|
BTW palmar is on his way, I just messaged him on steam.
|
and before i can even finish typing....
|
On November 10 2011 06:46 Curu wrote:
Man, I would play HoN again if the new heroes didn't look so damn ridiculously strong.
I want my DotA 2 T_T
I applied for a key...
|
guys I am truely sorry for some of the shitfest that happened today. Almost the second I started the game, college decided to unleash a combo move on me. the reason I didnt replace out was I knew it would be over in like a few days, and could hopefully make up the time after i was free. it was unfortunate that right when i was free was LYLO, and the spike in activity was, as I thought, used against me. I think If i had been more availible earlier on, the choice between me and WBG would have been a bit more clear.
I actually was beginning to doubt GM as scum, because I see no reason why scum would ever do what happened that night, unless it was for pure troll purpose.
Kitared, i hope you understand my skeptisism of your claim throughout the entire game. I was running through the scenario in my head that t you/GM were scum near the end, and you withholding your info didnt help me dissuade that  I see now why you were holding it back though.
|
Oh and LotR definatly didnt help me in the "kita's complicated fakeclaims dont work well" department.
|
Thanks for hosting palmar, Team melee is...interesting.
|
On November 10 2011 07:32 supersoft wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 07:31 GreYMisT wrote:
Thanks for hosting palmar, Team melee is...interesting. btw.: GG Grey! Was a lot of fun to play with you :D
Thanks same here, And because i have to rub it in...
GreY
11-07-2011
05:36 PM ET (US)
EDIT
DELETE
What sets me off a bit about WBG is the fact that he seems to be his normal aggressive self, but beneath that he is jumping from person to person a lot. the town WBG that i know makes damn sure everyone votes for who he thinks is scum. This is more like his play in MLP mafia where he jumped around a lot.
35
GreY
11-07-2011
01:31 AM ET (US)
I think due to timezones you are going to be more active than i will around lynch time. Know that at the present moment Im fine with nipple or SS, probally more SS atm. Its up to your discretion ultimatly though.
Also be wary of WBG, I not sure if i trust him to be town. I dont have much more than a feeling atm, but dont take everything he says at face value.
From our QT. Who was right?! ^^
|
On November 10 2011 07:34 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 07:28 Palmar wrote:On November 10 2011 07:22 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 10 2011 07:20 Palmar wrote:On November 10 2011 07:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
I couldn't bus Kurumi when he and RoL both came in at extremely odd times to soft defend us.
I even repeatedly sent Kurumi PMs telling him what I wanted him to do and every single time I'd look in the thread and there'd be this random single post that would make me and Radfield look like shit.
And I disagree with you completely on the day 3 business. I really don't think I got lynched on day 3 for any fault of my own. That lynch literally could've swung either way, and all the facts were on my side.
I know for a fact I would've hated to be in GM's or super's shoes as town. We were in a good spot. Town just flipped a coin and it landed correctly.
Also follow the cop IS an issue with the parity. All they need to do is check people who don't die and they have more than enough information on day 3. We couldn't do anything about a day 1 claim. That isn't our fault at all. I completely agree that you didn't HAVE to bus, but it was the safest way to win. But yes, the problem lay in you guys already having screwed up that opportunity, leaving it down to a decision on where RedFF and Kita would stand, which was unfortunately unfavorable to you. And of course you got lynched by your own fault, you have to remember, they only know either you guys or S&G are scum, you lost that argument to supersoft and greymist because they played well enough. It basically came down to a simple duel between S&G and Chezinu, and S&G came out on top this time. lol I really do disagree with this, but I'm not going to argue about it anymore because I know I'm more than a little mad right now. This game was extremely frustrating to me because I knew as soon as kita+red claimed on day 1 that it was going to be incredibly hard to win. I did my best, and we lost. Oh well. You did your best, the rest of your team didn't. You cannot argue with what's a fact. It really did come down to a 1v1 argument where both of you raced to convince the deciding team you were town, a race you lost. You made a few mistakes, but overall you played a really solid mafia game. The problem lies in your team. The fact you defended Kurumi and RoL multiple times throughout the game because they simply couldn't be arsed looking innocent, the fact that the Radfield side of your team who could've complemented your aggressive style with big solid posts very well was for the most part missing.... Those were the things that lost the game. There is no such thing as winning a game as mafia alone, you have to do it as a team because you never know when shit hits the fan. I found this out in personality where I was happily leading town until a random watcher found me out and suddenly the rest of the team had to scramble. The setup may have been slightly town favoured, after a very successful day1/night1 cycle, mafia was in prime position to win, all they had to do was to establish themselves as town and distance, because the parity cop could NEVER have more than one check because you found the doctor. Right, but one check is all the PC needed in a day 3 situation when there are four other players left. Think about it. If the PC gets one confirmed townie, then the PC just needs to muddy the check and then figure out which one is the last townie. If the PC gets two people as the same parity in the endgame situation, game just proceeds with preceding analysis. The only situation in which the PC has less than a 50% chance to score scum on day 3 is if both the checks died. No matter how we could've played it, town would've had at least a 50% chance to score scum on day 3. All you need is one shred of analysis and a bunch of dumb luck and you win the game right there. EDIT: Plus yeah, one of us getting lynched normally wouldn't end the game but with 3 afk partners=lol
But on day3 with 3 town 2 scum you have bassically a 50% chance to hit scum anyway, regardless of the settup
|
On November 10 2011 07:46 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 07:41 Palmar wrote:On November 10 2011 07:34 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 10 2011 07:28 Palmar wrote:On November 10 2011 07:22 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 10 2011 07:20 Palmar wrote:On November 10 2011 07:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
I couldn't bus Kurumi when he and RoL both came in at extremely odd times to soft defend us.
