EPTI'm down for this. :D
Steamship Liquidia (TL Mafia 46)
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
I'm down for this. :D | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 13 2011 08:57 Zona wrote: I can accommodate that. But it's best to try not to die early! I'm a noob to this stuff, what's a QT? (for reference, my first game of mafia ever was at IPL) | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 13 2011 10:24 GreYMisT wrote: QT stands for QuickTopic, its a message board that the mafia team, as well as observers and dead players, use to communicate Thanks! :D | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 15 2011 08:27 Zona wrote: What time period does MLG providence span? Will you not be able to post at all during that time? Btw I'm frantically scrambling to get the bot working with TL (lol leave things to last minute) but the game WILL start today. The bot might not go live at 9pm when the game starts but it will be functional tonight. Ehh, It's less that I'll have no access, and more I can't guarantee access. I can definitely mafia from my phone. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
As far as lurkers go, I'm more or less in agreement on the lynching. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 16 2011 00:07 GreYMisT wrote: If you are town just don't lie. It only serves to cause chaos when your lie is found as truth. While I dont nessesarily agree with LAL in all circumstances, you have to have a damn good reason for lying if you don't want to get lynched. Yeah, but what I mean is that not everyone intends to lie. If it's blatant and obvious, I say lynch them immediately, I'm just saying not to overreact to any inconsistencies or the like. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 16 2011 04:14 DCLXVI wrote: what does this mean, you want to lynch inactive people - really? How many, how inactive, why do so? I won't accept you just "more or less agreeing" with people. That is not helpful and super scummy imo. Now after some time has passed and more topics are brought up to discuss: Once again a wishy washy agreement with the general consensus, but not actually taking a side. This is also allowing mafia get away with lying if we used it. Once again you think that it is ok for townies to lie badly, we should cut them some slack? Why are you trying to allow scum to get away with occasional inconsistencies/small lies? All Kibibit has done is to sort of agree with everyone, make excuses for potential liars, and lurk (after he says we should probably lynch lurkers.) ##Vote Kibibit So you're seriously gonna call a vote simply because my opinions aren't aggressive enough? I'm pretty new to Mafia, but the one thing I've been taught, over and over, to the face, is that keeping quiet will get you lynched. But how's this. I'm all for LAL at this point, I'm only retracting the "pressure on the smaller inconsistencies" because where do we draw the line? I pretty much "sort of agree" with everyone as the handful or so of mafia games I've played have provided me with odd examples where the hyper-aggressive "lynch everyone on the first inkling of suspicion" is a bad idea. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
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. I think it's perfectly plausible to take new information into account while we focus on another player. If the first guy we focus checks out (for the time being), he should be an active part of the next focus. I think the more intimately they have to be involved in the lynch process, the more chances the scum gets to fuck up. Any focus targets that go idle after their focus should be re-evaluated sometime before nightfall. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 17 2011 05:33 chaoser wrote: Should ask yourself first. Why would mafia want undeserved attention? And what does mafia gain from saying they're townie outright in thread? What does a townie gain from claiming townie outright in the thread just as the game starts? Ask yourself why are people saying the main reason they want to vote me/kenpachi for saying we're townie when it's a null tell? I don't mind getting lynched, but I'd rather kenpachi doesn't. He's pretty underrated. Sinani is a way better lynch. If the mafia is playing super aggressively, which I've definitely seen more experienced players do, then it makes perfect sense to claim townie out of the gate. It's definitely tricky to lynch someone who you can't tell if they are just a mafia stirring the pot or just an eager townie. I may be wrong, but nothing you said there is too far out of line for mafia. ##vote: chaoser | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 17 2011 06:14 Cyber_Cheese wrote: @Kibibit, don't edit your posts, I know you only added the vote because I saw it, but if I hadn't it could have been anything. be VERY careful about that. Quote yourself and double/triple post if you have to, but don't edit. ever. I'm aware, I just did it so nonchalantly that I didn't catch myself. Won't happen again. