EPTStudent Mafia (New/Newish players welcome) - Page 3
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
| ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 06 2011 07:43 Tunkeg wrote: Having read up on the three most likely candidates for a lynch today (Those three are Adam (2votes in), Bbyte and Hassybaby.), and ElectricBlacks write up on Hassybaby I have the following thoughts: From scummiest to towniest I'd go for Bbyte>Hassybaby>Adam. Bbyte simply have posted to little and to little content. Hassybaby is pretty much a no-read at the time. But one major bad thing is that he haven't posted for ages. Adam I am leaning town on, and I do not want to see him lynched. Seeing that xtfftx have unvoted xsksc, he will not be lynched tonight. And as bad as this looks, I will also post my vote on Bbyte, to avoid any surprises. But I really feel Bbyte have been bandwagoned here, but rather him than the other two. ##Unvote: xsksc ##Vote: Bbyte Did it not register? ##Vote Bbyte | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
| ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 06 2011 07:55 Blazinghand wrote: It takes like 15 minutes for the bot to register it. Don't worry, it'll happen. Ok, it registered now. And on that note I am off to bed. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 06 2011 10:33 Blazinghand wrote: Discuss nothing this night. If you have something to post, write it up and post it 24 hours from now-- do not give the mafia any additional material to work with until after they've made their decision. If you think you're about to die and have some grand revelation to make, make it 1 minute before the night ends so the mafia can't base their kill off it. See you guys in 24 hours. That last part I may agree somewhat on, but the rest is pretty bad for town, we need to keep the activity up, even during night. But you guys have come to the same conclusion so I won't say more on the subject. What I find more interisting is the lynch on BByte. As I said before putting my vote on him, I feel he got bandwagoned, but out of the three candidates he was the "best". How do you guys see this lynch in hindsight? Was it the best we could do, with the information we had? | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
QUOTE]On December 07 2011 05:04 Blazinghand wrote: On December 07 2011 04:59 Tunkeg wrote: What I find more interisting is the lynch on BByte. As I said before putting my vote on him, I feel he got bandwagoned, but out of the three candidates he was the "best". How do you guys see this lynch in hindsight? Was it the best we could do, with the information we had? Honestly, yes it was. It was a bandwagon, and I'm somewhat disappointing that so little additional analysis was made, but as BByte noted himself, he picked a bad time to go afk for 24 hours. He hadn't posted enough content for anyone to get a read of any sort on him, and although he turned out to be a townie, he was still a lurker, if not by his own choosing. All my scumreads were mild, and I don't think we could have increased the probability that we'd lynch a mafia guy in any meaningful fashion by lynching someone different. I don't think anyone was really able to say "this guy here is a mafia" and be justified. We also demonstrated a willingness to lynch lurkers, and I'm sure we will continue to aggressively attack people for lurking in the future. This sets a dangerous precedent for mafia members, who feel pressured to both lurk and now to not lurk. We could have had a better Day 1, but it could have been much worse. We did what we could. But I'd also like you guys to analyze more before you vote with me. I'm kind of aggressive with my voting in cas eyou hadn't noticed. [/QUOTE] I totally agree on the last part. I think there were people voting for BByte who provided little reason to why they were doing so (only stating that your reasoning seemed ok to them). That beeing said he was the "lesser evil" of the three lynches that was in contention (IMO). | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 07 2011 04:15 Velinath wrote: Going off your assumption that someone will end up dying tonight, why should we hold off on posting analysis? The more conversation that we can have before night ends, the more that the dead townie will be able to contribute before they die. Given this, I feel that we stand to gain more by posting analysis earlier so that we can discuss it with all of the town voices. For the sake of conversation what are you thoughts on the BByte lynch yesterday. You were the first one voting for him, what do you think of the rest of us that ending up voting for him. Any votes you find more suspicious than others? | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 07 2011 06:30 Velinath wrote: Hi! As far as where I stand on the BByte lynch, despite the flip I think it was the best option we had. As a town I felt that we were somewhat divided between a couple of scumreads from different people, and, given that, it would be too easy for scum to swing a lynch one way or another in that situation. BByte, as a policy lynch, was a good call - lurking is and