|
On September 21 2011 05:46 GreYMisT wrote:Cyber's post above promted me to look back over trace's posts, and I found these two gems. most notably with regards to his plan for confirming townies. Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 15:27 TranceStorm wrote:
@DrH. Fine, those are valid points. I didn't fully flesh out my plan as well as I imagined it would be and underestimated the risks.
But, wouldn't it be a good idea to set the rule that if a player does ever pass on the ring, they reveal its powers? We already know that everyone wants the ring (both town and non-town) so I think it would be beneficial to town discussion to know the ring powers. (if they don't change like you fear they might). Notice how in this post he acknowledges the potential flaws and the fact that it is incompete a respectfull manner towards DrH.
You are selectively choosing quotes here. Look through my posts again. I rearticulate a point that I feel was valid against his criticism i.e. the idea that a person who has had the ring in the past should reveal its abilities. In fact, I act in the same way towards you and Cyber_Cheese as well agreeing with you when you articulate certain points while adding my own input. Simply because I responded to Dr. H does not mean we were working together.
|
On September 21 2011 06:05 Cyber_Cheese wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 05:51 TranceStorm wrote:
@Cyber_Cheese
You really have been tunneling me all game, so I will respond to some of your arguments.
I made a bad plan, I get it. We've already established that. It was an idea I had and I asked for input from other people to improve the plan, instead, everyone decided to say the plan was a bad idea so I dropped it. Why are you focusing only on Dr. H's response to the plan? A dismissive response says absolutely nothing at all. For example, I am making a dismissive statement about your arguments; does that mean we are secretly cooperating with each other? There were many other responses saying that it was bad. That takes up a majority of your large post.
Then you say that I jumped onto different bandwagons until I settled on the easy target of Errandor. Take a minute to think about that. If I were mafia, I would already know that prplhz was a townie and could keep my vote on him and pretend to be afk knowing that a townie would be lynched on day 1. After Errandor got lynched, I could stand around and shout "damn! I wasn't there to stop the lynch! Of course Errandor was innocent" (like many people did say). Moving from prplhz only increased the suspicion on me, something which a mafia would not do (which is why I don't suspect OriginalName either, since he moved in the same way that I did). The last time I let an anti-town plan slip, it was my first game in Cosmic Horror mafia, and I changed MrWiggles suggestion into a good one while siding against TheFerryman who called him out on it. I'm not making the same mistake twice. For that matter, if you were mafia, why did you kill or attempt to kill the other day 1 suspects? I'm iffy on that whole section of the game. Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 05:56 TranceStorm wrote:On September 21 2011 05:46 GreYMisT wrote:Cyber's post above promted me to look back over trace's posts, and I found these two gems. most notably with regards to his plan for confirming townies. On September 17 2011 15:27 TranceStorm wrote:
@DrH. Fine, those are valid points. I didn't fully flesh out my plan as well as I imagined it would be and underestimated the risks.
But, wouldn't it be a good idea to set the rule that if a player does ever pass on the ring, they reveal its powers? We already know that everyone wants the ring (both town and non-town) so I think it would be beneficial to town discussion to know the ring powers. (if they don't change like you fear they might). Notice how in this post he acknowledges the potential flaws and the fact that it is incompete a respectfull manner towards DrH. You are selectively choosing quotes here. Look through my posts again. I rearticulate a point that I feel was valid against his criticism i.e. the idea that a person who has had the ring in the past should reveal its abilities. In fact, I act in the same way towards you and Cyber_Cheese as well agreeing with you when you articulate certain points while adding my own input. Simply because I responded to Dr. H does not mean we were working together. Until Dr. H posted with a negative light on your plan, you stuck by it and attempted to work on it, and then it was suddenly a thing to be left in the past.
First off, so is your argument that I intentionally posted a bad plan so that Dr. H would be in a good light? That seems to be a very infeasible explanation for posting a plan in the first place. It's because I had a genuine idea which I believed would work.