I even repeatedly sent Kurumi PMs telling him what I wanted him to do and every single time I'd look in the thread and there'd be this random single post that would make me and Radfield look like shit.
And I disagree with you completely on the day 3 business. I really don't think I got lynched on day 3 for any fault of my own. That lynch literally could've swung either way, and all the facts were on my side.
I know for a fact I would've hated to be in GM's or super's shoes as town. We were in a good spot. Town just flipped a coin and it landed correctly.
Also follow the cop IS an issue with the parity. All they need to do is check people who don't die and they have more than enough information on day 3. We couldn't do anything about a day 1 claim. That isn't our fault at all. I completely agree that you didn't HAVE to bus, but it was the safest way to win. But yes, the problem lay in you guys already having screwed up that opportunity, leaving it down to a decision on where RedFF and Kita would stand, which was unfortunately unfavorable to you. And of course you got lynched by your own fault, you have to remember, they only know either you guys or S&G are scum, you lost that argument to supersoft and greymist because they played well enough. It basically came down to a simple duel between S&G and Chezinu, and S&G came out on top this time. lol I really do disagree with this, but I'm not going to argue about it anymore because I know I'm more than a little mad right now. This game was extremely frustrating to me because I knew as soon as kita+red claimed on day 1 that it was going to be incredibly hard to win. I did my best, and we lost. Oh well. You did your best, the rest of your team didn't. You cannot argue with what's a fact. It really did come down to a 1v1 argument where both of you raced to convince the deciding team you were town, a race you lost. You made a few mistakes, but overall you played a really solid mafia game. The problem lies in your team. The fact you defended Kurumi and RoL multiple times throughout the game because they simply couldn't be arsed looking innocent, the fact that the Radfield side of your team who could've complemented your aggressive style with big solid posts very well was for the most part missing.... Those were the things that lost the game. There is no such thing as winning a game as mafia alone, you have to do it as a team because you never know when shit hits the fan. I found this out in personality where I was happily leading town until a random watcher found me out and suddenly the rest of the team had to scramble. The setup may have been slightly town favoured, after a very successful day1/night1 cycle, mafia was in prime position to win, all they had to do was to establish themselves as town and distance, because the parity cop could NEVER have more than one check because you found the doctor. Right, but one check is all the PC needed in a day 3 situation when there are four other players left. Think about it. If the PC gets one confirmed townie, then the PC just needs to muddy the check and then figure out which one is the last townie. If the PC gets two people as the same parity in the endgame situation, game just proceeds with preceding analysis. The only situation in which the PC has less than a 50% chance to score scum on day 3 is if both the checks died. No matter how we could've played it, town would've had at least a 50% chance to score scum on day 3. All you need is one shred of analysis and a bunch of dumb luck and you win the game right there. Town had exactly 50% chance of killing scum on day 3. last time I checked 50/50 is quite balanced isn't it? And technically it's not that bad if scum dies on day 3, you just shoot parity cop during the night, and you have another 50/50 shot to win the game. Because of your good first 2 days, you guys were set up to have 2x 50/50 chance of winning the game. That's odds anyone should take. It's always gonna come down to it in mafia, it's what the game is about, having to convince people in a 1v1 situation. This time it was S&G vs Chezinu, each team has equal chances of convincing red/kita they're town. If Chezinu wins it ends the game, but this time S&G won the duel. But Nipple didn't have to give up. Shoot, Red21, and then it's another 50/50 fight, where Nipple and GM fight to convince S&G they're scum. At this point it's perfectly balanced, in my opinion. The problem is you had to go too much out of your way earlier in the game due to lazy play by the rest of the scum, so you were already at a disadvantage. 50/50 is incredibly good chances for town when they've mislynched for two days straight. EDIT: I mean really, put it in perspective. They mislynch twice and then suddenly they're actually FAVORED to kill scum. Without the check it's still 50/50, but that's the cap. With the check it's higher than that because the check inherently gives way more information.
