EPTMy first game!
Newbie Mini Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
My first game! | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Cupcakes for you guys  Just spent like 2 hours reading all the various material. Far more in depth than the real life version (which I have played a varient of) lol. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On October 28 2011 10:26 Cyber_Cheese wrote: + Show Spoiler + This could be a good time to run through the use of colour. On October 28 2011 09:00 IMABUNNEH wrote: Is the day/night cycles in real time, so 1 per real life day? Couldn't find it posted anywhere, either I'm blind, stupid, or a bit of both perhaps :D Questions about the setup/game should be asked in green, like this. Kita, you have access to the sacred blue text, why don't you use it more liberally? So the mods can easily see it while looking through the game. It doesn't have to be a mod that On October 24 2011 00:35 kitaman27 wrote: Posting: Mod Font: This is mod font. It is reserved for moderators. Please do not use it. Question Font: This is question font. Use it to ask the moderators questions about the rules. Please do us a favor and read the rules before you ask anything. Red can be used as much as you want, but is best reserved for the things you want to draw attention to. When using colour use bold over the coloured words, or they look piddly like this... Isn't this better? Oh and just as a general thing, use the search function on page 1 if you have a question at the very least, believe me it saved me from asking quite a few dumb questions so far ^_^ Thanks  Also can't believe I missed that super obvious part in the first post. Must pay more attention from now on! | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Anyway I can't believe all those bronies died D= I~ don't know if I want to live in a place where someone would hurt ponies  | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
You're a bunneh, you're probably next after bronies. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Either toads or risk.nuke definately look a bit dodgy. Both of the posts struck me as quite aggressive in turning it into finger pointing. I don't think getting all up in peoples' grills immediately is what we want. It's just going to get innocent people on the defensive from the start. Drem has so far poked at someone randomly as a "joke" and then at myself for not getting immediately aggressive. Who's next, risk.nuke for BEING aggressive? :p I don't think finger pointing every 6 posts at a different person is going to help us. I doubt someone with almost no activity at this point is likely to be scum though. So even though Skrammen hasn't said anything,I'd rule him out for the time being and look at the "half-active" posters. risk.nuke and hacklebeast are both pretty aggressive in getting people to turn on someone so early. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:27 risk.nuke wrote: Getting in peoples faces is precisly what we want. How else do you expect to catch scum? When people are all aggro at each other, that's the best time to watch for slips right? That's what I'd have thought anyway. So I'm watching them more closely. Even if that was what you thought, why were you so quick to tell everyone what you thought toad ment. He wasn't about to get lynched.. If that's what he thought when he wrote it he wouldn't had have any problems telling us that himself, if he's scum he might had given a scumslip. 2 people coming to each others' defense early on in the game isn't something I'd have expected either. Interpreting someone else's words to make them seem "nicer" than they were stated... | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
There was no coming to each others' defense, as he has said nothing in my defense. Hmm good point, that'll teach me to reread better. We still haven't heard from Skrammen though, and I still think Toad is dodgy. Since other than telling people they should post more posts, he hasn't really said anything. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On October 31 2011 05:36 Drem903 wrote: Zanfada also has not posted at all since his initial accusation, so he should also be one to consider for now. Yeah. Maybe they were just trying to get the ball rolling, or maybe they were trying to start people recieving flak early on. I'd go out on a limb and put odds on at least one of them being scum. Still have a day before having to vote at least to gauge that one more though. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On October 31 2011 05:40 Skrammen wrote: And just a head's up: Since we have people from both sides of the pond in this game there is bound to be somewhat of a delay in answers and people might be working or sleeping when some discussions takes place. We should be somewhat tolerant of this, but obviously 24 hours of no posting is not good. 2 posts in almost 24 hours is almost as bad as 24 hours of nothing though, and as a reference, the people on both sides of the pond (myself and Toads for Europe, for example) have multiple posts. Have you been working all Sunday or something? | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
@IMABUNNEH even though i don't like inactives either, direct attacks seem a bit off. He is not the only one who is post very little (i only see the same 5-6 returning while reading). I didn't mean it as a direct attack, though reading it it is more aggressive than I intended. It's an attempt to get him posting SOMETHING rather than nothing, and asking him where he's been is as good as any. @all: i would to remind you all of my previously posted opinion about Zanfada. It seems to me he overcompensates the lack of simple and clear arguments by huge blocks of text. He's definately FOS from me since a little earlier. It just seems a whole lot of nothing. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
That kind of tomfoolery reeks of someone trying to be "too obvious" to me. I've got a couple of hours to make my vote still, but for now, FOS on Toad. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Mafia can't really kill me right now, because if they do and I flip green town gets massive amounts of information from previous posts since I was a topic the last pages. Same with zanfas, that is if he turns out to be green. I think this sounds like you're already getting reasoning behind not being killed. You jump around a lot and most of your posts seem like you're going out of your way to let people know you're totally town. Other people look suspicious, but to me this looks like a balls out attempt to control the game yourself among newer players. For that reason... ##Vote Toadesstern | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
