Lord of the Rings Mafia
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
its hard for me to resist | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
I know Tom Bombadil was kind of a neutral figure right? He was just concerned about his forest or whatever | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 17 2011 08:43 prplhz wrote: Gollum was clearly evil and the Ents were clearly good, although they were pretty lazy. Ask yourself, would an omnipotent Gollum have sided with Gandalf? Would an omnipotent Treebeard have sided with Sauron? Also, why are we talking about neutral factions when we should clearly be talking about Voldemort and the Ring Wraiths? Gollum wasn't evil. He didn't want to take over Middle Earth or join Sauron or anything he just wanted the ring for himself. It's something to talk about. There's no election so we either have to find something else to talk about or all pile votes onto a random player and see how they respond and what to do about it. How do you suggest we get the Day 1 ball rolling then? | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
##Vote Greymist I don't think our mod would hand the ring off to an evil player day 1. It's probably with a Frodo , Bilbo, or Gollum if we have any of those roles. So we know Greymist either has a protown power that is greatly amplified by the one ring, or is part of a neutral/evil faction that needs the ring for some reason. And Chaoser is right. We can't spend this whole game talking about roles. Scumhunting is #1. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 17 2011 09:26 supersoft wrote: what? they gave "good reasons"? So you agree with them, that your question about the ring is scummy, although it was only a joke. You dont need to be nice to people if they vote you for no reason just because they are vets here. There is no good reason this early. The real reason is to start discussions. Kitaman just voted for somebody without saying anything at all, at least we're discussing something now. If bandwagons exist, mafia are drawn to them and the more we talk and the more people vote, the easier it is to catch them. If you're expecting a well thought out scumhunt 10 posts after the day then you should stop because that doesn't ever happen | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
the only real use of a confirmed townie is its a center for everyone to claim to | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 17 2011 12:54 Navillus wrote: EBWOP: I'm actually curious, I'm still really bad at mafia and I want to know. if you're town it's absolutely pointless to claim VT if you're scum it has a point which is to make people think you're VT thats why | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
Wherebugsgo I don't know your metagame but here's what I see. 1. begging for the ring in every post 2. vague allusions to why you want it 3. voting for TranceStorm and FOSing him with no reasons. You're playing absolutely detrimental to town. This is not pro-town play, it is not how we catch scum. It's how shit gets stirred and people always let bad scum like this slide (coag in countless games) because they figure "oh no way scum would act so brashly or bad". ##Vote wherebugsgo At the very least, if you aren't scum, you are a stellar example of how town players should never act | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 17 2011 15:17 TranceStorm wrote: I divided your posts into three parts. (1) My point is that the only time a person ever claims is if they have passed the ring on to another player. They don't reveal who that other player is. The mafia don't know who that second player is. (2) Sorry. I don't quite understand what you are getting at here. You wouldn't claim that you just got the ring. The key is that if two successive passes are done - then we have two players who can confirm each other. (i.e. player 1 says that he did pass it to player 2 on turn x and player 2 confirms this). (3) At least my plan is generating important discussion compared to the silly banter thats currently going on. If someone else would like to generate serious discussion, I would invite them to do so. We don't know anything about the ring. Passing it on to scum could have terrible consequences. If we knew exactly what the rings powers were and what powers each player had relating to it then we could maybe form some plan for its use but otherwise this discussion is pretty much off the table. In the lore of LOTR the one ring basically reflects the power of its holder. A simple hobbit like Frodo simply becomes invisible holding it. But a powerful wizard like Saruman or god forbid Sauron could use it to become basically invincible/mind control/etc. And I'm not sure the ring will have evolving powers (just speculating) but hopefully my points be simple to understand 1. We have no idea what the extent of the consequences would be if the one ring were to fall into the hands of an evil player. 2. We have no idea what the ring even does other than the player who holds it or maybe some other role has knowledge. 3. It is not worth risking getting the ring on the wrong side of the town simply to MAYBE confirm a few players. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 17 2011 15:25 Ciryandor wrote: Are you saying that his activity is a good reason why he should be a policy lynch, for being detrimental to village planning and strategy? I sort of agree, but TranceStorm's strategy only means that it exposes townies, because it's easy enough for a scum who cannot wield the ring's power to its full extent to be deprived of it by or pass it to a bigger scum who can actually make use of it if the initial ring-bearer throws it to them, which would blow the whole tactic out of the water. Also, it could have negative repercussions by allowing a nominally cleared scum player to actually take out townies from within. Considering everything that's happened so far I feel pretty comfortable leaving my vote on the player who comes in demands the ring without explanation, mocks the player who calls him out on it, and accuses people of being scum with no explanation. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
