EPTStudent Mafia (New/Newish players welcome)
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
| ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
Here's the things that interested me when I read the thread through initially: On December 04 2011 12:26 xsksc wrote: Well, with something like a counter-claim, we have to decide who's telling the truth and who's not, breadcrumbs are useful for this later in the game. If we happen to get it wrong and kill the blue, we get a guarenteed scum lynch the next day, so it's not the end of the world  Don't get the wrong idea here blues, we do NOT want you to claim now cause you'll just get shot, it's just a hypothetical situation. Breadcrumbs aren't useful. Nothing about breadcrumbs confirms the person performing them. There is nothing that stops the mafia from having an elaborately thought out claim they've breadcrumbed since day one. Do not attempt to use breadcrumbs to confirm anything. On December 04 2011 13:13 xsksc wrote: Ok I'm going to clarify for those unsure. Changing your past opinnion about someone or being wrong about something is not gonna get you lynched for lying. A misunderstanding is not a lie. Telling us you got roleblocked or medic saved etc when nobody visited you that night, that's a lie. Making a fake dt claim to try and lynch someone you think is scum, that's a lie. It's ok to be wrong, just don't straight up lie This is exactly what LAL is all about. Do not lie. You are allowed to change your mind. Straight up contradicting yourself is not recommended, but it's not a direct lie either. What is a direct lie is for example what's posted by xsksc, and that shit will get you lynched faster than you can say OMGUS. On December 04 2011 13:17 Blazinghand wrote: You say that like we all have to be in perfect agreement. You have the freedom to implement LALurkers conditionally in your own actions. Barring a good case on a Mafia member, though, I will lynch a lurker. ##Vote Electricblack http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291067&user=235503 ElectricBlack literally hasn't posted. ElectricBlack, come out and start talking, or I see no reason to change my vote. That being said, if you come by and start contributing, I see no reason to vote for you :D I'm mostly doing this to get you out here and helping. So hurry up. What kind of a bullshit vote is this. If you're gonna attack me for not posting, do it in a way that actually has even a slight chance of putting any kind of fear into me. If you explicitly state your pressure targets can get rid of your votes easily, then there is no pressure, and thus no dire need to respond to the situation. Next time you pressure me or anyone else, convince me that you'd be willing to hang me. Only when threatened with death do people actually respond in the way you want them up. Don't include a get out of jail free card in your post. On December 04 2011 15:04 xsksc wrote: Blazinghand, don't be so trigger-happy. Day 1 always starts like this, we have nothing to talk about so we create discussions. People aren't posting because there's no meangingful discussion going on. I got some going about policy lynches, we've discussed that to death though. Nobody is "lurking" right now because there is no meaningful discussion going on. Why not? Despite his methods being somewhat flawed, he's doing a helluvalot better job than the rest of town in creating discussion. Only problem with him is that he's not convincing enough in his voting spree. If I was scum I'd actually feel pretty safe ignoring him. However, it seems likely he is town, unless he has a really good scumcoach, because I'm not sure scum would draw all this attention to themselves right out of the gates. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
I'm catching up with the thread at the moment. I'm going to read extensively up on the current lynch targets and see if I agree with any of them. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 09:41 BByte wrote: Argh... ##Vote Velinath I want to say that after reading through Velinath's posts I do not agree with this vote. He has been very transparent with everything he's done, he's pushing the right ideas. If he is scum, he's the first scum I've ever seen actually trying to push the town away from lynching lurkers on day 1. I'd say I have a pretty strong town read on Velinath at this point. The only thing that worries me in his play is the lack of people under serious pressure, but I can sort-of relate to that, as it's already evident this town is going to be both active and hold a fairly high quality of posting. This means that any case is going to take more time to get going, and there's simply more to read. I like it. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
| ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 10:50 Blazinghand wrote: He said he's comfortable voting for Hassybaby, but he's obviously not-- he didn't take the 2-3 seconds to type in his vote. He's leading us by the nose. He's hiding behind the excuse of sleep to avoid an explanation, which I might buy. But to avoid slapping down a simple vote? No, this isn't normal. this is anti-town and I will not stand for it. Think about it-- if he's town, his actions don't make sense at all. Why not slap down the vote? If he's mafia his actions make perfect sense. Now I'm not gonna vote him until the morning just to spite you. I will vote in my own time when I can explain in detail why and how I came to the conclusion. In addition I still have a few people to read up on and form an opinion on, so I might not even end up voting Hassybaby when it comes to it. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