But most interestingly, I feel the need to emphasize this again. Nobody is taking his side. Allow me. Or at least my view on it. I would say to those voting Skrammen, is inactivity the only reason? I'd have thought if he WAS scummy he'd have come out and said SOMETHING by now, rather than just toppling over without a fight. Even a new scum would try and do something to alleviate themselves wouldn't they? Voting the inactives isn't a bad choice for what was pointed out earlier (was it by Toads?), that at the very least if they AREN'T scum then they're not that helpful either. But I think the scum would have shown themselves by now. I also think the fact that he has the MOST votes is telling more of the voters than anything. Scum are more likely to team up votes right? So out of those of you who HAVE voted on him, Zanfa, Xsksc, Harbinger, Chocolate, Toad, Ciry... as I type this that's the first time I've counted 6 already?I agree we should lynch someone suspicious, but unless someone can give me a better reason than "he hasn't posted much", I can't agree to the Skrammen lynching. I still think Toad is an obvious read, though Zanfa has been awfully quiet since the blame shifted away from him. A question though: Harbinger's post history seems to be about 50% condemning Skrammen even before other people joined in, and he hasn't really relented or even looked much at anyone else. Why are you so focused on Skrammen? | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 01 2011 09:32 risk.nuke wrote: But jesus christ I'm even off tracking myself, Why are you still blind and talking about Skrammen. Toadesstern have accidently done several scumslips, wake up! Basically what I tried to point out (I'm not the most eloquent with words  ). I think though there's a big bandwagon train on Skrammen based on very little, and the main perpetrators seem less than clean. There's only a bit of time left to vote, I hope people work out that they've already slipped into a mob mentality rather than voting for a lynch with good reasoning. TL will be down for extended maintenance in 06:20:29. What do? | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 02 2011 00:48 Toadesstern wrote: got home from university now and yeah let's get a little analysis what happened last day. Let's just pretend we don't know a thing. In that scernario everything's possible. I could be green, I could be red, Skrammen could be green and Skrammen could be red. Same with Zanfa and risk but I'm going to talk about Skrammen and me since the two of us are the main subjects in this thread right now. 1) Both red Let's start with the easy one and pretend both Skrammen and I am red. In that case the two of us are stupid and I'm blaming him to be mafia while he is blaming me to be mafia. I know we're not really blameing each other but I did vote for him so I guess that counts, too. That does not sound like a good plan for mafia imo. 2) Both green Next possibilty: We're both green. If that turns out to be true towns horribly fucked. Not because of the fact that both of us are green but since we didn't even get a majority on a green while mafia is probably even helping us or at least spreading their votes and therefore we might have 1 or 2 mafias on Skrammen as well. And still we don't get a majority. If that's true we got a major problem because we're not going to get a lynch anytime soon (= free kill for mafia without having the chance to kill a mafia or at least get GRANTED information). => pretty much everyone could be mafia because they're able to vote whoever they want without having to manipulate votes at least a bit. 3) Skrammen green, I'm red In that case town got a heavy problem as well. Skrammen was closest for having a majority and it's pretty much the same as the second possibility: I'm mafia and I went for a wagon issued by someone else and still town hasn't got a majority. That would mean that out of those 6 votes probably 2 or 3 votes are issued by mafias (my vote at least + maybe my buddies) while 3 townies voted for Skrammen, 3 voted for me, 2 voted for Zanfa and 1 voted for Chocolate. That's not exactly what you want to do as town, no matter what. 4) I'm green, Skrammen is red In that situation mafia is probably not going to vote for skrammen in the first place. They want to safe their buddy as long as it's possible without leaking information of who actually is mafia out of votingbehaviors right before the deadline. Also this would mean we got at most 1 mafia voting for Skrammen (that is if they got balls). I doubt they got the balls to put their mafia buddy on a 6-votes position themselves, just to make those other 2 mafias really hidden. There could always be a hero votechange 1h before the deadline which would have made a lynch. So in that scenario we probably got about 5 townies voting for Skrammen, maybe it's even 6, while mafia is trying to get us on someone else. Therefore they got either 2 votes on me, 1 vote on me + 1 vote on zanfa or 2 votes on zanfa (the third one is Skrammens vote on choc), while 3 townies did not choose to vote for Skrammen. For me it's kind of clear. I can rule out possibilty 1 (let's face it, noone's that stupid). I think 3 is pretty unlikely. I just think town should be able to get more than 3 votes on a single person without mafia therefore I think there's no mafia votes on Skrammen. If there are we're really fucked. 2 and 4 could be possible in my opinion. Having 5 or 6 townies able to focus their votes on 1 single person while 3 are not sure what to do sounds reasonable for me (compare with example 3: I don't think we got only 3 people being able to focus their votes while the rest is spreading their votes for whatever reason). Therefore I'd say its 4 > 2 > 3 > 1 I'm still not saying I think Skrammen's 100% sure red, and if he's green than risk is green as well. But I think it's a better explanation than the two of us being green or 'me red + Skrammen green' or both red. I agree, both red is almost impossible, especially considering how hard you pushed to get that one single extra vote. If you're both green then we have several issues. One would be we don't actually have a real clue as to who the scum are, since the 2 of you are our 2 main candidates. Both green seems unlikely given that there's a real case for both of you at this point. The decision then lies in who is red and who is green. If he is red, then I don't have a clue who his buddies are, but likely one of them must have voted for him. The other voters just don't strike me as particularly scummy just yet. If YOU are red however, then you'd be on the right train voting the person with the highest votes. I still don't like your case against him basically being "He didn't say enough". For him I haven't seen enough to know for certain, maybe 60% if it wasn't for you. But I'm 85% on yourself. You FOSd around a while and joined the majority (granted you voted just early enough that it wasn't a guaranteed majority on him, but it was late enough to know the general feeling of the group). That's what I think of the Skrammen/Toad situation anyway. I've got to eat, while I flick through the other posters. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
