BC's Arkham Asylum - Page 79

On July 13 2011 23:21 Eternalmisfit wrote:
/in

Been a few months since I have played a game.

On July 17 2011 22:27 Eternalmisfit wrote:
/Confirm

On July 19 2011 01:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just finished catching up with the thread and here is my thoughts on the game thus far.

1. As with most Day1 posting and analysis, I have yet to see any clear scum-slips so far. There has been some light scum-tells but nothing so far makes me confident and someone is definitely scum. Something that needs to be remembered is that Day1 lynch is a crap-shoot and most likely results in a lynch of a townie (Read last 8-10 games and you will see this pattern). Pretty much any post can be thought of as a scum tell via a weird convoluted way and I do not believe in lynching purely based on WIFOM analysis.

For e.g. Drazerk's analysis on Mr. Wiggles
Mr. Wiggles made some good points about a pro-town environment and also organizing the town. His early discussion with decon and couple others regarding getting the black roles out of the game asap also makes a lot of sense. However, Drazerk votes on him on the basis of meta arguments. The posts by themselves are reasonable contributions and can either be a townie or a scum hiding as a townie. It is at best a null tell and most likely pro-town behavior.


2. Regarding Coagulation
Coag posted the vet/newb list since Wiggles and (Mig??) asked for someone to post such a list. I do find him posting such a list scummy since people was asking for it to be done. I can agree he hasn't contributed much apart from that list but that can be said about the majority of the people in this game.


3. Regarding Lurkers
In a larger game such as this one, it is easy for mafia to lurk if people are not pressured to post. 5 posts/day should alleviate this issue but we should keep an eye out on people who are barely keeping the minimum posting requirements. There are several people who have not posted (not necessarily lurking as it has been 12 hrs since the game start) who should be pressured to post their thoughts on the game.


4. My current suspicions include: Supersoft and CreamyButter
Supersoft - His posting has been inconsistent. Claims VT and then claims it was a fake claim and so on.
CreamyButter - His posts are not too shabby but the fact that he is over-playing the noob card makes me suspicious. The players here in a general are a healthy mix of veterans and it is not like that he is the only new player. In fact, there are probably more relatively inexperienced players than vets and thus prefacing every post with 'I am a noob but' is not required.

-> Neither of these activities merit a vote on them by themselves but I plan to keep an eye on them to see.

5. Lastly, since out of game contact is allowed beyond PM's as well, feel free to add me on skype and talk to me if you want to. If you do not prefer that, feel free to msg me in PM-land as well.
Skype id: loony_surfer

On July 19 2011 04:18 Eternalmisfit wrote:


Care to share these scum-tells since your posts till this point have been nothing such fluff and spam.

On July 19 2011 06:11 Eternalmisfit wrote:


I am not sure why you bring mafia quick-topic over and over again.

As for ketomai, it is possible that:
(a) he is scum
(b) he read your past games
(c) someone told him about your old games in PMs.

Given the information we know, all three are equally likely which does not make him more or less likely to be scum than most people in the game.

Nevertheless, he guessed what you would be likely to do pretty well which is intriguing. What is more interesting is that you claimed VT and then said it was a fake claim. Then, you lied about being active in PM-land. This does sound as scummy behavior and your posting does seem inconsistent. Lies and fake claims was what got town messed up in recent games.

These actions do not necessarily make you 100% sum but in the lack of a better alternative at this point, you are currently the best lynch candidate.

On July 19 2011 10:38 Eternalmisfit wrote:
I am of the opinion that everyone should be analyzing the clues. I am hesitant in letting a small group of people analyze clues and figure out their interpretation of the clues for multiple reasons:

(a) Clues can be cryptic in which case a small group interpreting it might possible provide false evidence to support a lynch.
(b) If scum manages to have convincing people inside the clue analysis group, it can pretty much make most clue analysis useless.
(c) A small group of people will have inherent biases as to who they think are scum from reading the thread and thus might manifest that bias into interpretation of a clue.

I agree on the point that there clues should only supplement other evidence and should not form the sole basis of lynch (though exceptions can occur). I also agree that people bouncing ideas off each other is good for cracking the clues. However, I am against an official clue analysis team until we have a set of confirmed townies (even in that case I would prefer not have an 'official' team)

On July 19 2011 22:41 Eternalmisfit wrote:
There are a few people saying that having more than 1 candidate for a lynch on D1 is not good since it creates chaos. On one hand, it is not good to have 6-8 major candidates as it allows scum to cherry pick townies to lynch. But on the other hand, having just a single candidate allows scum to lay back and just have the bandwagon lead them to victory. In that regard, we should keep an eye on early voters on super-soft who after the initial vote on him have disappeared from the thread. Imo, it would be have 2-3 candidates heading into a lynch since if we can get an actual scum there, it would force the mafia to come out of the hiding and protect their members.