Good night. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
| ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 10:42 Blazinghand wrote: No. Vote. Don't wait, don't delay-- it's anti-town to do so. Cast your vote, even if you don't have time to explain. This is incorrect. If you're going to call something anti-town, you need to make sure you give it a thorough think before you open your mouth. Let's establish this: Writing a good case with explanations takes about 30-60 minutes to do. At the time I posted it was somewhere between 1 and 2 am UK time. I was never going to be able to post a good case in this time. So now that we've established I simply couldn't give a satisfactory explanation to my opinion, let's look at the options I had at the time. a) Say that I feel suspicious of him, but not vote because I cannot back up my vote at this moment. b) Vote him without any explanation c) Don't say anything at all. Remember, these are all the options I had available. Of course I got mad at you last night for being an asshole about me wanting to go to sleep, especially with plenty of time remaining in the day. Do you honestly think it actually benefits town if people start voting without explanation, only to promise some analysis later that may or may not be delivered? Now re-read the situation, does picking option a) make me scum? There is a reason at least two people asked you immediately why not voting was somehow anti-town. Of all the options available I think a) is actually the best option for giving town the most amount of information. The ideal situation is that I had been at home last night, but I was having a dinner and seeing a show at the opera with my wife, which basically ate up the entire evening. The fact that you're leading this bandwagon makes it very unlikely you're scum, once again I stand by my opinion that your play doesn't fit at all with someone playing scum for the first time, which is why I'm trying to be as polite as possible when I point out why you're wrong. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 11:50 xsksc wrote: Also, I will be voting for ElectricBlack, unless his defence is good I don't see a better lynch right now. Doing something to spite, in a game of mafia, is fucking dumb. ##Vote: ElectricBlack Does it make me mafia, if so, explain why. Am I supposed to read your post as "I don't know who we should lynch, and I don't want the responsibility of pushing a lynch, so I'm just going to try and lynch someone that did something controversial". What does this make you? Yes, I agree, you can actually make a case for me writing that post being dumb. But you cannot write any coherent case for me writing that post and thus I must be mafia. Do you even care if I'm mafia or not? I don't think you do. The reasonable explanation to me being angry at Blazinghand is that it's 1-2 am my time, and he's calling me scum for doing something every guide/veteran player would suggest. Don't vote without reasoning. @Rest of town Remember, the entire case against me is based on me refusing to vote without reasoning. That should tell you enough about how likely this endeavour is to succeed. If I get lynched I'm going to flip town, and you're going to have to look at how you came to the conclusion, probably the first town in history of mafia, that voting without reasoning is actually helpful to town in anyway. The difference between a Blazinghand wanting to lynch me and not, is nothing but typing in a vote. I did tell you my intentions, and I gave you reasons as to why I didn't elaborate. I hope people understand they're supporting a case that hinges on literally just typing in a vote or not. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 18:35 xsksc wrote: Not voting is one thing. Doing something out of spite is different. Then answer me, am I mafia cause I did something out of spite to him? If so, why? | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 12:24 Velinath wrote: After reading EB's last two posts, it's past "I don't have time" and into the realm of "I'm going to deliberately obstruct the town". I want an explanation. If you're town aligned, what's the motive behind withholding information/a case from the town because you are having a disagreement with one person? Regardless of how he flips, at the moment there had better be a damn good reason not to have voted and helped to generate discussion, past "Blazinghand pissed me off" - because that's simply not good enough. I'll respond to you seperately because you asked me a direct question, although your points have been covered in my previous posts. The reason I "withhold" the case is that it's not ready, and I'm not going to write it during the night. I explained this multiple times. The reason I didn't vote is pretty obviously that voting without reason isn't helpful to anyone. It doesn't put on any pressure, it doesn't help convince anyone of my case. I got mad at Blazinghand for attacking me with something I know is wrong. I didn't have time to post a case, and voting without reasoning is not good in any way. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 18:57 xsksc wrote: No, you're not supposed to read it like that. I said what you did was really anti-town, and it was dumb whatever your alignment is. If you're town, don't ever do something out of spite, it's stupid. If you're mafia, it's dumb too for obvious reasons. If you are a townie, the responsibility is on YOU to not do dumb shit like that. It's your job to not get lynched. I'm not pressuring you because you're an easy lynch, if you read my filter I've been transparent all game, I don't want town doing dumb stuff. If you're under pressure from someone, don't make an FU post and leave, it really doesn't make you look good. Why are you voting me if you don't think I am mafia? Am I not understanding the game correctly? Isn't the game about finding and killing mafia? Not punishing players who do stuff you don't agree with... I mean, I think it's equally, if not more, dumb for Blazinghands to call me terrible and dumb. Does it make him scum? Of course not, it makes me dislike him, but it says nothing about his alignment. Now, again, you voted for me, so explain why I'm mafia. Anything else is unacceptable. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