That kill was.... unexpected. Reading back through his posts, Toad is the only person to REALLY benefit from it. I don't think Toad is that stupid, but do we have any scum around that are stupid enough to think that would work? It's such a BLATANT kill that it could mean almost anything with relation to Toads. I can't see it as unrelated though, so the options in my mind are: 1) Toads is scum. Risk was so vehement about it that killing him protects Toads, and nobody would really think Toads that dumb, so he could get away with it. 2) Someone else was trying to implicate Toads to get people off of them, which would make Skrammen scum most likely. Killing Toads would be too obvious perhaps, so framing Toads much better? 3) Risk only brought a case against ONE other person, which was against Harbinger. Perhaps killing someone not too obvious to keep people off himself. However every explanation both prior to Risk's death and since then seems to include Toad or Skrammen as being red as an option. If one is red the other is almost certainly green, but at this point it is just far too unlikely that neither of them are red. Once I'm home from work and not on lunchbreak I'll pull up Harbinger's post history as well, see what gems are hiding there, because of point 3, unless someone beats me to it. It's definately something worth looking into, especially as he was a part of the Skrammen "bandwagon". I know we have 48 hours, but I think initially at least we should put some focus on these guys. If we're so spread out like Day 1 we'll end up with a no-lynch, and I think I definately made a mistake not switching to Skrammen Day 1. Initially I was far more suspicious of Toads, but they're almost 50/50 now, and having the information from one of them would have made today a lot easier for us. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 03 2011 07:57 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Toad, he said if he flips red risk and bunneh have issues. Not if he flips green. He said that because risk and bunneh defended him. I can't talk for risk, but as far as myself I don't think defended is the right word. On the first day I didn't think he'd done enough to be suspicious enough to be lynched, whereas I thought Toad most definately had. Since then, with his posting suddenly disappearing, and a couple of his posts just before that, you can see I definately became more suspicious of him. Between him and Toad it dropped to 50/50, and I'm still certain one of them has to be red. Too many explanations for what's happened so far leads to one of those 2 being a logically sound conclusion, and risk being killed just adds weight that there was something going on there. If I'm next on the hitlist though, I would actually think Skrammen over Toads, as obviously he wouldn't be dumb enough to kill his only 2 "supporters". Perhaps. Hyshes I jus reread the whole thread and i'm going to post a hard statement here. Ciryandor - Toadesstern - Drem903 See I actually agree with the other feelings on this. Ciry, Toad and Drem have all (if I'm remembering right as I post) been reasonably aggressive towards each other at certain points in this game, including (withdrawn?) votes. If all 3 of them are scum, I think I would eat my own foot. Any one of them you could probably put together a reasonable case for if you took their posts in a vacuum, but all 3 together, with context, just doesn't make ANY sense, and seems to be a method of saying "Hey guys look at them!"... which is another way of saying "Don't look at me even though I'm here!" However I also don't like what I saw with Toad and Drem's initial voting today. They voted for each other, and then both withdrew their votes from each other. Their reasoning was both "I was too hasty, these guys are totally more suspicious", and that makes me suspicious of both of them. Unless they were votes to see how people would react, remarkably synched together in reasoning, it seems too much of a coincidence to me. However, I don't like that Skrammen hasn't posted since barely surviving. He's hiding too much for me, and my suspicion of him has basically done nothing since go up since I refused to vote for him. Unless I see something compelling from him, I'm going to have to make a provisional ##Vote SKrammen Unless he posts something worthwhile, and worth waiting for, I'm unlikely to change this despite my other suspicions. It keeps coming back to him and Toads, but at least Toad doesn't look like he's trying to hide. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Unless he posts something worthwhile, and worth waiting for, I'm unlikely to change this despite my other suspicions. Just quoting myself to add something to this. This is my current viewpoint with our current information, and this is a serious vote. However I don't think we can risk a no-lynch again. We all know full well the reasonings behind SKrammen, though I could elaborate for anyone who has missed the last 5 pages. However I think if we have enough people near the end of the day voting for someone specific but are still split, it would benefit us to force the lynch to at least get some real information. I would be extremely suspicious after Day 1 of anyone who may be trying to block a lynch from occurring. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 03 2011 11:41 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Bunneh I thought you were going to look into my post history and make a statement regarding it? Am I not special enough for that? :-( I will but it won't be for a few hours. Last night I went out after work, came home a bit worse for wear, got in the post that I did, but wasn't up to reading your full post history. I will have it analysed as townie or scum before the votes are finalised tonight though. From a quick scan (mostly from the posts you specifically pulled, so take it with a grain of salt ) I don't think you're showing up as Red, or at least not top 3 suspects. ##unvote drem ##vote hyshes I no longer have a clue what hyshes is doing. Either he's a townie who has gone all emo because people put such a good case on him, or he's scum doing the stupidest thing."I could try and defend myself, or I can just agree to vote myself". Yet if he was townie, why would he vote to have himself lynched? There's still time for him to put forward a case either to defend himself, or to make a case on somebody else. But instead he just spent the last 3 or 4 posts saying "Yeah lynch me". Wtf is that? A townie can be open and honest, the mafia are the ones far more likely to try and play silly bugger mind games like that. FOS hyshes. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 03 2011 21:36 Toadesstern wrote: 1) We got a case here 2) If he is not willing to defend himself himself we can't stop lynching him because of that, because it's not making sense 3) The only possible thing is him being red and thinking he's going to get lynched anyway so he might as well try that one. NO Townie want's to get himself lynched unless it's not possible to not get lynched for some strange reasons, but he'd still try to prevent it (look at my case). I'm going to agree with this. What townie would try and get themselves lynched? All that does is dick the town over even more, so either he's given up playing, which means no big loss, or for reasons stated above, he's scum. I can barely even analyse it on any meaningful level, there's basically nothing to say. I don't see what this could achieve as a townie, and it's definately enough to change my vote for today. hyshes is scum. ##unvote SKrammen ##vote hyshes | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 03 2011 22:16 hyshes wrote: I'm not retarded, and this aint stupid play either. It's the only play i got left to have a possible chance on a town win. I'm just kinda hoping it will open your eyes. I'm just offering good working material here. for that purpose, i'm willing to do a sacrifice here. After my action here it will be 6towns vs 3 mafia (assuming mafia kills a townie next night), so still a good majority for the town. Maybe if towns is lucky, it will be 7vs3.. Sacrificing yourself just to show you're green doesn't seem like it helps the town all that much. The reason being, IF you were to flip up green, then it drops to a 7/3. The mafia then get to ping someone else (right?), making it 6/3. At 6/3 it's going to be a lot harder for us to get a solid lynch on a scum. If you throw yourself to the lions and turn out green, we're going to have real problems. If what you say is ACTUALLY true, don't sacrifice yourself, because in doing so you're basically sacrificing the town. This is why I think you MUST be red. You're right that you're not retarded, which is why the only possible option is that you're red. Also in your other posts you refused to defend yourself against "retarded" logic (think that's the right quote, or the gist of it). The posts made against you are pretty sound logically, and your attitude to the accusation is entirely illogical. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:24 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: I don't see how toad telling people to be active even if they are blues is suspicious, it isn't like he said "dt's and medics should role-claim in the thread" or anything. He, like most of us, is simply trying to encourage activity from everyone. It also helps make it clear that you must contribute to scum-hunting as a blue if you don't want to be mistaken for scum yourself. And just to call someone out a bit, I believe Skrammen has actually said the least of anyone so far, with a total contribution of: Early thread, a defense of Toad, and poke at SKrammen. The few posts following this show a not-quite-but-kindof defense of the initial accusations at Toad, and continue aggression on SKrammen. Following them, a move onto Drem with some reasonable arguments: + Show Spoiler + On November 02 2011 03:52 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: So while reviewing the voting and the resulting no-lynch, I noticed something very interesting from Drem: If you were very suspicious of both of them, why would you leave your vote on Zanfada? At the time of your voting, you had the option to make it 2 votes for Zanfada, or 4 votes for Skrammen. If your goal was to get scum lynched, and you were very suspicious of Skrammen, why place your vote in a way that greatly increases the odds of a no-lynch rather than nearly guaranteeing a lynch on Skrammen? I would also like a bit more from hyshes on why he voted Zanfada, considering his voting post was the following: Do you still think he is scum? Were you around at all after more votes were in? If so, what was your reasoning for leaving your vote on Zanfada, rather than switching it to Toad? Since the failed lynch you seem to be focusing more on Toad, but haven't really made a committal statement yet, do you believe Toad to be scum? I understand he may very well have been the person you were most suspicious of, but in the very post you used to place that vote you said you were very suspicious of Skrammen. My question was if you thought both were likely to be scum at the time, why would you vote in a manner that makes it less likely that either of them would get lynched? It isn't like you made an effort in your post to get people to switch from Skrammen to Zanfada to get him lynched instead, you simply said they were both very suspicious and placed your vote. Let's spell it out a bit: Suppose you think A and B are scummy. You think A is 60% to be scum, B is 80% to be scum. If you vote A, he will almost surely be lynched. If you vote B, there is a small chance A will be lynched, no chance B will be lynched, a large chance nobody will be lynched. How does the second choice ever make sense, unless you think A is likely to be town? I see nothing particularly wrong with these posts actually. Or anything so far. The posts have reasoned arguments, backed up by relevent posts. The next period doesn't need a quote tunnel. After risk turned up dead, there's a couple of extremely strong posts trying to assess who would want risk dead. Of biggest note to me at that time, was when I threw up suspicion purely because you were the only other person risk implicated that wasn't Toad, you gave a good honest reply that showed both your positive