will always be anti-town play. I wish he would have gotten back earlier to defend himself and avert the lynch, but as it stands it was the right call. I must admit I didn't expect people to jump over and start voting BByte as easily as they did. A couple people even said that they had decent scumreads but "because nobody's going to vote for them, I'll just vote for BByte". This is a little bit of a matter for concern. I don't know whether it's just town complacency or actual suspicious behaviour, but either way people need to step up and push their reads. + Show Spoiler + On December 06 2011 04:00 xsksc wrote: Okay, I'll go with your judgement on this one. He seems like a decent lynch I guess, I'd prefer Tunkeg but that doesn't look like it's happening today. ##vote: BByte Going to sleep now, will be back and active early tomorow morning. This one stood out to me - "it's not my best lynch choice, but it's not a bad one - and I can be more sure that my vote will help cement a lynch". + Show Spoiler + On December 06 2011 05:13 Grackaroni wrote: I'm willing to vote for BByte because he has not contributed to the game so far and his lynch target was stupid. HassyBaby could still be a good lynch for today. Similar thing here. "This guy's a good lynch. Here's another option, but hey, I can actually get BByte lynched". + Show Spoiler + On December 06 2011 07:26 xtfftc wrote: I'm going to bed, so I'm voting for Bbyte. It's not ideal but it's better than some unpleasant last minute surprise. ##Unvote: xsksc ##Vote: BByte Similar to the last couple. What it came down to for a lot of people was "who can I vote for that will be a safe bet to avoid last-minute surprise vote switches?". BByte was a safe lynch. Not the best, perhaps, but safe. His behaviour was scummy, but we could have done some more analysis on other people and maybe gotten a better candidate. EB's case on Hassybaby springs to mind as a pretty impressive case, I think if we had had the time to discuss that he would have maybe made a better lynch target. Now that we have another day ahead of us, we need to start looking less at policy lynching and more at scum reads. While there was a reasonable amount of scumhunting yesterday, we were unable to act on those reads. After filtering the voters on BByte, I can't really see anything suspicious. Every vote was based off of Lynch All Lurkers, meaning it's really hard to distinguish between which voters were motivated by policy and which were scum. Despite my voting first, I really feel like BH led the bandwagon here, and that should merit some scrutiny. As has been said in the last two pages, players thinking for themselves is a good thing. Forming your own reads will always be better than going off of someone else. That said, I find one thing suspicious. xkskc's post stood out to me as just jumping on a bandwagon and really helping to get it rolling. At the time, BH had just gotten things started. An informed mafia would be able to switch votes after seeing as visible a bandwagon as BH got rolling, and allay suspicion. "Yeah, I would prefer we lynch X, but that's not happening so I'll just go along with Y". Seems weird to me, but like anything in this game we could WIFOM it to death. Tomorrow, I think it might be a good move to focus on Hassybaby more. EB posted an interesting case yesterday, and I think I posted some stuff slightly before that. One of the big points there is his complete sheep vote on BKEXE based solely on my reasoning, and then disappearing from the thread. Something to look into. While I don't want to policy lynch him for lurking, his play so far does seem scummy. Thank you for answering. I agree with your thoughts here. It is pretty hard to say anything about which votes are more suspicious. But if I am allowed to speculate I would think at least 1 scum was in on the lynch of BByte, and more likely 2 scums to secure it. 0 and 3 would be very unlikely IMO. 0 is unlikely because I think scum wanted to secure the lynch of a townie. 3 unlikely because then they would put all their eggs in one basket (if all 3 jumped in early), and a change in lynchtarget would mean that at least 2 of them would have to switch to secure themselves (that would cause suspicion). If not all 3 jumped in early it would be no point in jumping in late for a third scum unless the vote weren't secured (for a secound scum, yeah, for a third no). So my view on the lynch yesterday is that there is likely to be two scums among the 7 who voted for BByte: Velinath, Blazinghand, xsksc, Grackorini, ey215, xtfftc and Tunkeg. And one among the rest. This is all speculations though, and probably not very usefull. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
| ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 01:18 Velinath wrote: For those who missed Jay's lies: He MIGHT have pulled off more reads than Hassybaby but that's about it. I didn't tagteam him after that post, the lynch was essentially locked in at that point and I stated that lurking was antitown. I voted BByte before BH did, this is just s straight up lie and he should be lynched for this alone. I defended Adam in an earlier post, check your facts "like he always does" - that's why I voted BByte before BH started a wagon on him. that's why I defended Adam when he was getting a bunch of votes. Pathetic. Lynch the liar. This is not lynch all liars. Lynch all liars are confirmed liars. People who have roleclaimed and then the role dies are confimed liars. Remember this before going any further, because else all your arguements become useless. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 01:51 jaybrundage wrote: Tunkeg i would like your input on my case against Veli and BH Well, as I stated befored don't think the case on you were all that great and I don't think your case on BH and Velinath is any good either. IMO the hedging part of the case on you is the one thing the case got, that is something to take into consideration. The rest is pretty much bleh. You trying to lable Velinath and BH as scum in your post, and at the time I can not agree with that. You make a good point about Velinath and BH beeing like an archon, but it is hard to read to much into that, but something to be aware of for later. You also make a good point about BH's aggressive play giving him a strong position in the group. And while his play was great in the beginning of day 1 to cause some discussion, his agressive ways now are IMO bad for town. He comes right after you on day 2 (after first writing that adam needed to convice him on you beeing scum), and it have led to a tunneling case on you. If he is a good town he needs to understand the position he have now, and be very careful creating cases out of nothing on people (seeing as the rest of the town follow suit so easily). In closing I have a question to Velinath and Blazinghand: You two led the lynch on BByte, now you are leading the lynch on jaybrundage. If this is also a misslynch can you see how this will lead the rest of us to be suspicious towards you? Is your reads on jaybrundage strong enough that you are willing to put your head on the block for it? If not, do you think it is fair that you two are tunneling so hard on him? | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 03:39 jaybrundage wrote: Alright tunkeg are you still going to go for xsksc then for mafia? At the moment yes. I see him as the best candidate, but I do not have anything more to go off then my post on him and his BByte vote. So for now I won't be pushing hard for him. I want to see other cases first. He have also been replaced, and I want to see more from his replacement. For now I won't be reading anything into him beeing replaced, but I think in hassybaby's case it could be a big tell on his allignment and is in general bad for the game. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 03:51 jaybrundage wrote: Why do you say bad for the game? And how could it be a big tell? This is for me on the hassybaby comment right? This is just speculation and something that probably just should be disregarded: But I think a scum player wouldn't get thrown out because of inactivity, simply becasue his scum buddies would make sure that he didn't. But I think this is something that we really should focus to much on (it beeing "outside" the game). | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
| ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 05:53 ey215 wrote: Alright, did some reading while eating. Here seems to be the brunt of the xscsc/Tunkeg dilemma. Tunkeg, even in his initial read that he mildly flipped on on xsc sounded like he had some suspicions. After a change in his read, xsc lost it on him and they bickered causing Tunkeg to tunnel in further. Tunkeg even admits in a post today that his case was "thin". I honestly think that this is the case of two potential townies going after each other. From everything I read, xsc's case on Tunkeg was very weak and again tunkeg called his own case "thin". Something I did find odd is they both argued against the BByte lynch and yet still ended up voting for him. Here's my read: Tunkeg Town xsc: null. I'm not convinced that xsc is scum, and would like to see his replacement do some posting so we can go from there and I do feel that Tunkeg has been doing what is in the best interest of the town up to this point. I'd have a hard time voting for either at the moment. Just FYI I didn't say my case was thin, I said many thought my case was thin. Just wanted to clearify that. On December 07 2011 21:53 Tunkeg wrote: Just read up on this during lunch, and while just reading through it really fast I have to say that the case you guys are building on jay, and the reasoning behind it is thin. 3 votes allready? Was it the the kill on EB that changed your mind?Many thought my case on xsksc was thin, but this is thinner, and it allready have 3 votes. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 06:08 ey215 wrote: My apologies, I misread that statement. So you still stand behind his replacement as very likely mafia? Ah, you are putting me on the spot here now. I would say he is the one I have the most scum read and scum feel about. Very likely is pushing it a bit far though. But he is definately the one I would go for atm. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 06:34 Tunkeg wrote: Ah, you are putting me on the spot here now. I would say he is the one I have the most scum read and scum feel about. Very likely is pushing it a bit far though. But he is definately the one I would go for atm. That beeing said, I find it hard to push the case further now that he have been replaced, and the replacement haven't written anything. Therefor I am keeping an open mind about other players, and since there is 3 scums I will be open for other suggestions as well, as long as I think there is a case there. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 06:45 xtfftc wrote: You lynch your best read. You don't start looking for excuses for when the player you're voting for flips town. You didn't want to get into the "pissing match" with BH, you were forced to by his aggressiveness. And using lurking as a proof that you haven't been staying under the radar is a pretty solid point if you're building a case against yourself. You were out of the picture when every good mafia wants to be: during the last ~12 hours before the deadline, so you did a great job. I answered to him after he mentioned me and I don't see how his death changes anything. What is there to be said about EB? His play was arrogant and trollish. He was obviously a veteran smurfing, who thought it would be fun to frustrate the townies (refusing to vote just when he was asked to the most active player in the game just because he felt like irritating us) and then giving us a great demonstration of how a town player has to prove his innocence when attacked. He posted a great case that lacked obvious flaws - and then he was happy to go inactive again. He came back to announce that he's found the whole mafia team - but didn't bother providing any analysis on two of the players he accused. And he also made sure to notify us that the Bbyte lynch was pushed easily... Before the game started (and also in the Looking For Coaches thread) some veterans suggested that there should be some experienced players in this game to help teach the newbies how to play properly. Instead we get a cocky smurf. There was no way to make a good guess about his intentions, which is the reason why I'm not all over Hassy at the moment. EB was good enough to make us do anything he wanted to as long as he was interested in putting a serious effort in the game, and I have no reason to believe that his intentions were pro-town, even after his flip. Ask veterans such as Sandroba and Palmar and they will tell you that the first thing a townie should do is to establish his/her innocence. The first thing EB did was to frustrate town and lose us half a day. So what good would it do to town to focus on him again instead of doing our own analysis? All you're achieving with this is disruping the discussion. Hmm, did you come to that conclusion on EB on your own? To me it looks so thought through that one would think you have discussed it with someone. | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
On December 08 2011 07:01 xtfftc wrote: I've discussed it with my coach (he even made a guess as to who EB actually is) but the opinions expressed are my own. Hmm, maybe my fault for asking but be careful referencing any talks with your coach: 11. You may not reveal or hint about the identity of your coach. You may not refer to any idea, course of action, etc. as something that was suggested by your coach. Hopefully you won't get any trouble by the admins for it, but I had my reason for asking (not becasue I wanted to get you in trouble over rules). | ||
|
Tunkeg
Norway1235 Posts
I think probability should be discussed more before going into a day 2 lynch. Some of you may call this WIFOM and just ignore it, and probably it is somewhat WIFOM, because it involves alot of speculating. The first thing I will speculate about is number of scum involved in the lynch on BByte. As I've mentioned before I belive the probability that 2 scums joined in on the lynch is the biggest: On December 07 2011 07:24 Tunkeg wrote: + Show Spoiler + On December 07 2011 06:30 Velinath wrote: Hi! As far as where I stand on the BByte lynch, despite the flip I think it was the best option we had. As a town I felt that we were somewhat divided between a couple of scumreads from different people, and, given that, it would be too easy for scum to swing a lynch one way or another in that situation. BByte, as a policy lynch, was a good call - lurking is and will always be anti-town play. I wish he would have gotten back earlier to defend himself and avert the lynch, but as it stands it was the right call. I must admit I didn't expect people to jump over and start voting BByte as easily as they did. A couple people even said that they had decent scumreads but "because nobody's going to vote for them, I'll just vote for BByte". This is a little bit of a matter for concern. I don't know whether it's just town complacency or actual suspicious behaviour, but either way people need to step up and push their reads. + Show Spoiler + On December 06 2011 04:00 xsksc wrote: Okay, I'll go with your judgement on this