EPTMini Mafia IV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Lesson number Zero, read the Newbie guide www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=180405 Lesson number one, learn from your mistakes Most of you come from XXXVI. Are you going to do the same thing you did then? NO! Improving at mafia is like starcraft, you analyize what you did wrong and fix it. Things town did wrong 1. Lynch people for being to smart. Shouting down Insasious, killing rol, killing Seraph. Comeon town. If someone is smart, listen to them. Don't stick your fingers in your ears and go "blahblahblahblah" 2. Relying too much on DTs (I'll get to this later) and town circles. They don't work, unless the game is broken. This game isn't broken 3. Not doing your own analysis, and letting the mafia do it for you. Actually read the thread guys, and do your own thinking DTs DTs are not a replacement for analysis. They only suppliment analysis. DTs, please claim only if 1. You have found red 2. It is close to lylo and one of your greens (plural, not singular) is about to be lynched 3. It is lylo. Town, don't rely on DTs. Mafia is an easy game. As long as the town isn't stupid it wins. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 20 2011 13:05 GMarshal wrote: lynch an inactive, unless we can force someone to reveal themselves as scum. I'm cool with this I feel like their general pattern of activity should be for DTs to check inactives (so we don’t waste lynches on them). Vigis should save their hits until we actually have a target for them. Medics should protect whoever the most outspoken/obviously town player is. Again, I think we should operate under the assumption that we don’t have any blues untill we get proof that we do (e.g. a failed hit due to medic or vet, and additional kill from a vigi, etc) I agree. Lets make this the town plan for the game. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On the other hand, I support any form of activity. In an awnser to Barunders concern about not talking about blues. Yes talking about blues is an easy day 1 discussion starter (we are doing that now), but past day one, be wary about people talking about blues. Talking about blues is a great way to stay non-commital and an easy way for the mafia to say nothing. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 20 2011 22:08 Nemesis wrote: @Jackal I wouldn't say that lynching actives is a big mistake. I wasn't paying attention to what happened in XXXVI, but we should lynch scum, and mafia is not always inactive. And I guess back to the usual first day topic. Lynching inactives. Since lynching a scum is very hard in the very first day. Lynching inactives would be a very good start as it would prevent mafia from lurking. I'm going to wait a bit for people to talk since the game has just started. Nemesis, activity was a big problem in the last two standard games. In XXXV, the town was stupid and killed off the people doing the analysis, and left themselves with a whole bunch of inactives In XXXIV, all the active people were killed, and lylo we were stuck with about 5 people who barely didn't get modkilled. Inactivity won't be as much of a problem in a mini mafia, however it is something we have to worry about. Remember, if we don't kill the inactives now, they will just drag us down and lose us the game. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 21 2011 01:30 Barundar wrote: Is there another option than pressuring and eventually lynching them? Things to look out for regarding lurkers is people like zeks in pyp3, who didn’t post much, but always posted game related stuff, ie. he was following the thread without contributing. Indeed, saying things without actually contributing is a great way to find a mafia. An inactive may actually help, but a lurker just repeats nothing. On January 21 2011 01:47 Pandain wrote: ##Vote Nemesis Nemesis wasn't here for the inactive games. So I don't fault him for not knowing the dangers of inactives. On January 21 2011 02:20 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Now as for day 1, until someone royally messes up this will be a FoS game. For the people giving advice to blues, that is cool thing to do, but with this set of players we should all know the game by now let alone feels like forced activity. I don't see much wrong with forced activity. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Of course, remember, the activity lynch is just something we should consider as an alternative to the top scummy target of day one. If the day one lynch is actually good, rather than a bunch of random screaming that doesn't make sense, I'm all for lynching the mafia. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 21 2011 02:57 GMarshal wrote: At this point all we have to work on is forced activity, as we don't have all that much to discuss (more now that people have started posting). I mean we could talk about GSL, but I don't think that will bring us any closer to finding scum (actually looking at the rules, we couldn't so nvm). So for now I'm going to go ahead and help Pandain pressure. ##Vote Nemesis Also, I just realized something relevant, according to the rules "In the event of a tie nobody will be lynched." which means if we dont want to risk killing a townie the first day we can always force a tie. Abstaining is bad because it brings us closer to lylo (Assuming that the doctors don't make their protects) | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Remember, although we are talking about lynching inactives, there are only two people I see that are in danger of being inactive. ShoCkeyy likes to lurk, and Chaoser can disappear at times (well, Chaoser had an excuse). Lurker- Avoids positions, attention, and tries to pretend that he is contributing, but really isn't. For example, Annul was technically a lurker in XXXV (Notice that besides answering questions, he did not comment on anything else). Generally Mafia Inactive- Doesn't post besides a "sorry, I'm inactive". Defiantly Ainti-town. I'm cool with killing both Lurkers and Inactives. But remember, the Inactive kill is more of a policy lynch, while the Lurker kill should only accompany analysis proving that the lurker is mafia. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