posts and the ones that could implicate, you in an attempt to help what I was looking for. You were right that you were a potential benefactor from his death, but at the same time so were both Toad and Skrammen, far more so than you. A hit might have been a "subtle" one coming from yourself, but far more likely that it was from elsewhere either looking to implicate one of the 2 of them, or actually from one of the 2 of them. Next posts of note I feel are the following: + Show Spoiler + xsksc, you've been pretty quiet, would you mind posting some of your thoughts/analysis? I pretty much have a null read on you currently. Ciryandor, I would also like to hear what your current thoughts are when you get the chance. You've posted today, but none of your usual analysis yet. @Skrammen Since you reappeared, I would like to reassert my earlier request; If you value your life, please make a post of the following: 1) At least 2, preferably 3 people you think are scum 2) Explanations and some analysis of why you think they are scum 3) At least 2, preferably more, people you think are town, excluding yourself 4) Explanations of why you think they are town 5) What you think the goal of the risk.nuke shooting was @hyshes Have you reconsidered your 3 scum picks yet? If Ciry and Drem are both scum, why would Ciry now be voting for and bringing intense scrutiny to Drem? Do you honestly think that mafia would be bussing one of their players on day 2? Drem, if you are still around, I would also like to know who are several people you think are likely to be town and why. These to me are very townie signs. It's like 6 posts or so in a row which are actively asking others questions, and trying to find out information. Someone that active in looking for information is someone committed to finding something out. The only 2 options are "Who are scum?" or "Who are blues so I can kill them?". The tone of the posts though strike me more as the first one. These are followed by the long post that first implicated hyshes. This is where it gets tricky for me. That post has perfect reasoning in it. After reading it, I had a similar sentiment that I hadn't shared about hyshes previously. And that's about when this whole game went tits up. Now that final direct assault on hyshes came after several lines of questioning, and most other people giving what appear to be satisfactory responses, so the aggression towards hyshes would not be unwarranted. His reaction certainly didn't help us, and after your original attack and his responses to it I was 100% certain he was scum as well. It's hard to express in words though how I don't understand his reasoning behind his actions. I DON'T think that Harbinger's original attack was unwarranted or unfounded though, so I don't read it as scum attacking someone for a lynch. That would be too obvious. My conclusion on Harbinger for the time being is Townie. Sorry it took so long to post this by the way, I know I missed when I insisted I'd have posted it by. So assuming I rule out Harbinger for the time being, we have to go back on what we had prior to the hyshes thing. In my mind it continues to be as follows: 1) Skrammen or Toad. Only 1, but almost certainly one. Otherwise I'll be a monkey's uncle and entirely thrown through a loop. 2) Drem. More to come on that, but he's been semi-active, and some dodgy posts. 3) No idea. Perhaps Chocolate? I'd have thought possibly hackle, but my real guess is that he was a townie who just lost interest from the start. I don't have a real lead on a 3rd at the moment though. I'd like to hear more from xkxdkskd though. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
If one of them are scum, we should do something about it, not dick around. If one flips green, we know with absolute certainty who we want to lynch the following day. If we were to vote based on percentage liklihood (something subjective), then the only choices I'm seeing right now is a 50/50 on SKrammen/Toad, and a 50-70 chance on Drem. However that 50/50 immediately becomes "the other guy is 100% the other thing) if we get a lynch there. For this reason, I'm making my vote the one that gets the most information for us. It's not a choice anyone necessarily WANTS to make, since we have a 50% chance of getting it wrong, but at this point I feel it's now or never to get that 100% chance next time. ##vote Toadesstern | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 06 2011 02:59 Toadesstern wrote: Well in that case I'm obviously on Skrammen. Given what I said earlier I think the outcome is always better if we lynch skrammen. If he's mafia than fine, we just lynched a mafia (same if you lynch me and I flip red). However since we got hyshes and risk the green case is really fucked up. If I flip green you can't tell a bit about other people because risk and hyshes, who both targeted me were green. So a logic like "let's just lynch everyone who pushed for toad" would be flawed. Plus I got to add that I still think the only reason you guys still think I'm 50% mafia is because of those weird lynches/kills by mafia. Yes both attacked me bot come on, noone could have THAT seen comming I'm still conflicted on that. It's not JUST the suspicion of who else have died/lynched, there are parts of your behaviour that still strike me as scummy. But then there is also behaviour that strikes me as townie. I get the feeling that mafia would be more active than SKrammen is being though, however I could be ENTIRELY wrong on that. My initial vote remains on Toads, however I feel Toads or SKrammen have to go today. If there are more people jumping on SKrammen near the deadline, I'll swap my vote to ensure we get the lynch we need. My vote for Toads first is my feeling that Toads is more likely scum than SKrammen. I might also see something between now and then that changes my mind anyway, so who knows. @Harbinger: Tomorrow (RL time) will have to be for a true look back through his posts, since I have friends shortly arriving for a party at mine. My initial answer to that post is earlier I thought he was suspicious, but it may have been the feeling of "everyone is suspicious to me wtf do I do?!". I don't think he's posted that much in the last day or 2 (real life days, not ingame days) so I'd like to see a bit more from him, and potentially what he thinks of me, by the time I reply tomorrow. If that doesn't come through I'll go ahead and PBP (assuming this is play by play?) what I think of him anyway. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 07 2011 04:23 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Should be back in time to change as somehow I doubt this one will garner enough votes to ensure a lynch, but for now ##vote xsksc Do you have some form of argument for this? I don't think this late in a game a vote can exist without some reasoning posted. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Toadesstern IMABUNNEH sermokala xsksc HarbingerOfDoom SKrammen Toadesstern Drem903 xsksc Who has votes on them from who. With the voting deadline not too far away, and myself needing to get to bed early today, I'd like to see some kind of decision. I don't want to end the day without a lynch. With votes this spread people need to make choices. There hasn't been that much discussion today (I'm as much to blame as anyone else for that), and we're still missing votes from people. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