Yes, as I said, writing a case probably takes about 30 minutes, and I want to fully understand xsksc's motivations before I continue on. From my standpoint xsksc has already agreed that me not voting was in no way anti-town, because I know he knows that most people who play mafia would always consider voting without reasoning anti-town. xsksc for some reason seems to be unable to come up with a coherent case as to why I'm mafia, obviously he can't because I'm not scum, but at leas Blazinghand has the decency to pretend that he has logical reasons to back up his accusations. all xsksc has said is that he thinks me refusing to play nice with BH is dumb. And I agreed that a case can made for it being dumb. But xsksc voted for me, so he must think I'm mafia, and now I'm waiting for him to procide reasons for that. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
| ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 19:41 xsksc wrote: Are you actually reading what I'm saying? Fuck me man, seriously. I want you to be coherent. You say that you're okay with voting for me simply based on you thinking me getting mad is anti-town. I am trying to get you to explain why you think I'm scum because of it. My premise is "Voting without reasoning is anti-town" Your rule is "I will vote people who do anti-town stuff, regardless of if I think I'm scum" BH's action is "Pressure ElectricBlack to vote without reasoning" The logical conclusion is that you should have voted for him at the time, however it seems to me you're only willing to uphold your rule as long as it's an easy bandwagon to jump on. If you are town, I would have expected you to remove your vote from me now that I have sufficiently explained why I did what I did. I took the time to go into details as to what motivated me to post like I did, and I think the explanation is sufficient. You have yet to provide a single reason as to why I am mafia, yet your vote remains on me. Also, you say I'm over-reacting to pressure, but I think I'm the guy being transparent and investigative, and you're the guy who's using caps lock and cursewords. Please note: I'm not suggesting anyone votes BH, I think he's town. I am just pointing out how selective xsksc's play is at the moment. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 19:43 xsksc wrote: Voting someone for no apparent reason is anti-town. I voted you because you made a stupid anti-town move, I've said this four times now. Ah, so you agree that voting with no reason is anti-town. Why are you then supporting the guy that tried to bully me to do exactly that? as for your second statement. I've asked four times. How does that stupid move make me scum? | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 20:08 xsksc wrote: I've told you. I've told you four fucking times and I'm starting to lose my patience here. "Now I'm not gonna vote him until the morning just to spite you." This is so incredibly anti-town. It wouldn't have been a big deal if you just had to go and posted your analysis in the morning, but withholding JUST to spite him? If you think that's okay then I don't know what to say. It's dumb regardless of alignment. I never said I have strong evidence that you are scum. I said I was PRESSURE voting you, to see how you respond. Anti-town = / = Scum This is not about me trying to find an easy bandwagon. Please just think logically for a second, there were 2 votes on you and 5 on adam, which one looks like the easier bandwagon to you? This isn't even about me wanting you lynched. Prior to this incident we had a very small ammount of your posts to analyze. Now we have a LOT more to work with. Do you see now? It's not about lynching you, it's about getting you talking, getting your reactions to pressure, and you seeing how you defend yourself. And what do you think of my defense? I mean, clearly there's enough material on the table now for you to re-think your stance, and sufficient and logical explanation has been given to all my actions last night. We have already established that voting without reasoning is anti-town, so surely you must relate on some level to me being very annoyed at BH for attempting to get me lynched (in red letters!) for refusing to do something you and I both agree is anti-town. Was it unnecessary? Yes. But I can't always hold my temper. So, what is your current stance xsksc, you have all this new material. Do you still think I'm scum? | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
| ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 20:24 xsksc wrote: What's interesting? I can't make a big post about you right now cause I'm playing SC2, I'm posting quickly inbetween games. I'll do it when I'm finished. Why didn't you reach this conclusion earlier, instead you chose to repeatedly defend your position by claiming what I did was anti-town. I haven't presented any new information that wasn't already available in my last few posts, what made you suddenly flop? Of the three people that joined BH's case against me, you're the one that seems to have done it without agreeing to the premise of me refusing to vote being anti town. Velinath agreed with BH's reasoning that I must be scum because I decided not to vote, He already has shown himself to be willing to be critical of the situation, so I'm not worried about him. Once he realizes my choice of not voting was actually optimal in the situation (as explained when I first started responding to the cases built while I slept), I think he will find something more productive to do. Ey specifically stated he was pressure voting me. Obviously that's not such a smart thing to do, but it doesn't make him scum. You on the other hand seemed to clinge on to the fact you saw my actions as anti-town without providing any further reasoning as to why I must be scum. This leaves only two options to explain your play. a) You're scum looking for an easy case to jump, and you didn't expect me to come back with strong reasoning. b) You're town who for some reason is okay with enforcing your perverted sense of how the game should be played to the point of trying to kill people who don't agree with you, even if you have no reason to believe they're scum. If the answer really is b) then I hope you don't do anything like this again this game. Don't attempt to get people killed unless you genuinely think they're mafia. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
Pressure is stupid. Either you're killing people or not. There should never exist no such thing as a pressure vote. But clearly we don't agree on that. I need to re-think my stance on you. I am not willing to commit to a lynch candidate at this moment, I will however within a few hours explain and elaborate on my statement about hassybaby. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 20:59 xsksc wrote: Please read through past mafia games or read a guide or something... I don't know what to say lol. Pressuring someone is one of the best ways to hunt scum with. While I don't think arguing methodology is productive. I would like you to direct me to an example of a great town-sided player on this site applying a "pressurevote". Maybe I can then read up on the game in question and understand why you favor this tactic. Also, if you could point me in the direction of a guide that explains the benefits of pressuring with votes backed by flimsy reasoning, I'd be thankful. However, I agree with Adam, we're not getting anywhere with this, I will respond to any questions you have, but I need to re-read our interactions and your general gameplay with a cooler head to decide if I think you're scum. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
He did step in to try and stop us at each other's throats, which directly opposes mafia agenda, which is to make the thread as much of a mess as possible. He could easily have feigned afk or something. His initial posts didn't give me much of a scum vibe from them. His reaction to the pressure seems genuine and the list of reads he posted is for the most part pretty good, he not only gives us his reads, but also explains the thought process behind each read which I find to be very helpful in determining his alignment. I would like for him not to die today. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 00:26 Hassybaby wrote: Later on, I'm all for it. But not Day 1 imo, and especially not less than 24 hours since the start of the game. The whole idea behind lynching lurkers is to use the day 1 lynch to get rid of one, this is simply because it's inevitable that town has worse reads on day 1 than any other day, so what you're sacrificing is a chance of catching scum, and the reward is better chance to hit scum in the later days. Statistically, the day 1 lynch is the least valuable one for town, because it has the least chance of hitting scum, so I think the idea of saving lurkers until later in the game is very bad. If we're going to use a lynch to teach lurkers a lesson, it'll be the day 1 lynch. I don't think we actually have a lurker in the game, so the discussion is irrelevant, but at the time HassyBaby was pushing an idea I can in no way see as town favored. Moving on.... On December 05 2011 01:49 Hassybaby wrote: Firstly, I'm honoured that you think I'm a veteran, but you're totally wrong. I'm not a veteran in any way shape or form. This is my second game, and my first game was XLVII, and we all know how that went  Why do you want people to think you're new and bad? What is the reasoning behind that? Isn't the optimal way to play as town to come across as good as possible, because that makes people more likely to listen to you and be convinced by you instead of not listening to you. Not only that, but you're also shredding responsibility. If you're new surely you can't be held accountable for using bad logic, having bad reads and not playing optimally. If someone said I was a "veteran", I'd run with it, because that helps me get my points across, and it forces me to play very well. There are two factions in mafia, only one of them likes being ignored and perceived useless. And that faction is not town. On December 05 2011 01:49 Hassybaby wrote: This goes especially to you Tunkeg, because right now it feels like you're playing the Serejai role from XLVII. Accusing everyone isn't going to help. In fact, it can easily get you ignored in the thread. Accusing people is fine, but do it within reason considering situations in the game. Tunkeg is applying pressure by asking questions and analysing how people respond, Serejai just painted names red and gave