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). That's up to that player. Assuming the power of the ring doesn't change that might not be such a bad idea but then we have all this WIFOM about whether they're confirmed or not and it basically paints a big target on their head for the mafia to hit | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
Vain is definitely being antagonistic and the fact that he slipped under the radar for such bad posting isn't a good sign. People seem to be complaining that we're still talking about Gollum or the ring or whatever but most of the discussion on the last few pages is about a lynch so stop complaining. I'm keeping my vote on WBG until I make up my mind. Vain, Drazerk, prplhz are all people I'm looking at. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
"TranceStorm is scum TranceStorm is scum Trancestorm is scum" is not scumhunting. Neither are OMGUS votes based on bad misunderstandings of what another player is saying. You said your first vote/reasons were bad. Yet in that same post you say " I already found you scum, look at TranceStorm." That's some big confidence for a "bad" vote. Cut the bullshit. It's obvious that what ever you are, you're not here to help us. Honestly on Day 1 I'd be more content lynching a pretty sure SK/Third Party player than some gut scum read that is probably wrong and end up killing some VT or power role that is actually helping us. As far as your posting all you are is an annoyance and a distraction. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 18 2011 05:39 wherebugsgo wrote: Are you fucking kidding? Drazerk didn't say anything about me being scum other than "leaning" scum on me. In the same post he says there are "definitely posting restrictions" when participating in a conversation about me talking about the ring in posts I make. Drazerk is scummy. I also think TranceStorm is scummy, I don't think my vote reason was bad, I just didn't explicitly state my vote reason. I wanted it to appear "bad" to promote discussion (which I did, no?) You specifically said this. THIS GUY IS SCUM. He thinks, "wherebugsgo has a posting restriction"=he must be scum. Hey genius, guess what, I'm not scum just because I have a posting restriction. Drazerk never even once implied that you having a posting restriction makes you scum. So no, I'm not kidding my point still stands. He never said or implied it was scummy. Sorry. This entire quoted attack on Drazerk is based on a bad misunderstanding. You didn't say anything about TranceStorm being scum other than he was scum and that was it. It wasn't until way later that you explained your vote (giving us all of one sentence of justification). If that's your basis for voting Drazerk, perhaps you should vote for yourself. Oh I see you're playing bad on purpose to "promote discussion" i.e draw all attention to yourself and make the whole day 1 discussion worthless. Very good town play, bravo. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
but your vote reason on me is even worse than mine. I figured people would pick up on my bad vote | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 18 2011 05:37 raynpelikoneet wrote: My vote is on prplhz, at least now. Let's c if anything new comes up before day ends. ##vote prplhz Contributed nothing this game so far now just announcing a sheep vote. Explain why. Why is prplhz more convincing than other candidates? What do you think about the gollum/ring discussion? | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 18 2011 06:15 prplhz wrote: wow what a 100th post i'm so blown away i want to vote for me too now i don't like drh or heist or wiggles but there are tons of people here who are worthy of scrutiny stuff like this, it's the wiggle room we want 'cause that's when people really have to talk about stuff, even if we're lynching a scum i think 51/49 is better than 100/0 and drh should probably think so too unless he's a crazyman i'm fine with wbg and cyriandor and syllogism, good questions and wbg is not worth the attention he's getting right now, let him troll around and then maybe a vig can shoot him at some point or whatever I'm not gonna fight with you on this. I'm not saying people shouldn't press who they think is scum. But when there is one overwhelming bandwagon against an obvious mafia we shouldn't go out of our way to split it since that's what the mafia wants. I'm not advocating analyzing/voting for only one player a day. That's silly. There is usually only a single bandwagon when something like a major scum slip/red DT check/really good analysis comes up on a player and that's exactly what should happen in that case. Maybe there is just a misunderstanding between us but I think having (in a vacuum) a split wagon between two players is the ideal situation for scum. On September 18 2011 05:58 wherebugsgo wrote: Why don't you tell me Drazerk's motivation for voting for me, then? Why did he mention the posting restrictions in the context of his vote on me? Why did he sheep Chaoser? You seem to know all about Drazerk. Go ahead and tell us. And yes, I did say that my vote reason was bad, because that was the way I intended it to appear. I have reasons for voting him, I don't have to state everything and put it out on a silver platter for you. This is the same reason why I'm not going to tell anyone why I want the ring. If you guys decide to give me the ring, fine, if you don't, you're just hurting yourselves. Of course, I might actually have to put everything on a nice silver platter, since most townies are usually extraordinarily thick and incapable of reasoning. You're pretty good at jumping to conclusions. He mentioned it because it was what we were talking about. Other people were speculating about whether or not you have a posting restriction and he is coming out and saying you probably do. He never connected it to his vote for you or his reasons for thinking you're scum. I'm not Drazerk I don't know why he voted for you. Stop being obnoxious I never said I knew anything about his reasons or what he's thinking I'm just saying your basis for attacking him is flawed. You have no reason to be this defensive unless you're guilty of something, slow to understand basic logic, or intent on being as annoying as possible in this game. I've decided you're a clown and I'm not wasting anymore discussion talking to you about this. Come up with something good enough to reply to and I'll think about it. You're just noise. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