How many people haven't voted? And I implore Harbinger to pick either one of them. I think voting Toad gives us far more information than voting Drem, but if we sit around with a no-lynch again we're going to be in trouble. Still waiting for an explanation to the xkskskcxkfd vote as well. At the moment it just looks like you're deliberately blocking a lynch for one reason or another. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
##unvote Toadesstern ##vote Chocolate | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Town Harbinger Ciry Toad This isn't an uncommon feeling at this point I guess, though my decision on Toad might look odd to people, so I'll explain that briefly. Despite receiving varying amounts of pressure on every single day, he hasn't been afraid to continue to stand up and make himself heard. What's convinced me the most though isn't that he's attached himself to the other 2, but that they all 3 sort of slowly came together on opinions over the last couple of days. Now either it's a FANTASTIC mafia ploy and they are the 3 scum, but I find that so unlikely at this point. Scum Skrammen Drem While re-reading I read enough from Toad to convince me he probably wasn't scum, doing so had the opposite effect on SKrammen. He hasn't made any attempt to redeem himself in order to avoid a lynching. He hasn't tried to pressure others, which sounds like he doesn't NEED information because he already knows it. Drem is scummy to me after a reread. He's inconsistant, and his posts lack the attack of most people, which leads me to believe something similar, he's not interested in hearing a defense. [purple]Unknown[/purple] Zanfa xksxksd These are 2 I simply can't place. I don't think either has posted enough to get a particularly good read from, and through my guessing above, one of the 2 has to be scum. In my opinion Zanfa has come off as more scummy to me. He's quietly slipping onto the bandwagons, and reading his posts it almost seems like he's trying to avoid creating any kind of waves that might cause people to focus on him. xkskckxk has been more committed when he has tried to apply pressure, and seems to me just like a bit of a newbie who didn't want to go out on a limb early on, as his posts have increased recently, whereas Zanfa's seem to just stagnate. That's what I think at the moment. Who gets shot tonight is probably going to play the biggest role, as Toad said. That alone might give us the information we need. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
| ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
But is SKrammen REALLY that obvious? We originally thought that risk.nuke kill was potentially scum trying to shift attention away from him, since it implicated anyone except for him. I'm going to go with the obvious here. SKrammen absolutely has to be scum. I don't know if anyone doesn't have him on their scum list anymore either. So an early vote to make my intentions known: ##vote SKrammen Sorry to Toad for suspecting you for so long It seems that as soon as a couple more of us came round to believing you were town, you got punished for it. That makes me think the scum are the low-middle activity people for certain. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
You've been suspicious since Day 1, and your posting pattern reinforces the want to vote you. You were quiet on Day 1, stepping out late to defend yourself and barely not getting lynched, but you left it pretty late to do so. Over the next day or so you were pretty quiet, lying low and staying unassuming until the hyshes bandwagon formed, which you jumped on pretty late. Your posts have said very little in the way of content, and you haven't particularly attempted to pressure anyone. You said if hyshes flips green you'll be having a good hard look at Drem, but your post about him didn't REALLY say much. Also your posts seem to express the most suspicion of Drem, and yet you haven't committed to a vote or pressure on him since then. Also this quote: Regarding the Me vs. Toadsstern thing, at this point two options seem to be possible: 1. One of us is scum. This seems to be the general consensus, and we've been in each others throat for most of this game. But if toad was green then the mafia should have used this, because if Toad gets killed by mafia, I would have been lynched already. But if we consider Toad to be a mafia, the scum will not touch me, because if I die it gives you pretty good information on him. 2. Neither of us are scum. I'm not quite sure about this, but I've mentioned this previously. I think this is the least likely of the two. You offered the fact that if Toad gets killed by mafia, you would be lynched. You also quite rightfully (in my opinion) let us know that the most likely option is one of the 2 of you are scum. Well now we know which one isn't, it's a fairly simple deduction as to who is. If I were to make a list of people who I think are town and who I think are scum, it would look exactly like the one I did do earlier. + Show Spoiler + On November 07 2011 22:33 IMABUNNEH wrote: Right having taken the time to reread everything, I can say one thing - I think I was wrong on the Skrammen/Toad thing. Not wrong as such, but wrong to remain so stubbornly fixated on Toad from day 1. Having taken a stepback and read everything through again, I'm going to step out and say who I think is what. Town Harbinger Ciry Toad This isn't an uncommon feeling at this point I guess, though my decision on Toad might look odd to people, so I'll explain that briefly. Despite receiving varying amounts of pressure on every single day, he hasn't been afraid to continue to stand up and make himself heard. What's convinced me the most though