one. He seems like a decent lynch I guess, I'd prefer Tunkeg but that doesn't look like it's happening today. ##vote: BByte Going to sleep now, will be back and active early tomorow morning. This one stood out to me - "it's not my best lynch choice, but it's not a bad one - and I can be more sure that my vote will help cement a lynch". + Show Spoiler + On December 06 2011 05:13 Grackaroni wrote: I'm willing to vote for BByte because he has not contributed to the game so far and his lynch target was stupid. HassyBaby could still be a good lynch for today. Similar thing here. "This guy's a good lynch. Here's another option, but hey, I can actually get BByte lynched". + Show Spoiler + On December 06 2011 07:26 xtfftc wrote: I'm going to bed, so I'm voting for Bbyte. It's not ideal but it's better than some unpleasant last minute surprise. ##Unvote: xsksc ##Vote: BByte Similar to the last couple. What it came down to for a lot of people was "who can I vote for that will be a safe bet to avoid last-minute surprise vote switches?". BByte was a safe lynch. Not the best, perhaps, but safe. His behaviour was scummy, but we could have done some more analysis on other people and maybe gotten a better candidate. EB's case on Hassybaby springs to mind as a pretty impressive case, I think if we had had the time to discuss that he would have maybe made a better lynch target. Now that we have another day ahead of us, we need to start looking less at policy lynching and more at scum reads. While there was a reasonable amount of scumhunting yesterday, we were unable to act on those reads. After filtering the voters on BByte, I can't really see anything suspicious. Every vote was based off of Lynch All Lurkers, meaning it's really hard to distinguish between which voters were motivated by policy and which were scum. Despite my voting first, I really feel like BH led the bandwagon here, and that should merit some scrutiny. As has been said in the last two pages, players thinking for themselves is a good thing. Forming your own reads will always be better than going off of someone else. That said, I find one thing suspicious. xkskc's post stood out to me as just jumping on a bandwagon and really helping to get it rolling. At the time, BH had just gotten things started. An informed mafia would be able to switch votes after seeing as visible a bandwagon as BH got rolling, and allay suspicion. "Yeah, I would prefer we lynch X, but that's not happening so I'll just go along with Y". Seems weird to me, but like anything in this game we could WIFOM it to death. Tomorrow, I think it might be a good move to focus on Hassybaby more. EB posted an interesting case yesterday, and I think I posted some stuff slightly before that. One of the big points there is his complete sheep vote on BKEXE based solely on my reasoning, and then disappearing from the thread. Something to look into. While I don't want to policy lynch him for lurking, his play so far does seem scummy. Thank you for answering. I agree with your thoughts here. It is pretty hard to say anything about which votes are more suspicious. But if I am allowed to speculate I would think at least 1 scum was in on the lynch of BByte, and more likely 2 scums to secure it. 0 and 3 would be very unlikely IMO. 0 is unlikely because I think scum wanted to secure the lynch of a townie. 3 unlikely because then they would put all their eggs in one basket (if all 3 jumped in early), and a change in lynchtarget would mean that at least 2 of them would have to switch to secure themselves (that would cause suspicion). If not all 3 jumped in early it would be no point in jumping in late for a third scum unless the vote weren't secured (for a secound scum, yeah, for a third no). So my view on the lynch yesterday is that there is likely to be two scums among the 7 who voted for BByte: Velinath, Blazinghand, xsksc, Grackorini, ey215, xtfftc and Tunkeg. And one among the rest. This is all speculations though, and probably not very usefull. As I belive BH and Velinath is the most green out of these (as of now) I will leave them out. And I will also leave myself out. This leads me to believe that there is 2 scum out of xsksc, gracken, ey215 and xtfftc. Seeing that ey215 and xtfftc is attacking eachother, and the way they are attacking eachother I don't see it as likely that they both are scum. Seeing that Grackorini is somewhat joining in on xtfftc's analyses: On December 08 2011 07:49 Grackaroni wrote: Ey215 has been on every one of your bandwagons so far from Adam----> EB -----> BByte -------> JayBrundage. @BH : Why is Ey215 one of your main town reads? I think he is just sheeping your vote. And therefor I don't think both of them are scum. xtfftc have been voting on xsksc and had him as one of those he suspects as scum throughout the game. I don't think both of them are scum. So this leads me to think that the most probable scum pairings of those in on the BByte lynch is: xsksc(Starshard)/Grackorini xsksc (Starshard)/ey215 Grackorini/xtfftc I say we should lynch anyone of these four, it would give us a high probability for actually killing a scum player. | ||
| ||