Second, I am not aware at all of what happened in your previous games, but I will maintain that proposing ideas for the town to debate about is not an anti-town measure. Before I made my proposal there was absolutely no discussion about really important issues. People were merely speculating about other unimportant things (which mafia loves to feed as you said). Because I proposed a plan, there became more focus in the town's initiative (partly helped by WBG's antics). Mafia would be fine leaving the town in the discussions that existed before my plan came around.
I obviously can't account for why the mafia decided to target the people they did last night, but I will maintain that my vote switch from prplhz to Errandor would not be a move made by someone with mafia motivations.
And finally, I had revised the 'plan' after Dr. H's post - from the 'chain' idea to that of the 'reveal what the ring does' idea after multiple people expressed displeasure. It wasn't only Dr. H's reasoning that convinced me to give up the plan, it was the fact that I realized that no one was going to accept my logic afterwards.
|
On September 21 2011 06:48 Cyber_Cheese wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 06:29 TranceStorm wrote:On September 21 2011 06:05 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On September 21 2011 05:51 TranceStorm wrote:
@Cyber_Cheese
You really have been tunneling me all game, so I will respond to some of your arguments.
I made a bad plan, I get it. We've already established that. It was an idea I had and I asked for input from other people to improve the plan, instead, everyone decided to say the plan was a bad idea so I dropped it. Why are you focusing only on Dr. H's response to the plan? A dismissive response says absolutely nothing at all. For example, I am making a dismissive statement about your arguments; does that mean we are secretly cooperating with each other? There were many other responses saying that it was bad. That takes up a majority of your large post.
Then you say that I jumped onto different bandwagons until I settled on the easy target of Errandor. Take a minute to think about that. If I were mafia, I would already know that prplhz was a townie and could keep my vote on him and pretend to be afk knowing that a townie would be lynched on day 1. After Errandor got lynched, I could stand around and shout "damn! I wasn't there to stop the lynch! Of course Errandor was innocent" (like many people did say). Moving from prplhz only increased the suspicion on me, something which a mafia would not do (which is why I don't suspect OriginalName either, since he moved in the same way that I did). The last time I let an anti-town plan slip, it was my first game in Cosmic Horror mafia, and I changed MrWiggles suggestion into a good one while siding against TheFerryman who called him out on it. I'm not making the same mistake twice. For that matter, if you were mafia, why did you kill or attempt to kill the other day 1 suspects? I'm iffy on that whole section of the game. On September 21 2011 05:56 TranceStorm wrote:On September 21 2011 05:46 GreYMisT wrote:Cyber's post above promted me to look back over trace's posts, and I found these two gems. most notably with regards to his plan for confirming townies. On September 17 2011 15:27 TranceStorm wrote:
@DrH. Fine, those are valid points. I didn't fully flesh out my plan as well as I imagined it would be and underestimated the risks.
