|
On November 16 2011 09:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
Please elaborate how making cases out of nothing does anything to pressure scum?
As soon as you make a baseless case on a scummy or dummy townie they can begin fabricating analysis. In fact, you could lead the whole thread to believe your target is scum when there is no real reason for them to be scum in the first place.
I think we should approach this game more carefully. We have multiple lynches but we will be hurting ourselves if we end up lynching multiple townies instead of scum.
As soon as you make a baseless case on a scummy or dummy townie they can begin fabricating analysis. In fact, you could lead the whole thread to believe your target is scum when there is no real reason for them to be scum in the first place.
I didn't fabricate analysis though. Forumite built a shitty case on LSB out of nothing. The difference between him and I is that I didn't try to hide my case behind long paragraphs and shitty reasoning. I just went "lawl scum *vote*"
But back onto the topic of pressuring:
In XXXIX redtooth makes a bullshit case on Irish_Punk with no real reason and I followed up on his vote. There is no "leading the whole thread" in that game at all because the natural reaction to a bullshit vote is to go "wtf?", especially when clearly there was no real case in the first place. Who is going to be lead along by "lawl scum, *vote*" as the only reason for voting someone? No one, as was true in that game (people ended up voting Kurumi off 6 votes compared to the 2 on Irish)
Anyway, due to the random no reasoning pressure, Irish overreacts and responds in a crazy manner. This then created discussion; At my expense though =[. More importantly, because of how he responded to the situation and how the rest of the players responded to his response of the situation, I was able to get a solid read on about half the thread and ended up pinning two other players as being mafia. My day two read/suspicious/vote was on amber was completely based around the fact that he was very flaky between voting Kurumi and being suspicious of Irish.
Then I directed a vigi shot at GGQ due to how he handled the Amber lynch.
|
If there wasn't a majority lynch in play, I'd put my vote on everyone, and start taking off people who don't register as scum. That's about how many people I think should be lynched each day.
GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE!
|
|
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On November 16 2011 10:40 chaoser wrote:+ Show Spoiler +But back onto the topic of pressuring:
In XXXIX redtooth makes a bullshit case on Irish_Punk with no real reason and I followed up on his vote. There is no "leading the whole thread" in that game at all because the natural reaction to a bullshit vote is to go "wtf?", especially when clearly there was no real case in the first place. Who is going to be lead along by "lawl scum, *vote*" as the only reason for voting someone? No one, as was true in that game (people ended up voting Kurumi off 6 votes compared to the 2 on Irish)
Anyway, due to the random no reasoning pressure, Irish overreacts and responds in a crazy manner. This then created discussion; At my expense though =[. More importantly, because of how he responded to the situation and how the rest of the players responded to his response of the situation, I was able to get a solid read on about half the thread and ended up pinning two other players as being mafia. My day two read/suspicious/vote was on amber was completely based around the fact that he was very flaky between voting Kurumi and being suspicious of Irish.
Then I directed a vigi shot at GGQ due to how he handled the Amber lynch.
And then you proceeded to lose.
*Back to lurking
|
On November 16 2011 10:40 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 09:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
Please elaborate how making cases out of nothing does anything to pressure scum?
As soon as you make a baseless case on a scummy or dummy townie they can begin fabricating analysis. In fact, you could lead the whole thread to believe your target is scum when there is no real reason for them to be scum in the first place.
I think we should approach this game more carefully. We have multiple lynches but we will be hurting ourselves if we end up lynching multiple townies instead of scum. Show nested quote +As soon as you make a baseless case on a scummy or dummy townie they can begin fabricating analysis. In fact, you could lead the whole thread to believe your target is scum when there is no real reason for them to be scum in the first place. I didn't fabricate analysis though. Forumite built a shitty case on LSB out of nothing. The difference between him and I is that I didn't try to hide my case behind long paragraphs and shitty reasoning. I just went "lawl scum *vote*" But back onto the topic of pressuring: In XXXIX redtooth makes a bullshit case on Irish_Punk with no real reason and I followed up on his vote. There is no "leading the whole thread" in that game at all because the natural reaction to a bullshit vote is to go "wtf?", especially when clearly there was no real case in the first place. Who is going to be lead along by "lawl scum, *vote*" as the only reason for voting someone? No one, as was true in that game (people ended up voting Kurumi off 6 votes compared to the 2 on Irish) Anyway, due to the random no reasoning pressure, Irish overreacts and responds in a crazy manner. This then created discussion; At my expense though =[. More importantly, because of how he responded to the situation and how the rest of the players responded to his response of the situation, I was able to get a solid read on about half the thread and ended up pinning two other players as being mafia. My day two read/suspicious/vote was on amber was completely based around the fact that he was very flaky between voting Kurumi and being suspicious of Irish. Then I directed a vigi shot at GGQ due to how he handled the Amber lynch.