However, let's knock off the "he's too bad to be scum" nonsense. I've seen worse from mafia players in the past. being bad doesn't clear you. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
So far our scum cases boil down to "your plan was stupid" "you didn't post enough" and "idk you voted for me and you didn't explain it well." If I get a strong scum read then I'll move my vote. My read on WBG is either scum or SK. Either way, he's a detriment to town and I'm pretty sure he is not a pro-town role. I feel more comfortable voting for a player that I'm about 75% sure is a non-town player than a player I'm 15% sure might be scum. My vote for greymist was really just a placeholder to get him talking. That's pretty standard stuff. That's it. I'm not concerned with defending myself, I'm doing what I feel is right. WBG has been posting a little bit more constructively and at the very least, if he is a bad townie, he's learning that you can't shit post and troll without getting heat. There are still 24 hours left but so far all of the "scum" cases I've seen have been incredibly weak and I don't know why people seem to think it's impossible WBG is scum in the first place. Because he's too reckless? I've seen worse. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 19 2011 04:35 prplhz wrote: also, drh fits the reasons for my jack vote too, he's not doing as good as i'd expect and i think that that is very weird, he is arguing for silly things like "lets just have one candidate for lynching" and "lets wait for a guy who is 100% scum before we lynch scum, until then we just lynch 3rd party" and a lot of you agree that that is a terrible agenda. but drh wasn't going anywhere so i switched to jack. god i never said any of those things dude you are really misunderstanding me | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
Also I never said we should wait for 100% scum. I would rather lynch SK if there are literally no convincing scum reads. However like I said (never used the term 100%) I would definitely vote for someone I thought was mafia over someone I though was SK but on Day 1, as it is, there is no one I have a strong read for (and I have a lot o freading to catch up on and my mind will probably change). Also I think there is still a pretty strong chance WBG is mafia because his earlier behavior was considerably scummy and from the environment we have he would have known he could get away with posting like that. Lots of scum have done worse. I have absolutely no reason to believe WBG can't be scum. Please stop misrepresenting me and twisting my thoughts and words | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 19 2011 05:19 Palmar wrote: Radfield is a cool guy and Errandor has done nothing that looks like town posting. WBG is almost definitely not scum, just put yourselves in his shoes, why the shit would he post the things he's done if he was scum, he's basically piling on attention and scummyness by wanting to look for his precious, outright demanding it. I'll be voting for Errandor. "why would a scum player act so scummy?" terrible reasoning btw | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 19 2011 03:34 wherebugsgo wrote: I'm going to vote Jackal. I'm not convinced on prplhz. It should be fairly obvious that I'm an easy lynch for mafia. I'm not scum. ##unvote Archon_Toilet ##vote Jackal58 I suggest we look at Archon_Toilet, Dr. H, and Drazerk more carefully, particularly after the lynch. None of them have contributed anything; all the voters on me have feigned contribution by essentially voting me and saying nothing else. yeah no case against you could possibly be contribution right | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 19 2011 07:55 prplhz wrote: @wiggles why would my flipping scum make wbg more likely to be scum? i didn't deal too much with him or support his supposed 3rd party agenda more than any other, i only said that 3rd party shouldn't be designated for lynches 12 hours into the day. @drh you're still on my list for sure. what principle is making you abstain from voting? don't you think one of me and erandorr could be scum? I didn't abstain from voting, I voted for WBG because I think he is scum or SK more than Errandor. I will always vote for the person I think is most scummy and should be lynched. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 19 2011 07:52 Drazerk wrote: That was my whole reason for voting for him originally and the reason Ill probably vote for him tomorrow. WBG won't be lynched today but hopefully he will be shot tonight or lynched tomorrow. stop doing this dont you know saying anything bad about wbg isnt contributing it also makes you scum | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 19 2011 09:57 wherebugsgo wrote: The one that involves you telling people to give me the ring day 1 (when it's outlined in the OP that the ring may only pass hands at night) and also to lynch me at the same time, coupled with the fact that there were likely multiple scum on my wagon, meaning if I were to receive the ring (and not die) and then be lynched the ring would be sent to one of my voters. AKA scum. That case. I don't understand. Are you saying scum voted for you because they thought someone would give you the ring so they could get the ring when you got lynched and thats why me and drazerk voted for you | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