Regarding my thought on current major front runners:
(1) Supersoft
I have posted my thoughts on him earlier. He has shown some scum-slips but nothing that paints him 100% scum. We should not read too much into his outburst followed by major rationale posts later on. It can be frustrated townie or scum trying to appear such and thus it is a null-team.
@supersoft - The biggest problem I have with your behavior is your arbitrary finger pointing. So far you have accused ketomai and prphlz on flimsy grounds just because some else made a note of them. This doesn't sound good/pro-town play to me.

(2) redFF
His play has been generally spammy which I didn't find too different from his PTP play where his town play wasn't stellar either. I haven't played many games with him or seen many of his games on TL-mafia and I was surprised when Coag referred to him as a vet. The major suspicion I see against him is that he defended supersoft. In that case, two possibilities can arise:
(a) supersoft is town - In this case why would scum go out of his way to defend a sure-shot lynch townie. The reasonable possibility is scum trying to gain town cred but that is possibly the only reason.
reFF being townie and defending supersoft has a problem that redFF marks supersoft as clear townie w/o providing any rationale.
(b) supersoft in scum - In this case, it can be scum trying to protect scum. Frankly, this situation seems more unlikely to me since redFF is trying to save supersoft while supersoft is trying to throw redFF under the bus by posting his PMs.
My most likely interpretation of the situation is either one of redFF and supersoft are scum and they have different alignments. This makes both of them prime candidates for the lynch.

3. Pyo
His self vote abstain is suspicious in the light that his vote will not be game changer at the time he voted. Even his didn't believe that supersoft was scum, he should have found some other candidate to vote for which he found suspicious. He is also a potential lynch candidate but not as strong as the other two.

There are several other people like Nisani who are showing odd behavior but they are probably no good for D1 lynch as we have multiple candidates to discuss already.

I am going to vote for supersoft since both him and redFF are equally likely to be scum imo. Supersoft's flip provides information on redFF while the opposite doesn't seem likely. Also, his posting inconsistencies, lies, and random incoherent FoSing doesn't bode well with me.

#Vote: supersoft

On July 19 2011 23:25 Eternalmisfit wrote:


On the contrary, I think Day 1 has been reasonable and less spammy than the past games I have been in. There has mostly relevant discussion and less fluff/spam than say PTP or XXXIX which were a true definition of cluster-fuck.

On July 19 2011 23:50 Eternalmisfit wrote:


Worst Idea Ever!!
Who determines who is the most pro-town player? If by chance, the player selected to mass claim to is mafia, we lose all of vigi's in a single night.

On July 19 2011 23:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

I would like to remind everyone at this point (if you haven't read the role descriptions in the OP properly), there are four godfather like roles in the game. Thus, till the godfather and the third party are all eliminated, we will be hard-pressed to find confirmed townies. Of course, there will be people who are near-confirmed or highly likely to be town at late game but not 100% town till these roles still exist in the game.

On July 20 2011 06:37 Eternalmisfit wrote:
I am going to swap my vote to VE since Day1 lynch is usually a crap-shoot and leaving a confirmed black alive makes no sense. Also, leaving a confirmed scum to vigi's is not a good idea since for all we know our vigi's might be bad enough to shoot wrong people.

Node seems to be heading the modkill way since he has made no posts. Zona also seems to heading the same way with only two posts till now. Is anyone in contact with Zona? I am getting a feeling that he did not read the OP and the 5 post requirement.

On July 20 2011 22:38 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Nice that we got a red lynch on Day1.

In light on Kavdragon's revelation, it would nice to get a confirmation from notasmurf that Kav actually told this plan to him. If notasmurf can confirm's Kav's plan, this should clear Kav's II claim.

---

As for DT check's tonight, I would suggest the following. At this point, the people who voted for redFF are less likely to be scum than those who did not since it was a close vote. So, I think that the DT's should focus on people on the VE vote-list since it is more likely that there are at-least a couple of scum there.

In that regards, a possible way of avoiding overlapping DT checks is that assigning potential DT's a third of the list. For e.g., if your number is 1-13 in player roster, focus your check on top 1/3rd section of the VE vote. #14-26 focuses on 5-8 on in player roster. #27-40 focuses on bottom 1/3rd of the list.
Of course, this does not make it 100% that DT's won't overlap checks since the player# of DT's can still fall in the same bracket but it decreases the probability of the clash though.

(I am assuming 3 DT's since I feel that it is highly unlikely that we have more than that.)

On July 20 2011 23:29 Eternalmisfit wrote:


I can agree with the second part of your post about the choice but I cannot see how my idea causes more overlap. Regardless of that, I still believe that DT checking somewhere in the VE vote list is a good idea as it more likely that there are scum in that list.