Thats the problem though, because with your first vote you didnt fabricate analysis, because you didn't make any analysis until I prompted you.
And This is directed at a lot of people, but whats up with reciting the history of a bunch of past games? I mean unless you are using it for meta analysis it servers only to act as filler really.
|
WBG, you also said that we should lynch perferably 3 people today, but focus on only one target during the eairler portions. Don't you think its going to be difficult to decide when we have all decided to lynch someone, and then ignore everything they say while we work out who else to kill? While i feel the same that we should keep focused on one person per day, I think that it would better serve to keep the multi lynch in reserve unless we can all agree to use it.
|
On November 16 2011 11:07 kitaman27 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 10:40 chaoser wrote:+ Show Spoiler +But back onto the topic of pressuring:
In XXXIX redtooth makes a bullshit case on Irish_Punk with no real reason and I followed up on his vote. There is no "leading the whole thread" in that game at all because the natural reaction to a bullshit vote is to go "wtf?", especially when clearly there was no real case in the first place. Who is going to be lead along by "lawl scum, *vote*" as the only reason for voting someone? No one, as was true in that game (people ended up voting Kurumi off 6 votes compared to the 2 on Irish)
Anyway, due to the random no reasoning pressure, Irish overreacts and responds in a crazy manner. This then created discussion; At my expense though =[. More importantly, because of how he responded to the situation and how the rest of the players responded to his response of the situation, I was able to get a solid read on about half the thread and ended up pinning two other players as being mafia. My day two read/suspicious/vote was on amber was completely based around the fact that he was very flaky between voting Kurumi and being suspicious of Irish.
Then I directed a vigi shot at GGQ due to how he handled the Amber lynch. And then you proceeded to lose. * Back to lurking
Not my fault. I blame rest of town. I gave them a 1 KP mafia by end of Day 3 and they lost it =[
|
Thats the problem though, because with your first vote you didnt fabricate analysis, because you didn't make any analysis until I prompted you.
And This is directed at a lot of people, but whats up with reciting the history of a bunch of past games? I mean unless you are using it for meta analysis it servers only to act as filler really.
??? Ok...? That's what I did in XXXIX too? WBG asked me how that was a valid strategy as town since he couldn't see how it would be helpful and so I explained it to him. Using an old game as an example is the easiest/quickest way
|
Ah alright, I thought you were talking about your meta or something like that. Anyway, I can't beleive that chaoser was the only one to question this nonsense.
On November 16 2011 09:07 sinani206 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 09:06 Drazerk wrote:On November 16 2011 09:03 sinani206 wrote:
wtf
##Vote: chaoser Your not going to lurk the first day, come out of no where and then vote chaoser without reason. FoS sinani206 His posts this game are nothing like what I've seem out of him before and even if I hadn't played with him before, the posts are straight up scummy.
While Its too early for me to have a kickass town read on any player, I can't let this slip on by. What is this? This cannot be all you have to say about what you find "straight up scummy." I fail to see how you can come in here, call him scum, when you have barely been here yourself and this is all you have to offer.
It hasn't worked in the past few games, but maybe this time this will get some sense out of you.