thats something you really can't fix though. if we assume a settup with 8 town and 2 scum, the town has a 20% chance to random a scum. As they fail, the scum and town numbers reach an equillibrium, bringing it close to 50%. Town doesnt truely have a favored odds to lynch scum, because if it ever reaches exactly 50% the game is over because scum can control and neutralize the lynch.
|
The reason why town wasnt completely screwed at the end was only 1/4th of the mafia team was actually present at all. If the other 3 components were assembled it might have been a different story.
|
On November 10 2011 09:07 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 09:05 kitaman27 wrote:On November 10 2011 09:02 Ace wrote: He can play this card from both alignments, hence you can't even take his excuse of doing it to WIFOM the Mafia seriously. The Town would have lost but it was the correct play. If it could have come from both alignments, you discard the information and base the lynch on the other 70 pages. Carrying out a policy lynch just for the sake of policy doesn't make sense. It wouldn't have been a policy lynch. Also in the end you guys disregarded your own thoughts prior to the night that team S&G was scummy. When both team S&G and I said the same thing, and I pointed out how I would "never" shoot chaoser in such a situation, you should've realized that the only chance I would've shot chaoser is if we had a proper role check on night 1 on either chaoser or GM that confirmed one/the other as lying. That's a 1/3 chance we role checked one of them, way too low to be dealing with in a LYLO situation. So, since you got opposite parity checks, you should've insta-lynched GM. That didn't happen for whatever reason (I'm still not sure why I got lynched, actually) but whatever.
I think the problem arose when most of us listed team nipple and team we are marshal as our 2 scum. being forced to choose between the two really threw us off.
|
On November 10 2011 09:09 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 09:05 kitaman27 wrote:On November 10 2011 09:02 Ace wrote: He can play this card from both alignments, hence you can't even take his excuse of doing it to WIFOM the Mafia seriously. The Town would have lost but it was the correct play. If it could have come from both alignments, you discard the information and base the lynch on the other 70 pages. Carrying out a policy lynch just for the sake of policy doesn't make sense. This isn't a policy lynch. It is a LYLO and someone has been found to be lying about a Role claim. You can't tell if he is Town or Scum because his alibi is acceptable for both alignments so you can't take it at face value. What you do know is that he claimed a role, and the actual REAL role died. What happened in the other 70 pages that can overturn this scenario?
Regardless, its a good thing we didnt kill him, lol
|
On November 10 2011 10:59 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 09:10 GreYMisT wrote:On November 10 2011 09:09 Ace wrote:On November 10 2011 09:05 kitaman27 wrote:On November 10 2011 09:02 Ace wrote: He can play this card from both alignments, hence you can't even take his excuse of doing it to WIFOM the Mafia seriously. The Town would have lost but it was the correct play. If it could have come from both alignments, you discard the information and base the lynch on the other 70 pages. Carrying out a policy lynch just for the sake of policy doesn't make sense. This isn't a policy lynch. It is a LYLO and someone has been found to be lying about a Role claim. You can't tell if he is Town or Scum because his alibi is acceptable for both alignments so you can't take it at face value. What you do know is that he claimed a role, and the actual REAL role died. What happened in the other 70 pages that can overturn this scenario? Regardless, its a good thing we didnt kill him, lol This statement means you completely missed the point of everything Ace said.
No i understand, He is saying that a smart town would have killed GMarshal because his plan was chaotic and very indicative of scum play, and we didnt do it because we were dumb.