Pandain, why shouldn't we kill inactives? | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
I'm going to say it right now. If there are inactives, lets lynch them. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 21 2011 11:24 Pandain wrote: Because mafia will never go inactive. As for pressuring them.... For example, we can threaten to lynch people. When for 2 days in a row you only say "I'm busy", that's unnacceptable, and we lynch them. As of now though there is no one I would consider truly "inactive inactive." There really the only way to differentiate is by lynching them, such as soulfire and george clooney, who wouldn't talk even if pressured. But no one is doing that now. So for now, lynching "inactives" is not what we should be doing. Go read XXXIV, or Micro Mafia IV. That or even read XXXV. I don't know what happened at the end, but I'm assuming that inactives still lost you guys the game. It doesn't matter, even town aligned Inactives hurt the game and Inactives in LYLO causes town loss. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
The town decided to off smart people instead. The issue is who are you going to bring with you to LYLO. You aren't going to bring Shockeyy if he doesn't do anything by stare at us. You want to bring smart people who actually does analysis. Firstly, lets set up definitions. Lurker- Avoids positions, attention, and tries to pretend that he is contributing, but really isn't. IE Brownbear in Pokemafia Inactive- Doesn't post besides a "sorry, I'm inactive", IE Mafia Lurker- Lurker with in depth analysis on him proving that he is mafia. IE, Shockeyy in Pokemafia Lurker- For example, Annul was technically a lurker in XXXV (Notice that besides answering questions, he did not comment on anything else). Generally Mafia Inactive- . Defiantly Ainti-town. 1. Mafia does both. It is natural for mafia to lurk. They do this because it is easy an wins game. And inactive mafia is a mafia who doesn't want to play anymore, but is willing to show up for the team. The difference is that usually inactive townies get modkilled as they don't see any reason to actually vote 2. I'd kill both. I've explained above in a different post. But order of Mafia Lurker>Inactive>Lurker 3. My opinion of Nemesis is that your argument is bs and relys on purported scum-tells that aren't true. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 22 2011 02:08 Pandain wrote: Finally, I've decided that I don't think Shockkey is scum. He's playing his norm, in fact, even has contributed more with a semi analysis of Nemesis. I think Hesmyrr is a far better person to vote considering he has barely talked at all. Shockkey's 'semi analysis' of Nemesis was a FOS for Nemesis targeting him. I'm going to support the Shockkey lynch because 1) Indirect FoS on Pandain. Pandain has detracted from his initial posts on activity back in XXXV, one possible explanation could be that Pandain is on a scum team with an inactive, shockeyy. 2) He's not going to be very active anyways 3) He hasn't posted anything besides excusing himself for lurking,+ Show Spoiler + On January 21 2011 05:22 ShoCkeyy wrote: So we actually had a chance in the end to win as a town? But that didn't happen either way. JESUS | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
How about we lynch shockeyy and see what Pandain thinks???? :D! | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 22 2011 04:12 chaoser wrote: You've spoken but all you've given is definitions and what we SHOULD do with no clear plans/idea on how we're going to even go about doing it (differentiate between town lurkers/inactives and mafia lurkers/inactives). You stated that your main goal is get town to be active which is a non-committal thing to do. Your analysis of Nemesis was pretty bad, pretty much calling him out on saying pretty much the same things everyone else was saying/everyone else usually says on Day 1 (Lynch inactives, blah blah blah). Though I do think Nemesis' over aggressiveness was a bit weird, I think your actions/posts haven't been much better. So I'm keeping my vote on you for the time being. Chaoser, lets lynch shockeyy instead! On January 22 2011 02:08 Pandain wrote: Finally, I've decided that I don't think Shockkey is scum. He's playing his norm, in fact, even has contributed more with a semi analysis of Nemesis. I think Hesmyrr is a far better person to vote considering he has barely talked at all. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 22 2011 06:02 ShoCkeyy wrote: Go ahead and lynch me so you can get no information what so ever, now you're really being stupid and playing horribly. Either way, still at work, then I have school tonight, so I won't be able to post till like 10pm Eastern. If I did my time zone conversion correctly, that means that you won't be appearing until an hour after the day is finished. In addition, the shockeyy lynch has never been about information. (Then again a side benefit if Shockeyy is red, Pandain is red). It's about clearing away the inactive players day one so we can get some good work done later On January 22 2011 06:12 chaoser wrote: Aside from not posting much, I don't know how I feel about shockeyy. i'm going to stick to my vote on pandain. Why go for someone he supports when you can just go for the main target. His jumping around on votes really makes me suspicious. Is it suspicious or is it another attempt by Pandain to try to promote activity day 1? If I remember correctly, he did this back in another game, just 'pressuring people'. By pressuring I mean what he is doing now. On January 22 2011 07:58 Hesmyrr wrote: Pandain Ah, yes. "his disastrous attack on me" =/ See my prior post for response. What I want to discuss is the thing I found worth noting. While I can see why he would vote me for pressure purposes, this is just poorly supported. I mean really poorly supported. Check the third quote by me he writes about, I will go into detail there. Okay, I realized that thing about "huge scum tell" could have come from me writing "hugely anti-town (thus a scumtell)" which can be read wrongly I guess. But the thing is how the hell could he believe that my previous post was about inactivity being huge scum tell when LSB's post I was replying to was basically arguing why lynching inactive is a good thing. His line of attack on me just felt really unnecessarily forced. Discussing the setup is supposedly a mafia tell in Mafiascum Wiki, but it does not apply to TL mafia. Discussing the setup here is a null tell, generally townie, as the mafia here don't feel its necessary to do anything. However, discussing the setup can be used to augment an argument about not taking any positions. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 22 2011 13:25 Barundar wrote: I changed vote because there was noone defending Shockeyy. A bunch of people came out to post suddenly when the pressure lifted. I'm glad we avoided a tie, but there was a bunch of lurkers that suddenly popped up when the lynch wasn't already settled. Mafia was way too happy letting Shockeyy die. Lets look at the last few votes On January 22 2011 11:51 Pandain wrote: ##Unvote Shockkey ##Vote LSB Yeah shockkey isn't mafia. If you really think mafia have decided to just let us have a free kill on day 1 with NO resistance, that's a bit of a silly willy thought. Posts LSB has made just have made me suspicious of him. He knows better than to think "if X defends Y, and y is mafia, X is definitely red" Hasn't shown shockkey to be mafia lurker HEAVILY contradicts what he's been saying this whole time. Especially the above post for instance, and several others. Looks familiar? Yeah, he's been throwing FOS on everyone. Which is very interesting, since once you accuse everyone, you basically accusing no one at all. On January 22 2011 12:16 Barundar wrote: To be honest I agree. LSB voted for Shockeyy as an indirect FoS on Pandain, which seems like false logic to me. Shockeyy would be the perfect easy target for mafia, and LSB seems to have tried to bandwagon him without letting Shockeyy defend himself. Lastly it seems like noone has stepped forward to defend Shockeyy, except Pandain... ##Vote LSB Interesting. The key issue is that I voted for Shockeyy for another reason, he wasn't going to be very active or useful anyways. Indeed look at what he did. Pull up a tally of votes, and throw around OMGUS. The point is, Barundar suddenly forgets this and says that this means Shockeyy is an easy target for the mafia. + Show Spoiler + On January 22 2011 10:07 Barundar wrote: Right now our votes are too spread out, with new candidates popping up, and people voting for themself. I’m going to go with Shockeyy, who I think has tried laying low the most, and who I feel will be the least usefull for the town in the long run. ##Vote Shockeyy I think however it’s too early to try and look for obvious connections between players, if anything, mafia xxxv taught me to take one lynch at a time. Pandain is hardly linked to Shockeyy just by stating his opinion on him, but let’s see what happens when we get close to lynch... On January 22 2011 12:53 GGQ wrote: I'm also worried about this lynch out of nowhere. I'm going to vote for the person that I feel made the least convincing defense, which is ShocCeyy. I also dislike his 'Kill me and you'll see!' defense. ##Vote ShocCeyy Doesn't really offer an analysis of Shockeyy's post, just a small reason to seem like he is contributing. On January 22 2011 12:59 Pandain wrote: Fadoodle ##Unvote LSB ##Vote Shockkey Doesn't even bother to give a reason On January 22 2011 12:59 chaoser wrote: #VOTE SHOCKEY Well... not much reasoning behind this. But Chaoser did suspect Pandain. Hesmyrr then votes, but he knows that his vote is useless. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
We should keep the Medic Protect List as small as possible, maybe 2-3 people so the mafia won't be tempted to shoot inside it. On the other hand, the DT check list can be pretty large. But it should be used as a way that people can make FOS Medic Protect List Hesmyrr- He has no real suspicion on him, making him an attractive target DT Check Lists Pandain Barunder- weird vote switching GGQ | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 23 2011 07:56 Jackal58 wrote: I concur with your analysis of Pandain. His play is almost identical to XXXV. An almost paranoid rush to change the vote in the last few minutes. I don't understand it but it is the same behavior. If I were on at the end of day yesterday I would have switched my vote to force a tie just to see if his head exploded. Firstly, that behavior is decidedly anti town. Rushing off into a lynch that isn't thought out is a bad way to play and a great way to kill a lot of greens Secondly, it isn't unique to his town behavior. He does this every game, regardless of being mafia or town. The thing is, he's not to careful as mafia, and spends time defending scumbuddies. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 23 2011 12:19 Jackal58 wrote: It was a joke. I'm slowly getting a feel for the way various people approach this game. Pandains approach is akin to chicken little. Wow I fail at sarcasm, kicks self for skimming | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
 | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
| ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
I generated pointless day 1 discussion that helped barunder hide (I now figured out something else I want to talk about that isn't pointless) And then I defended Nemesis day 1. | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On January 26 2011 12:50 GMarshal wrote: LSB if you hadn't gotten killed that night we might have hung you day 2, as I thought you were being pretty suspicious. Pah, I'm (kingof) impossible to hang! I probably would have bused Nemesis if I did survive. Half of the reason why I defended Nemesis was because I hoped that he was mafia, and by defending him I could survive another night. | ||
| ||