##Vote: Sinani206
|
On November 16 2011 04:14 DCLXVI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 03:00 Sabin010 wrote:On November 16 2011 02:37 Zephirdd wrote:On November 16 2011 02:25 Tyrran wrote:On November 16 2011 01:59 Sabin010 wrote:
I agree about lynching liars, but if we're lynching lurkers because they're not active just doesn't seem to be a good way to go about this. If some one proposes we lynch a lurker, I'm not voting. So you are basically saying : " hey mafia, go lurk and stop posting and you'll be safe from me". I hope you understand how this is suspicious. Gotta agree with Tyrran here. Lurkers are bad for townies. That said, I don't want to just go on "lynch ALL the lurkers!" mode, but at least lynching one or two a day should make them stay in high alert. You know I never thought about it like that. did did you just not read the thread then? That option was brought up several times. @LSB I didn't know that kenpachi always townie claims day 1, it has been forever since I have played. It still does not allow him to post 2 other useless one liners and then leave. I just don't think that you should just write off kenpachi so quickly. Zephirrd confirmed early then came back later and actually posted stuff. Once I look that over and see if it is good material I can comment more on it, but at least he posted something. Kenpachi posted useless one liners in response to hiroruby (so there was stuff to talk about, he just decided not to) and then disappeared. I want to see more out out of Kenpachi than this. If he has played enough games for this behavior to be standard, then he should know that this doesn't help the town. ##Vote Kenpachi
This is one of the worst reason's I've heard on why to vote someone. I'm going to vote for someone because they play like normal. With someone as established as Kenpachi, he defiantly has a style of playing that should not be ignored
At the same time he has been useless, so I won't fault you on that.
On November 15 2011 20:44 Forumite wrote:/confirm Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 16:12 LSB wrote:On November 15 2011 15:49 DCLXVI wrote:damn I forgot people post while I'm in the middle of writing posts... ugh On November 15 2011 14:55 LSB wrote:On November 15 2011 14:19 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On November 15 2011 12:55 LSB wrote:
come to think about it, that does seem like a nice icebreaker. So everyone! How about lets talk about how you think mafia should be played, the importance of blues, what should we do with lurkers, and what majority lynch means. LAL?For your point on LAL, unless I have misread the OP, we only know what abilities are possible, not which are actually in the game, how they may have been combined into roles, nor how many of the role there may be. So, unless we have a cop of some variety, I don't know how you intend to find liars in this game. So were you just stating that as a general "in mafia games" rule, or did you have something in mind for this game in particular? I'd be interested in hearing how you intend to determine the liars given the setup. Lying will come up and you will be able to recognize it. The most prominent example is fake claims. So LAL means no fake claims. + Show Spoiler +Or it means don't get caught lying. Kenpachi's green claim would be an example of a potentially acceptable lie (if he is blue) as this early in the game any claims are meaningless So what is your position on Kenpachi claiming townie? At first you say LAL, but then lying can be acceptable in certain situations, such as kenpachi is blue. Then you say that his claim is meaningless as it is too early in the game. Does that make his post spam/intentionally distracting? Surely he is a good enough player to realize the importance of his claim. Can you explain your opinions on the subject rather than just post vague generalizations. Is kenpachi's claim worth analyzing/what does it mean? Wtf does this mean? Are you saying you are taking Kenpachi seriously? Stop talking hypotheticals, iirc you've played with Kenpachi before. Even if you have not you can go through his posts and figure out how he plays. In addition you've played before so you know how TL mafia is in the first few hours. I honestly don't see how I´m going to step in here. DCLXVI allready caught this and posted before me, but I don´t think my reason for noticing has been discussed. Okay, to me it looks like this; LSB wants us to Lynch All Liars. Kenpachi claimed Townie, but LSB doesn´t want us to take the Kenpachi claim seriously. My problem here is that either Kenpachi lied, or he just told Scum not to nightkill him, because it would be no use. If we are going to go by the LAL policy, then either Kenpachi lied or acted Pro-Scum, so why should we back off? Kenpachi does this every game, then we can ignore his claim, but what I don´t agree with is LSB promoting LAL wanting to ignore the claim, even if it is meta. It took him about 5 posts to go back on his own policy of Lynch All Liars. If Kenpachi lied (or play Pro-Scum), why does LSB then defend him after his first policy post? FoS LSB
Bandwagoning much?
I have no idea what you're trying to pretend I'm saying but from what it looks like, you didn't read my post and you are just parroting 666.
As for lynching 1-2 lurkers and 1-2 scum, sounds reasonable, I think we should stay at about that number for now. We need to be carefull about lynching, not just because of the consequences in the setup, but if we find 5 players who seem connected, then it´s better to lynch 1-2 and see if they are scum, than lynching all 5 at once and kill 5 innocent townies at once.