isn't that he's attached himself to the other 2, but that they all 3 sort of slowly came together on opinions over the last couple of days. Now either it's a FANTASTIC mafia ploy and they are the 3 scum, but I find that so unlikely at this point. Scum Skrammen Drem While re-reading I read enough from Toad to convince me he probably wasn't scum, doing so had the opposite effect on SKrammen. He hasn't made any attempt to redeem himself in order to avoid a lynching. He hasn't tried to pressure others, which sounds like he doesn't NEED information because he already knows it. Drem is scummy to me after a reread. He's inconsistant, and his posts lack the attack of most people, which leads me to believe something similar, he's not interested in hearing a defense. [purple]Unknown[/purple] Zanfa xksxksd These are 2 I simply can't place. I don't think either has posted enough to get a particularly good read from, and through my guessing above, one of the 2 has to be scum. In my opinion Zanfa has come off as more scummy to me. He's quietly slipping onto the bandwagons, and reading his posts it almost seems like he's trying to avoid creating any kind of waves that might cause people to focus on him. xkskckxk has been more committed when he has tried to apply pressure, and seems to me just like a bit of a newbie who didn't want to go out on a limb early on, as his posts have increased recently, whereas Zanfa's seem to just stagnate. That's what I think at the moment. Who gets shot tonight is probably going to play the biggest role, as Toad said. That alone might give us the information we need. Nothing done since that post has shown me that there's any variation to that. My suspicions that Toad is actually green were made known along with that of one or 2 others (I think) not too long before his death. I get the feeling he was originally planned as a bandwagon lynch if people started getting it right, with a good number (as evidenced by the Chocolate days initial votes) of people thinking he was scum. When people started coming round to the idea he wasn't, he was immediately pinged off as one of the biggest threats to any scum. Especially as his case was on Drem and SKrammen, both people I have on my "they're scum" list. I find that an unlikely coincidence. If you're scum the risk.nuke kill makes sense (of course you wouldn't kill someone defending you), and the Toad kill later in the game makes sense for reasons I already explained. I'm more convinced than I am about anyone else anyway. Also note that your arguments against votes and suspicions have MOSTLY been "I think that argument is weak", without really explaining why it's weak, or why your arguments are stronger. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
1) Assuming I stand by my idea that either SKrammen or Toads had to be a mafia, then if I make the decision that SKrammen seems far more scummy than Toads to me, then it eliminates Toads as a red. 2) Toads has been a suspect since day 1, I've pressured him as have others basically every day, and he hasn't once baulked under the pressure. He's maintained composure, and given fully reasoned answers when something has been asked of him. SKrammen practically disappeared while under pressure, and seems to struggle to answer reasonably basic attempts to probe him without resorting to "Your argument sucks" (paraphrasing) type responses. 3) Toads appeared to have the trust of both yourself and Ciry. We know for a fact now that all 3 of you weren't scum buddies rising to the top. Ciry and Toads both bring experience, though I can't remember if you're newbie or not, and I would assume that more seasoned players would have definite reasons in their mind to "trust" someone. I identified you as someone I thought was probably town a while back. Toads was confident about both you and Ciry, and as he has flipped green, and the 3 of you were more or less voting together before that, logic follows that you're PROBABLY safe bets between the 3 of you. 4) Toads has got votes wrong, so has SKrammen. But Toads made much more effort to explain his votes and try and get people to see his point of view. SKrammen hardly does that at all, instead making a vote or a choice without that much to back it up. The decision came as I was learning that the mafia were likely to be below that top level of activity. risk.nuke was active and attacking people, he died. Toads was active and doing so, he died. Toads was smart enough I reckon not to risk shooting risk even as a double/whatever bluff, and did a lot to provoke people into talking. At the time I was changing my opinion, it was when I decided that I thought Toads was playing far to risky to be scum, I didn't think a red would REALLY be that Balls of Steel in his play. I'll note that I never REALLY intended to finish with my vote on Toads that day. I didn't want to drop what had been my prime suspect without forcing him to respond to votes first. Before the massive hyshes train, I liked and approved of the way he was posting. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 09 2011 18:10 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Also possibly of interest, here is every post of xsksc's where he mentions Bunneh: + Show Spoiler + And Bunneh, posts mentioning him in some way other than listing him in a vote count or asking why I voted him: + Show Spoiler + So assuming I rule out Harbinger for the time being, we have to go back on what we had prior to the hyshes thing. In my mind it continues to be as follows: 1) Skrammen or Toad. Only 1, but almost certainly one. Otherwise I'll be a monkey's uncle and entirely thrown through a loop. 2) Drem. More to come on that, but he's been semi-active, and some dodgy posts. 