no particular reason for it. Also, you seem to be assuming Tunkeg must be town? Interesting. Next post that caught my interest: On December 05 2011 09:24 Hassybaby wrote: And people have posted since I last saw.... Veli, yeah I think I went over-defensive there. I misinterpreted Tunkeg's posts, and that's my bad. The post about BKEXE is a good catch. I'd again like to see what he says about that. Meanwhile, for lack of a better vote right now, I'll be voting on BK. That is totally based on Veli's point, as I don't see strong cases against tohers right now. So odds are I'll change the vote tomorrow, especially if BK makes a good point. ##BroodKingEXE And finally, even after all this time Hassybaby doesn't have as much to go on. He puts down a vote based on the reasonings of others, which obviously frees him of all responsibility for the lynch if it's wrong. And despite already having piggybacked onto someone else's reasoning instead of explaining his own thought process, Hassybaby decides to specifically state that the vote might be changed. There is no reason to do that, if he has a better scumread than BK at some point he can just explain that and change. Once again I feel like Hassybaby is attempting his best to not be responsible for his actions. If Hassybaby is town, he is doing his best to make sure no one listens to him, essentially making him useless. But the reasonable explanation is that he is scum. ##Vote Hassybaby | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 05 2011 23:44 xsksc wrote: Hmm, it's like 4pm EU time, where are all the europeans?:\ It's so snowy here I'm just gonna stay inside and f5 the thread, need more people posting! How do you feel about my case against Hassybaby. If you were to suggest that I revisit someone's posting history in order to determine his alignment, whom would you suggest? | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 06 2011 00:45 xsksc wrote: I'll consider the case on hassybaby, gonna filter him. There are several people I'd like to lynch for being retarded but that's probably not the best idea :/ List them, and explain what they've done to earn your stamp of being retarded. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 06 2011 01:03 xsksc wrote: ebwop adam lynch would not be a good idea* don't ignore me please. You mentioned wanting to lynch people for being retarded. I want to know who these people are and why you think they're being retarded. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 06 2011 01:28 xsksc wrote: Sorry EB, didn't mean to ignore you I was just responding to Tunkeg. Retarded was a harsh choice of words, I apologise, I'm just really frustrated from being forced to repeat myself so many times today. I wish people would actually read what I say so I wouldn't have to. I'm not interested in your choice of words. You could've said "silly" or "dumb" or "ill-thought out" or whatever, I don't care how you word it. What I am interested in, is what people have done things that you consider dumb/bad/retarded enough for you to want to policy lynch them. List the people, and list the things they've done. I think you're bullshitting with your statement, I think you can't actually back what you said up, you just threw it out there. Prove me wrong. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 06 2011 04:26 xtfftc wrote: Okay, I'll get some dinner and then update my views on xsk and Adam before going to bed. I think you're scum too. What do you think about that? | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
xsksc I'm on the fence about, and I haven't read bbyte well enough through to make the call. Why are you ignoring my case against Hassybaby? | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
| ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 06 2011 07:11 jaybrundage wrote: ey are you planning on voting for hassybaby. So far bbyte is gonna get lynched regardless unless we have a change.I would still like to see his defense. But so far it doesnt look good. But honestly last minute switches always put me at unease. I still plan to stick to adam i would like to see what he has to say about whats going on so far. And EB if you think adam is not a good candidate plz state why this post. Isn't going to change anything. Put in some content i would like to see more of your thoughts. But besides Hassybaby's case which was actually pretty good. And you arguing with xsksc which granted showed that you can post very well when you want too. Why give me this one liner it's not gonna change anything Read the thread. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12601877 And my case against Hassybaby http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12602036 | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
Can we please switch to Hassybaby, which is much more likely to be a good lynch. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
On December 06 2011 10:01 jaybrundage wrote: Atm i wouldnt vote hassybaby for the same reason i didn't vote Bbyte. Hassybaby has not been able to defend himself. And now that Bbyte is hear hes came to late to defend himself. I hope hes mafia but i dont have a good feeling about this. And I think you're the last scum That's it, jaybrundage, xtf, hassy. Game solved. Next one? | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
This is to be expected, It is very easy for mafia to deflect the day 1 lynch onto an inactive/scummy townie. I hope tomorrow we can resume playing on a more analytical basis. There was no reason to kill this guy over for example Hassybaby. | ||
|
ElectricBlack
United Kingdom38 Posts
| ||
| ||