This doesn't mean anything. I fail to see how this is relevant to the game
On November 16 2011 04:42 Lemonwalrus wrote:
As far as lynching lurkers goes, I just thought of something.
If we decide to lynch lurkers one a day or something, I think that gives mafia a slight advantage, in that they will be able to, with their numbers, lead the vote to non-mafia lurkers before it gets to mafia lurkers. So say there are 3 town lurkers and 1 scum lurker, the scum will be able to vote and probably help the scum lurker be the last of the 4 lynched and they won't look bad in hindsight since they were just following the policy we had set forth to lynch a lurker a day. I don't really know what we could do to stop this but I'd like to at least discuss it before we start playing in to scum hands. I know lurking townies aren't particularly useful, but they are still a warm body that puts town that much further from losing. Idk, anybody have any suggestions?
You've played as mafia before, there is always multiple mafia lurkers and towards the end of the game it's hard to figure out who is who between town and mafia. I say we lynch people who are "impossible reads" starting day 2.
Take Lanaia for example. She hasn't posted anything substantial and stuck to commentary on the game as a whole. (Of course, she's probably going to come back and post more.)
|
On November 16 2011 11:39 GreYMisT wrote:
WBG, you also said that we should lynch perferably 3 people today, but focus on only one target during the eairler portions. Don't you think its going to be difficult to decide when we have all decided to lynch someone, and then ignore everything they say while we work out who else to kill? While i feel the same that we should keep focused on one person per day, I think that it would better serve to keep the multi lynch in reserve unless we can all agree to use it.
Nah, remember I said we need to all focus on one person until 24-36 hours before lynch.
Then we start consolidating to get multiple targets. Basically, if one person is working on a case on one person and one person only, it's more effective than if that one person tries splitting their attention to watch four or five at once. It's just not effective.
If we all focus on one target each and then evaluate toward the end of the day, we can sift through the best cases and work on lynching those. However we need activity in the last 24 hours to make this viable, and we'll rack up a lot of posts. But it'll hopefully be the best way to find scum.
What I don't want people doing is what chaoser is doing; just going out there and throwing votes left and right without actually thinking about them. Sure, you can do it if you want, but it's not going to be pretty. The thread will be a mess and you'll have multiple people OMGUSing because they're taking votes.
|
On November 16 2011 11:41 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 11:07 kitaman27 wrote:On November 16 2011 10:40 chaoser wrote:+ Show Spoiler +But back onto the topic of pressuring:
In XXXIX redtooth makes a bullshit case on Irish_Punk with no real reason and I followed up on his vote. There is no "leading the whole thread" in that game at all because the natural reaction to a bullshit vote is to go "wtf?", especially when clearly there was no real case in the first place. Who is going to be lead along by "lawl scum, *vote*" as the only reason for voting someone? No one, as was true in that game (people ended up voting Kurumi off 6 votes compared to the 2 on Irish)
Anyway, due to the random no reasoning pressure, Irish overreacts and responds in a crazy manner. This then created discussion; At my expense though =[. More importantly, because of how he responded to the situation and how the rest of the players responded to his response of the situation, I was able to get a solid read on about half the thread and ended up pinning two other players as being mafia. My day two read/suspicious/vote was on amber was completely based around the fact that he was very flaky between voting Kurumi and being suspicious of Irish.
Then I directed a vigi shot at GGQ due to how he handled the Amber lynch. And then you proceeded to lose. * Back to lurking Not my fault. I blame rest of town. I gave them a 1 KP mafia by end of Day 3 and they lost it =[
im too good at faking idiocy for you, i guess
lol
|
What I don't want people doing is what chaoser is doing; just going out there and throwing votes left and right without actually thinking about them. Sure, you can do it if you want, but it's not going to be pretty. The thread will be a mess and you'll have multiple people OMGUSing because they're taking votes.