3) No idea. Perhaps Chocolate? I'd have thought possibly hackle, but my real guess is that he was a townie who just lost interest from the start. I don't have a real lead on a 3rd at the moment though. I'd like to hear more from xkxdkskd though. [purple]Unknown[/purple] Zanfa xksxksd These are 2 I simply can't place. I don't think either has posted enough to get a particularly good read from, and through my guessing above, one of the 2 has to be scum. In my opinion Zanfa has come off as more scummy to me. He's quietly slipping onto the bandwagons, and reading his posts it almost seems like he's trying to avoid creating any kind of waves that might cause people to focus on him. xkskckxk has been more committed when he has tried to apply pressure, and seems to me just like a bit of a newbie who didn't want to go out on a limb early on, as his posts have increased recently, whereas Zanfa's seem to just stagnate. Food for thought. Hmm... maybe that's part of the reason he hasn't really been on my radar. I'm pretty sure you'd get similar results with me/Chocolate, me/hyshes, me/hacklesermo, and me/risk.nuke (pre-death). To be fair, and it was brought up before, it's not like anyone has really put pressure on me either. If it was literally only one or 2 people, then I'd agree with you, but barely anyone has put any suspicion on me, and those that have have barely done more than question something I've said. Perhaps you'd like to pick up their slack if my lack of being suspicious is suspicious to you For Skrammen: Bunneh (11/8 21:55) Ciry (11/9 09:42) hackle/Sermo (11/9 11:18) xsksc (11/9 11:31) Drem (11/9 12:11) If we go on the assumption Harbinger is town, then there's a minimum of one mafia voting here (SKram and Zanfa have not voted and voted someone else respectively). That means either SKrammen has been thrown away, or SKrammen is innocent. If he is then we definately should be looking at the people on him. Especially the last 3 votes, Drem has already been up for the lynch before. Is it tonight or tomorrow we have to vote by? I think this needs looking at carefully with the quick bandwagon. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 10 2011 07:52 Drem903 wrote: ##unvote Skrammen ##vote IMAbunneh no hard feelings. Going to accept HoD's wisdom and try to avoid a mislynch. I'll catch up with a full post on proposed scum when I haven't just got home from the pub. In the meantime it looks like we're going for a no-lynch? I'm going to stick with the plan and trust you guys know what you're doing (I don't fully understand what's going on RIGHT now, curses be to a few pints), but I need to vote for who voted for me right? Correct me if I'm wrong and I'll swap my vote to what's needed. #unvote SKrammen ##vote Drem903 | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
##vote xsksc | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
So HarbingerOfDoom - Townie xsksc Ciryandor - Townie sermokala Skrammen - Claims Medic. Drem903 IMABUNNEH This is what we have to go on, that's assuming everyone is right about Harbinger and Ciry. God help us if we're not. The fact that nobody is arguing with SKrammen's medic claim leads me to believe that he must be a medic. If he wasn't the real medic would have stepped in by now I'd assume. That leaves xkkscsk, sermo, Drem and myself. That means I only have one possible proposed scum list: Drem Sermo xkssdksc Am I right in thinking we need a lynch today, since if SKrammen IS medic and dies then 3v3 is a lose? In that case We HAVE to make sure we're correct, which means lynching someone we're certain on. The question you should ask is who are you certain of? For those 3, I'm sure their list will replace myself with them, so we have the 4 "obvious" choices, and need to cut us down immediately. We can't mislynch today. What does everyone think of each of the 4 of us? Who is most likely scum? We need EVERYONE to agree, and I want to see everyone's opinions, because that will show us who is most likely scum. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 12 2011 04:48 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: And wait a second...hahahahaha, you saved me? No wonder Bunneh put off that post analyzing me, he thought I'd be dead. No lol. I don't know if you've noticed, but I'm both not as active as I want to be (especially the days I'm doing shit), and I'm also kind of lazy. If I was scum, don't you think I would have made sure it went up before you died? If I was red (hint: I'm not), then getting it up earlier would let me play the whole "Oh my god I got him killed woe is me!" kind of speech, which would make me instantly popular right? No, you've read too much into that. The other 3 are obviously the scum. You want me to analyse their posting to prove that it's them and not me, but people did the same for hyshes and Chocolate and look how well that turned out. At this point whether I was scum or green I could write anything I wanted to implicate people. But protip, we know that of the 4 of us, 3 must be scum right? If you think it's me, despite me doing far more to try and help us than people like sermo, xksccsx, and Drem (who has succeeded pretty well in pushing attention just around him) then by all means go ahead and lose us the game. Or you could do the smart thing and vote for someone who is far more confirmed red than me and make your judgement based on that. I'm also not the one who spent a day saying "OH MY GOD YOU GUYS ARE STUPID THIS GUY IS OBVIOUSLY RED", and when they flipped green, spent my next few posts telling everyone "OH MY GOD YOU GUYS ARE SO STUPID SHEEP WE LOSE NOW GG" We all need to agree on a lynch right? At least agree on one you actually know, rather than a half-assed "It all adds up!" Do we have until tonight or tomorrow night? | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
On November 12 2011 12:04 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Argues he isn't scum. Knows we need to lynch or we lose. At the time he last posted there were not enough votes to pass the lynch. Claims to be unsure of the deadline. Doesn't vote with us on Sermokala who should essentially be confirmed scum to him before a time he thinks the deadline might be. MAKES PERFECT SENSE Isn't scum Read and worked out we need to lynch or lose Was unsure of the deadline Double checked the deadline after posting because realised "duh" Chose not to vote anyone just yet Still have 24 hours to vote If I have to vote for Sermo to get a lynch, I will. If we change our mind and decide to pick someone else between now and then, I'll vote for them. ##vota semokala but only because I trust Harb's judgement. It's a vote to at least make it clear I'll be voting with what you think is best regardless. | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
Reading the Observer QT gave me more information than the game did! :D All in all had fun, learned some things, and somehow avoided being asked anything real for the majority of the game. Looking forward to maybe playing another one soon | ||
|
IMABUNNEH
United Kingdom1062 Posts
) after I got a footing on what people were looking for what. I KNOW I made multiple mistakes and scumslips having read back, but I think other than that switch on Day 1, what I was saying/contributing worked within this specific game if nothing else. I get the feeling that depending on who you're playing with changes how you need to play the game. | ||
| ||