and yes, I'm dialing down my activity level in this game. I spam too much. I second guess myself too much. I think the fact that I didn't change my vote around 100 times and say every little thing on my mind is better play but I guess it comes off as a lot different from how I normally play. I read Vers guide like twice before this game. Wiggles has a good DT checklist although Palmar/jeejee definitely warrant a check. Both have been well under expected activity levels and I think it was JeeJee who made the rather cryptic posts about shadows. Odd behavior. Medics should go for the big veteran townie targets as usual. Myself, Radfield, JeeJee, Mr.Wiggles I would venture are the biggest targets. But really, you should use your own discretion. Medic - pick the experienced player you think is most likely town DT - pick the player you think is most likely scum. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
almost purely defensive play focusing only on people who criticized or voted for you everyone discounting the possibility you're scum begging for ring day 1 and spamming spam im done go read my posts ive said enough about you im not gonna keep repeating myself | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 19 2011 21:44 syllogism wrote: I can't quite reconcile these statements with the fact you left your vote on WBG. Care to clarify? Did you just became more certain about WBG being scum/mafia somewhere along the way? Why? What do you think about the possibility of WBG being a third party who isn't a serial killer? Looking over Radfields case, it wasn't as strong as had really thought at first glance. That was a pretty bad kneejerk reaction. I think WBG is mafia or SK. WBG is playing pretty arrogantly. He thinks I can't possibly have another reason for voting for him other than he "asked for the ring" (i provided several others, whatever) and I think he's SK or Mafia. It's very possible he is non-sk third party or even town. Unfortunately I don't have DT powers, I can't check. What reason do I have as mafia to tunnel a useless and obnoxious player like WBG when I can take the easy bandwagon on Errandor or Prplhz (who was accusing me anyway) ? Yeah, I know it's WIFOM but if I'm really about to get bandwagoned for making the "wrong vote" then I don't know what to say other than TL Towns really are getting worse. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 20 2011 01:54 wherebugsgo wrote: Thank god someone else noticed this. The whole point of me calling out Dr. H was to expose this contradiction. He said he had no scum reads, then said Erandor is probably scum and didn't vote him despite saying he would vote someone other than me once he actually had scum reads. Somewhere in there he magically goes from me bein third party to being scum solely because no one else thinks I am scum. No I think you're probably more likely SK than scum but I still thought you were more likely scum than Errandor was. As you continued posting I became more confident in my vote, not less actually. But whatever. Since everyone is 100% sure you can't be mafia for some dumb fucking reason I guess I'll take the heat . | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 20 2011 03:04 syllogism wrote: It's night and you were only asked to clarify something. Saying that you are about to be bandwagoned seems like an overreaction to me, no? Tunnelling WBG as mafia makes sense because, assuming that he is a third party, you don't really get into trouble for it and you can do it with some real conviction given that you don't have to make up reasons for finding him scummy. I'm annoyed that I'm in the hot seat for picking the "wrong" bandwagon when the one everyone else went onto flipped out a pretty good power role. I'm also overreacting because WBG's attitude and play style annoys me so much I seriously considered quitting this game yesterday. I'll cool down but I'll never play another game with him, i know that much. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 17 2011 19:23 xtfftc wrote: Also, none of the currently discussed lynch targets are viable. They are all easy ones. I'd rather go for a random lynch out of the remaining players. ". So no, I don't want to pick someone random. I said that I'd rather pick a random player out of the remaining 27 than one of these 3 because lynching them would give us absolutely nothing. " From his second post. This is a very strange thing to say. How does lynching a random person give us 'more' than one of the 3 day 1 bandwagons? This makes sense if A. He's scum trying to divert from the possibility of a teammate being lynched. B. Is scum and implicitly knows none of those 3 candidates are mafia and thus would gives us "nothing". I can't really make sense of that statement. I'll give xtfftc a chance to clarify his reasoning further. I'm not happy with Jackal and WBG has been way way way way too active from the very beginning to be mafia. Way too active from the beginning to be mafia? What does that mean. I've never heard that reason before. Plenty of scum have been active players since the beginning of day 1 in mafia games it happens all the time? Now he's promising some sort of analysis on 3 players (kind of distracting, should narrow it down to one that he finds most convincing. An analysis that comes up with "I think they're town" is noise). Oddly enough, he starts it at night 1. I find a lot of holes and mistakes in the logic and the longer posts don't really seem to be saying a lot and what does stand out from them are poor arguments and a sort of refusal to take a serious stance on anything. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On September 20 2011 09:43 Radfield wrote: And keep in mind that there are players actively trying to bullshit and cause chaos. People seem to forget this when they get upset. Just straighten it out, call it out, and keep town on the right track. Most of all stay civil. We get it. You're not the mod and posts like this are just BS attempts to appear helpful and pro town. I don't trust you. | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
| ||