But, wouldn't it be a good idea to set the rule that if a player does ever pass on the ring, they reveal its powers? We already know that everyone wants the ring (both town and non-town) so I think it would be beneficial to town discussion to know the ring powers. (if they don't change like you fear they might). Notice how in this post he acknowledges the potential flaws and the fact that it is incompete a respectfull manner towards DrH. You are selectively choosing quotes here. Look through my posts again. I rearticulate a point that I feel was valid against his criticism i.e. the idea that a person who has had the ring in the past should reveal its abilities. In fact, I act in the same way towards you and Cyber_Cheese as well agreeing with you when you articulate certain points while adding my own input. Simply because I responded to Dr. H does not mean we were working together. Until Dr. H posted with a negative light on your plan, you stuck by it and attempted to work on it, and then it was suddenly a thing to be left in the past. First off, so is your argument that I intentionally posted a bad plan so that Dr. H would be in a good light? That seems to be a very infeasible explanation for posting a plan in the first place. It's because I had a genuine idea which I believed would work. Second, I am not aware at all of what happened in your previous games, but I will maintain that proposing ideas for the town to debate about is not an anti-town measure. Before I made my proposal there was absolutely no discussion about really important issues. People were merely speculating about other unimportant things (which mafia loves to feed as you said). Because I proposed a plan, there became more focus in the town's initiative (partly helped by WBG's antics). Mafia would be fine leaving the town in the discussions that existed before my plan came around. I obviously can't account for why the mafia decided to target the people they did last night, but I will maintain that my vote switch from prplhz to Errandor would not be a move made by someone with mafia motivations. And finally, I had revised the 'plan' after Dr. H's post - from the 'chain' idea to that of the 'reveal what the ring does' idea after multiple people expressed displeasure. It wasn't only Dr. H's reasoning that convinced me to give up the plan, it was the fact that I realized that no one was going to accept my logic afterwards. The first point I believe to be an unexpected side-effect that accidentally benefitted you. The second was merely to point out that these things do happen and that not every bad plan should be dismissed so easily. The voting and mafia's targeting seems too open to interpretation to be relied on here. What possible reasons would 'noone accept your logic afterwards' for? If no one likes an idea, it's because it was ill-thought through. My argument here is it required your scum buddy to post before you realised just how ill-thought through it was.
Ok - your argument is something that I cannot convince you otherwise of. Given that there is no way for me to prove to you that it was not a "scum buddy's" intervention which cause me to drop my plan, I suppose that's an argument that you'll have to take in good faith. There's absolutely no way to prove or disprove what my motivations were for posting that so I'll just leave it at that.
I am not scum, but if you continue to believe that, I can't argue much more against that. In the meantime, I'll go analyze some other players.
|
Besides the the apparent scumminess of iGrok / Jackal, a player that has seemed to slip right through the cracks to me has been supersoft.
If you filter through his posts, he says that he is trying to change his playstyle to become less spammy. This reminded me of Ver's Mafia XXX analysis (stickied in the TL mafia forum) where youngminii proclaims that his lack of activity has been because of his efforts to become less spammy. I find it a convenient explanation for his lack of analysis on most of the people in the thread.
What is critical to me is that supersoft has not interacted with the thread at all throughout the game - repeatedly giving excuses for his non-actions.
At one point, supersoft says this:
On September 19 2011 07:58 supersoft wrote:
lol whatever! i filtered prplhz and erandorr and. both dont seem very scummy to me. i think chaoser and igrok are far more scummy right now. i'll get internet access in my hotel where i stay tomorrow and will catch up.
if i have to decide between both, maybe erandorr is a little bit scummier. but really, this post edit lie is straNge, but it doesnt give much information about his alignment...
However, he never posts the next day except once to respond to an accusation against himself where he says that he will 'kick the scumteam's ass'. That's it. Despite saying that he would catch up and everything, he doesn't do so other than this one post. I don't know what's going on with supersoft's personal life, but he seems to be making tons of excuses to cover up his actions. Whether it be the fact that he's trying to cut down on spamminess, he's on the road, he's drunk, will only have hotel internet the next day, is working in Berlin - it seems that he is always trying to reduce his ability to give real analysis on players.
Indeed, when chaos13 picks up on his wishywashiness and his slight contradictions, supersoft responds with the post containing one of his various excuses. Granted, there isn't much evidence from supersoft's posts, but I feel that supersoft's lack of behavior qualifies him as scum. He is being just as scummy as iGrok at the moment.
|
On September 21 2011 07:58 Radfield wrote:
Trancestorm, supersoft said he would be away until wednesday. Shelf your case for now and look at him in two days.
He never explicitly said that he wouldn't be able to post until wednesday. But I can give him leeway for right now until Thursday.