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 17 2011 06:56 chaoser wrote: So you agree it's a null tell? Nothing I said there is out of line for mafia but nothing I said there is out of lien for town either? If it's tricky to tell why are you voting to lynch me based solely around the fact that I claimed townie in thread? Because you've been hyper-aggressive, almost nonsensically so. If it were simply to put pressure on lurkers or reasonably obvious scum, I'd probably lean towards not voting, but your actions so far feel less like you're trying to root out scum and more like you're banking on someone to slip up. Of course, none of this is definitive proof, but it all came down to an internal decision; Are you experienced scum or a townie doing nothing more than kicking up a lot of dust for the sake of it? Neither seems too helpful to me. Thus the vote. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
##unvote: chaoser For now. I'm still on a close watch, as you haven't strayed at all from a similar play style I've seen in the many hours of live games at IPL. That said, he brings up a good point. Even if they turn out to be townie as fuck, I agree that we need to get at least SOMETHING out of Bum and Coag. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 17 2011 10:09 wherebugsgo wrote: ##unvote chaoser ##vote Lemonwalrus Reason: Sorry, but I can't let away with you calling out another player for an unreasoned vote and then pulling an unreasoned vote yourself. That feels more like a vengeful vote than a reasonable one. If there's more to why Lemon's being particularly scummy, I'd like to hear it, but it feels a bit silly to vote just because he reneged on one of his callouts. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 17 2011 10:29 wherebugsgo wrote: please elaborate on why you think a self-contradiction doesn't constitute a reason to vote somebody. Lemon wanted chaoser to provide reasons for voting, yet voted bumatlarge with no stated reason. Even now he deflects the question by saying he intended to vote that way before. That's fine, but that's not a reason. Intent and motivation are different things, and any person with the capability to understand the two definitions should know that. Honestly, I started typing a response, but the more I think about it, the less strongly I hold that opinion. Still, the bit of clarification you put down makes it way better than the original "LOOK! Look at it! He's a hypocrite!". | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
If Kenpachi flips a blue role, though, shit (for me at least) is gonna get a lot more confusing. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
? | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 18 2011 10:01 GreYMisT wrote: I agree with this policy. Even though we all have more than 2 votes out at the moment, this would definatly lessen the amount of crap we have to sift through. I'd like to know if the people not voting sinani are doing so because they generally feel he isnt scummy, or they arnt because they dont want another lynch today. I only haven't because I don't have any sort of coherent feelings about him. Not like it matters much, I'm generally confused about day 1 due to the lack of hard evidence besides looking at peoples posts and going "Yep, that's scummy" | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 18 2011 10:09 sinani206 wrote: - You most post in the thread at least once every 24 hours. Your role may also include other activity requirements which you must follow. No, I mean why'd you pick that post for the comment? I commented about an hour before that one. Anything before that is chalked up to sleeping and preparing. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
I was hesitant on kenpachi mostly because while he was whiny, nothing he did was particularly scumlike. The read I'm getting on prplhz is noticably less pristine. That said, I'll probaly wait a tick before throwing down the vote. I'm Leaning towards yes on prplhz and chaoser at this point | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 23 2011 00:09 wherebugsgo wrote: Newsflash: your instincts suck, start using logic. The faster you learn that the faster you stop being terrible. And I mean that in general, not you specifically. It's less that, and more Day1 sucks dick for trying to use logic, and beyond Day 1 I've been a touch preoccupied. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
Fair enough, then. | ||
|
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
On November 24 2011 01:46 Forumite wrote: He posted his thread before reading my post where I voted 3 of the lurkers who voted prplhz yesterday. It´s allready been answered earlier, you probably missed the post. I'll step out here then, since I'm trying to be less confused here. Is there any particular reason I'm not on that short list? I've lurked fairly hard and I did vote prplhz.I'm willing to go over my reasoning as to why. Right now, my activity pretty much puts me up on the chopping block without much defense to go on if we lynch any more townies. | ||
| ||