How does my doing something--->lead to everyone else doing the same thing? That's quite a logical leap
The fact of the matter is the thread isn't going to be that messy as can be seen in a previous case where I did the same technique and in the end town gains from it.
|
(oooh I figured out you can find your userid from the filter function. What can't this wonderful invention do <3)
/spam
|
We got 48 hours from now, right? This time tomorrow we need to look at the votes and see where people stand. I'm honestly surprised how few votes there are, you get as many as you want, a decent townie can take advantage of this. There is no comparing how scummy certain players are to others, you just lynch them or you don't. I guess it's still early, and I'm still fishing for reads here.
|
On November 16 2011 09:46 wherebugsgo wrote:Chaoser filter link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366&user=41788&user=41788Chaoser right now is all over the place. He is not fostering positive discussion. He just OMGUSed sinani, he is pushing three different people right now, and he is using very little reasoning for all of those votes. Chaoser if you are town, you need to slow down and focus on one person so that your posts are more coherent and readable, or you need to provide more information about your vote targets. Right now you're being incredibly distracting, particularly as people have to keep asking you why you're voting the people you are voting. This OMGUS on sinani, for example:
You are saying that Chaoser is scum because he doesn't tunnel and doesn't play like you?
hmm...
Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 09:15 chaoser wrote:On November 16 2011 09:07 sinani206 wrote:On November 16 2011 09:06 Drazerk wrote:On November 16 2011 09:03 sinani206 wrote:
wtf
##Vote: chaoser Your not going to lurk the first day, come out of no where and then vote chaoser without reason. FoS sinani206 His posts this game are nothing like what I've seem out of him before and even if I hadn't played with him before, the posts are straight up scummy. 1) Deal with my posts being different. This use of "your posts are different" meta is so stupid I'd gladly post completely differently every single game to kill it. Can't tell if you're mafia or stupid >_> Also while the manner in which I post is different, the reasoning behind my posts isn't, (XXXIX) 2) How are my posts "straight up scummy?" ##Vote: Sinani206I'm so happy I get to vote multiple people If you can't tell if he's scum or dumb, why did you vote him? It makes no sense using your very own logic. If you can't tell someone's alignment, why would you vote them? Then, your attacks on Zephirrd are really bad too. He's a new player, and most of what he's saying makes sense. That's better than a lot of other new players. You even admit to making cases "out of nothing" as an attempt to create reactions from other players. That's not a good way to play town and you know it. You should be posting a case on someone after you have subtly pushed them for a while, instead of voting them the instant you think they've said something scummy. That's not reliable.
Wait, what's so bad about this attack http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366¤tpage=18#348? Or the other attacks, I'm having difficulty following your generalizations right now
|
Welcome to WBG logic. But that doesn't make what he says untrue, I think chaoser should focus his attention more and prove singleton cases rather then babble on about everything. Doubt he's scum though.
|
On November 16 2011 12:05 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 11:39 GreYMisT wrote:
WBG, you also said that we should lynch perferably 3 people today, but focus on only one target during the eairler portions. Don't you think its going to be difficult to decide when we have all decided to lynch someone, and then ignore everything they say while we work out who else to kill? While i feel the same that we should keep focused on one person per day, I think that it would better serve to keep the multi lynch in reserve unless we can all agree to use it.
Nah, remember I said we need to all focus on one person until 24-36 hours before lynch. Then we start consolidating to get multiple targets. Basically, if one person is working on a case on one person and one person only, it's more effective than if that one person tries splitting their attention to watch four or five at once. It's just not effective. If we all focus on one target each and then evaluate toward the end of the day, we can sift through the best cases and work on lynching those. However we need activity in the last 24 hours to make this viable, and we'll rack up a lot of posts. But it'll hopefully be the best way to find scum. What I don't want people doing is what chaoser is doing; just going out there and throwing votes left and right without actually thinking about them. Sure, you can do it if you want, but it's not going to be pretty. The thread will be a mess and you'll have multiple people OMGUSing because they're taking votes.
Oh god...
Why? Why do you always say things in every game that makes me mad?
There are so many ways this could go wrong. For instance, say we're focusing on Target A, and then Target B does something that is moderately scummy.
Do we FoS him? Vote him? "No," says the master, WBG. "First, we must finish discussing target A, THEN, we can go ahead with Target B."
This can only protect mafia. Please, no one do this.
|
looool
I'm not saying focus on ONE target. I'm saying, each person focus on one target for now.
Unless you're sandro and you can peg the entire scumteam at once, it doesn't make much sense to be FoSing like 5 people at once.
|
to clarify again, each person go for whoever they think is scummiest. That doesn't mean all of us go for the same person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