Also, does anyone else feel disquieted by the fact that iGrok refuses to respond to any of the arguments leveled against him (and change his behavior at all)?
|
Does Bulletproof mean that you are impervious to night killings? I thought it meant that you were a veteran or something. Also, I think there is a slight flaw to your plan. When you have the ring, assuming that you are impervious to night killings, someone could still steal the ring as implied by the OP:
3. Special abilities. Some players may have the ability to steal The Ring without using lethal force.
I don't know how good that would turn out to be.
|
On September 21 2011 11:57 iGrok wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 11:53 kitaman27 wrote:On September 21 2011 11:51 iGrok wrote:On September 21 2011 11:49 GreYMisT wrote:
So unless a power like gandalf's surfaces again, we need to wait for a DT to roleclaim in thread before we can act with your power? No. If a good enough case is made by someone I believe to be town, I'll use it then. But only a PM DT can make me use it no matter what. I'm not passing it off to popular vote because that's too easy to manipulate. Huh? What makes you think there is a pm dt in this game? ...because gandalf was one. And my safe claim was Celeborn, Lord of Lothlórien
I'm not sure if you missed my earlier comment, but here it is again:
There is nothing that prevents someone from stealing the ring from you (and that role is heavily implied in the OP). At that point you no longer remain bulletproof and I assume that then bad things will happen.
Of course, whether you die or not doesn't matter to the town, but having the ring in the wrong hands probably shouldn't happen (as many people were quite willing to tell me a few days ago).
|
iGrok is definitely lying to the town / covering something up. It is so implausible that somebody would medic protect him when he had been behaving so strangely. What's also curious is that he knows what powers he will get once he gets the ring. Given that we read even Sauron's role PM and he doesn't have any hints as to the powers that he would have obtained had he received the ring, I'm suspicious as to how iGrok got his info. Out of the candidates that we have so far, he's definitely deserving of a lynch.
I'm also inclined to believe that syllogism wasn't being truthful about being hit by a day vig. We can now see that a day vig has to write "##Cleave target" (or whatever kill command they have) - nobody did that to syllogism. I don't quite understand why he did that though.
|
On September 22 2011 03:32 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2011 03:31 syllogism wrote:
Also why are you role claiming medic to save a third party? Huh? Because it was obvious to me I would not survive another cycle anyway so I may as well stop two easy lynches.
What the hell? That's terrible reasoning. Why would you not be able to survive another cycle? Did you really think the mafia would target you or something?
|
On September 22 2011 04:48 Cyber_Cheese wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2011 04:40 supersoft wrote:On September 22 2011 04:33 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On September 22 2011 04:32 raynpelikoneet wrote:On September 22 2011 04:28 chaoser wrote:On September 22 2011 04:26 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Can you confirm 100% iGrok is not mafia? You are blue fishing so fucking hard right now Yeah, sorry about that. I meant to say: What makes you and Cyber_Cheese think iGrok would ally town over mafia? Town is the majority, his kill would end the game faster if it were to hit a mafia, and that brings his victory closer as well as ours. That's wrong. We are the majority, but mafia has a much higher killpotential. They only lost DrH. We lost many more people. Right now, the scumteam is in an advanteogus position. Only because we seem to be concerning ourselves with the third parties, don't forget the scum kp usually goes down as they die, and we can try and find one today to kill. If iGrok's kill isn't on the person we want it on, we lynch him tomorrow and he loses. We don't have to hand over the ring and seal the deal he proposed, he's going to value his survival and eventual victory more than he will value the spite of wasting his kp on one of us.
There's a slight problem with this scenario. The issue is that if iGrok's kill goes off on the wrong target, then lynching him would waste a valuable lynch that would be used for another target. (Much like how lynching him now would waste a potential lynch - the difference is that he can't act in any way in the future).
iGrok's advantage to the town is that he can search for two very specific targets and has a single night kill which could be used in any way, but besides that he becomes quite useless.
|
On September 22 2011 05:26 Radfield wrote:
If iGrok is scum, then he'll be confirmed scum by tomorrow and we lynch him then.
