vote for me because RoL told him not to. I would have died, if not for RoL. Thanks! As for insane mafia. The town consisted of sheep and some crazy people with guns and bombs | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
 | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 17 2011 12:58 bumatlarge wrote: Man LSB was right -_- I dont even feel like going through this game to see all the things town did wrong, but the lack of blues was really cruel. I'm going to instill some sort of safeguard against this in XXXVI, I'll see what I can cook up. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 17 2011 13:03 Jackal58 wrote: I hurt town. I never was able to establish any credibility.Even today mafia was either me and somebody else or me and somebody else. You voted for Brocket! That means you were smarter than most of the town! | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 17 2011 13:12 flamewheel wrote: why (RB), Brocket (Framer), and d3_crescentia, annul (GF), and Tevo were Mafia. As we already know, LSB, RebirthOfLeGenD, and Insanious were Veterans. ~OpZ~ was our Mafia Vigilante. Everybody else was a townie. So what was the purpose of this game? The puprose of the game was to have a few smart/active people in the town be able to stay alive longer by making them veterans. However, this was foiled as one person was lynched, one person was shot by the town, and the third gave up in frustration. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
I'm like to brag that the LSB scumdar is 100% accurate* *Note, only counting large analysis posts. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 17 2011 13:26 Pandain wrote: To be fair alot of the "veterans" really didn't do much :p. You were REALLY scummy day 1, and while I was really retarded in wanting to get you lynched so soon(but that just shows how scummy you were), your defense was pretty abysmal and your whole "Oh, I'm going to be confirmed, but I can't tell you guys!" just screamed scum. RoL did actually help but then got double shot. But seriously, that was one of the major mistakes. I told Opz NOT to hit RoL, I told him to hit darth. And then he shoots RoL. Why did you do that btw Opz? Impervious was decent, at least he wasn't as retarded as me. I wasn't scummy at all, Annul yelled a bunch of things that were not true and people didn't bother to actually read any posts at all and went with the "Hey, apparently omgus is a scumtell, so lets go with that" | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 17 2011 13:32 Pandain wrote: Actually the reasons I were suspicious of you weren't really even Annul. I thought Annul had explained it pretty poorly. There were a number of things you had done: 1.Your pms with me. You had this whole "I knew annul would accuse me, hoping no one would read it, because I never defend" which was just REALLY far fetched. 2.Nitpicking at small details. 3.Super defensiveness, which even u said was out of your norm. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=179009¤tpage=25#486 There was my analysis You're a bit naive about PMs, and it actually hurts your game First rule about PMs, don't ask for trust. Second rule about PMs, don't give trust Superdefensiveness? That something that Annul made up, go read the posts | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 17 2011 13:16 Pandain wrote: I actually feel at least somewhat more confident. I was suspicious of D3 because of his "contributing without really contributing", yet laid back on him because he was actually at least somewhat contributing whilst others weren't. This is a gigantic mafia tell. Read Ver's analysis of Salem mafia, or the lynch on Shockeyy, you should have hammered him for this So I have a question to post to everyone: Who is more suspicious: 1.Those who don't contribute. 2.Those who try to contribute but are just really really bad at it. 3.Those who try to contribute but it doesn't really say much. This is the problem, just because someone posts bad (ie Bill Murray), it doesn't mean that they are mafia. Firstly, what is a contribution. Contibution is new analysis or reasoning. All else is inactivity #1 is pretty suspicious. But you have to seperate "not contributing" from "Inactive" #2 is not suspicious at all, unless you can tell its intentional #3 is not suspicious at all. As long as they are contributing, activity is not an issue | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 17 2011 13:44 Pandain wrote: My PMs weren't about trust. I'm talking specifically on our pms, in which you had this whole far fetched theories which seemed like you were just grasping at straws. Not my fault that they were actually completly true And about trust, you screaming OMG CLAIM TO ME! Didn't really help your case And again, when I say super defensiveness, I just mean for you. Usually, as you said, you just let it go by. You said "Oh, it was just so horrible I had to respond," but it really wasn't that bad of an analysis. uhh, the analysis sucks. Go read it | ||
| ||