I'm saying its a good thing we were dumb, or we would have lost
|
On November 10 2011 11:03 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 11:02 GreYMisT wrote:On November 10 2011 10:59 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:On November 10 2011 09:10 GreYMisT wrote:On November 10 2011 09:09 Ace wrote:On November 10 2011 09:05 kitaman27 wrote:On November 10 2011 09:02 Ace wrote: He can play this card from both alignments, hence you can't even take his excuse of doing it to WIFOM the Mafia seriously. The Town would have lost but it was the correct play. If it could have come from both alignments, you discard the information and base the lynch on the other 70 pages. Carrying out a policy lynch just for the sake of policy doesn't make sense. This isn't a policy lynch. It is a LYLO and someone has been found to be lying about a Role claim. You can't tell if he is Town or Scum because his alibi is acceptable for both alignments so you can't take it at face value. What you do know is that he claimed a role, and the actual REAL role died. What happened in the other 70 pages that can overturn this scenario? Regardless, its a good thing we didnt kill him, lol This statement means you completely missed the point of everything Ace said. No i understand, He is saying that a smart town would have killed GMarshal because his plan was chaotic and very indicative of scum play, and we didnt do it because we were dumb. I'm saying its a good thing we were dumb, or we would have lost This is gold LOL It should go in the postgame analysis
eh, play to win. whatever works.
|
On November 10 2011 11:05 wherebugsgo wrote:
That's not a very good example to set for newbies lol.
Next thing you know you'll have 3 new players fake claiming medic before LYLO every game
you know what I mean. this situation is comprable to starcraft or any game really. you could say "well i lost because any good player would have expanded to the 12:00, but you expanded to the 6 like a noob" Hope that metaphor makes sense, it does in my head.
Do i agree that if this situation was played 100 times, and in each of those 100 times someone fakeclaimed medic right before LYLO, that person probally shoudl be lynched? Yea, that would probally be optimal. However each game is a different situation, thats what makes the game playable. Some situations you can't approach like a computer, because humanity and emotion is invovled. Thats why this situation worked out for us, we took a calculated risk, at least i did, and it payed off.
|
On November 10 2011 11:14 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 11:02 GreYMisT wrote:On November 10 2011 10:59 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:On November 10 2011 09:10 GreYMisT wrote:On November 10 2011 09:09 Ace wrote:On November 10 2011 09:05 kitaman27 wrote:On November 10 2011 09:02 Ace wrote: He can play this card from both alignments, hence you can't even take his excuse of doing it to WIFOM the Mafia seriously. The Town would have lost but it was the correct play. If it could have come from both alignments, you discard the information and base the lynch on the other 70 pages. Carrying out a policy lynch just for the sake of policy doesn't make sense. This isn't a policy lynch. It is a LYLO and someone has been found to be lying about a Role claim. You can't tell if he is Town or Scum because his alibi is acceptable for both alignments so you can't take it at face value. What you do know is that he claimed a role, and the actual REAL role died. What happened in the other 70 pages that can overturn this scenario? Regardless, its a good thing we didnt kill him, lol This statement means you completely missed the point of everything Ace said. No i understand, He is saying that a smart town would have killed GMarshal because his plan was chaotic and very indicative of scum play, and we didnt do it because we were dumb. I'm saying its a good thing we were dumb, or we would have lost It's lucky, not good. That's the mistake you are making. It's like saying if Option A is correct 90% of the time, but you guys chose option B, which is only right 10% of the time and somehow B ends up being right it doesn't mean that B is a good decision just because is somehow worked out. That's basically the idea behind LAL and why dumb luck =/= good play.
But does good play matter if everytime you have a choice between A and B and B is right, you lose? and then in the post game here we are going "well shucks, I guess i hope next time A is right"
|
Ace, the only point of your argument seems to be to make damn sure that none of us feel good about winning.
Am i correct in thinking that you are saying that when GM made that claim and the medic flipped, we should have instant lynched him and lost the game? I understand that scum can claim just as well as town can, thats why I didnt believe kitaman's claim the entire game. I just refuse to believe the "correct" play for town is to lose the game.
|
Rather than being told about how bad we are, I would like to actually hear ways we can improve.
Feels like im playing DotA in here or something
|
On November 10 2011 13:20 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 13:16 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 10 2011 13:00 prplhz wrote:
But this is a game of behavioral analysis and not a game of statistics or logic? Or lynching people just to teach them a lesson ... what the fuck ofc it's a game of logic But it's that only when people behave logically? I mean sometimes stuff is logical, but then if like people count on me to act logically you'll be very disappointed and maybe you have to account for that or something? Like if I suck and then you're like "of course he's a genius like everybody else because why wouldn't everybody be a genius" and then I totally fooled you because I suck and stuff like that. Or what ... ?
And thus WIFOM was born
|
On November 10 2011 13:41 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 13:31 redFF wrote:
so we won because we are terrible? yay? SC analogy? You're D- rank and you just won by going deep six off no scouting. Ace is Bisu.
what map?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