How do we will he be confirmed scum?
|
On September 22 2011 05:42 Radfield wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2011 05:29 TranceStorm wrote:On September 22 2011 05:26 Radfield wrote:
If iGrok is scum, then he'll be confirmed scum by tomorrow and we lynch him then.
How do we will he be confirmed scum? If he is scum he needs to follow through with the shot we direct in order to stay clean for tomorrow. If he does not, then he gets lynched. If he claims he was 'roleblocked' then he gets lynched. If for any reason his target does not die, he gets lynched. If the target we choose is a townie, and scum kill him, AND his flavour comes up with 'consumed by shadow and flame etc" then so be it, as we are successfully directing scum's targets. If scum want to act as a double lynch for us, so much the better. If anyone else ever dies by the same flavour, or if the KP isn't matching up, we lynch him. It's like in PYP1/2 when scum got the compvig. IT DOESN"T MATTER AS LONG AS WE ARE DIRECTING THE SHOTS.
Well that sounds reasonable. I am concerned about how the town is supposed to direct iGrok's night kill when we are divided as is though. Nevertheless, I'll look between Jackal and Palmar now.
|
Both Jackal and Palmar are really really similar in my eyes. Both of them post a ton of one-liners and haven't given really substantive analysis at all this game. Both of them always seem to do that in all of their games. However, Jackal hasn't voiced an opinion at all on the current candidates but continues to jump around calling everyone scum.
My vote will be going to Jackal right now.
|
On September 22 2011 07:16 prplhz wrote:
hey TranceStorm
why are you ghost voting on the bandwagon and why are you always one of the last guys to jump on the bandwagon?
Because I have trouble making voting decisions? Reading between the cases of Palmar and Jackal does take time you know. Anyways, why don't you withhold judgment until after the lynch - you can attack me all you want if I'm wrong about Jackal.
|
|
|
Hmm, Radfield's flip has tipped me off to a event I found quite curious at the time. I raised a case against supersoft here in which I accused him of using many many excuses to cover up his lack of activity (although he did get to work in the German Parliament - congrats btw).
Radfield responded with this post here - saying that supersoft would be away for the time being. What was curious was that Radfield didn't spend any time at any of the accusations on the periphery players, but chose to respond specifically to my accusation. Whats also curious was that supersoft never explicitly said that he would be away until Wednesday - he said that he was merely working in Berlin until Wednesday (and showed that he could still communicate from his hotel). Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but perhaps Radfield slipped here picking up on something he read from the mafia QT?
Anyways, supersoft has done nothing to alleviate my suspicions with his current activity so I will continue to view him as mafia. I'll join the rest of your discussions in just a minute.
|
Also just to clarify. Radfield could only have contacted one person and that would have had to have happened on day 2. As per his role pm:
Poison to the Ears: Each night phase you may choose a target to communicate with privately over the next day phase. Your target will not be given your identity nor your alignment. You will not be given your target’s role nor alignment. I will provide you with the link to your Quicktopic at the start of the day phase.
That means that he chose someone on night 1 and talked to them on day 2. This is also the same for the Pippin role meaning that Wiggles didn't talk to anyone either.
|
Oh I think someone pointed this out, but both Ciryandor and Radfield were 'put to the sword' meaning that a vig went for both (or after prplhz). That makes chaoser's hit claim more believable in my eyes since only two other players were killed on the first night.
|
On September 23 2011 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Actually, TS, i find u more scum than supersoft.
Ok, I will try to convince you otherwise then.
|
On September 23 2011 09:38 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2011 09:35 TranceStorm wrote:On September 23 2011 09:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Actually, TS, i find u more scum than supersoft. Ok, I will try to convince you otherwise then. try me.
Well you have to raise an argument against me. Otherwise its just:
You: "I think you are scum".
Me: "I'm not".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
