|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 23 2011 02:39 SamuelLJackson wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 01:15 kitaman27 wrote:Post-lynch thoughts: On December 22 2011 13:51 SamuelLJackson wrote:
I'm inclined to believe GM's claim. He has no reason to counterclaim at this point if he is scum, there's no real gain to it for scum to fake that.
Likewise LSB's claim makes no sense for scum either unless he has a night role that he want to use before death. That their role names are different should absolutely not be factored in as you can be sure Ver would have named identical roles different things especially after the debacle of the previous Incognito game where people were using role names and abilities to try to determine alignment.
What they've both claimed is a role that is impossible to fulfil as scum.
At this point I'd rather lynch Chezinu or Foolishness, both of whom have shown that despite prodding neither is posting with Town's interests at heart. Chezinu is being blatantly anti-Town with his posting still under the disguise of "Chezinu is Chezinu." Chezinu or Foolishness obviously wasn't going to get lynched, considering your post was only 10 minutes from the deadline, but what concerns me is that you just explained why you thought LSB's claim made no sense as scum, yet you didn't move your vote off him. Surely, a no-lynch would have been better, giving him an opportunity to shoot, if this was the way you guys felt, wouldn't it? GGQ also mentions how the case against LSB is thin and that he is not confident that he is scum, but he moves his vote to him anyways. RoL puts a placeholder on Chezinu, yet disappears for the remainder of the day. The last thing we need is another Team Melee game from him, so I hope to hear from him day two. There were also several other people who disappeared from the discussion, such as L and BC. I'd rather a lynch of him than a no lynch or we just have a repeat of day 1 with no lynch information. Of course I would've preferred Foolishness or Chezinu more but unfortunately by the time I got home it was too late to solidly put something together. I wasn't even expecting to be here for the lynch since the game had started at 11:30 EST and I wasn't expecting to be home until after that but the deadline was pushed back half an hour. Is Sheth still on your radar kita? What about GMarshal? /Curu
As you probably noticed in Election mafia, Sheth's day one posts were pretty scummy. The game is still ongoing so I don't want to go into it too much, but he seemed susceptible to slipping up whenever he was asked to comment on something. This game he has been much more conservative in giving his opinion. He hasn't really brought anything new to the table, even if we don't follow through with a majority, I wouldn't mind seeing 7-8 votes on him with a threat of being lynched to see how he reacts tomorrow.
I'll buy the blue claim from GM for now. I don't see the reasoning he would claim as scum, since its too early in the game for a fake claim like that to have any benefit. He said he is shooting tonight, so if he hits scum, he clears himself. If he hits town, he kills himself. If he claims roleblock, well that's one less roleblock for scum to use elsewhere and we can go from there. My biggest concern would be if he claims to have saved his shot for a later point, rather than shooting tonight, since it doesn't resolve his alignment.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 23 2011 03:02 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 02:42 kitaman27 wrote:On December 23 2011 02:24 VisceraEyes wrote:
What about my Traitor theory guys? Hey! Hey! What about my Traitor theory? Everyone's ignoring it! If GM were the traitor, the scum team would still need to shoot a scum to justify him living. I don't think the trade would be worth it, considering GM would then have to deal with having a reason for being alive for the remainder of the game for shooting scum. It looked like LSB was going to be lynched even before the counter-claim, so its not like traitor would have anything to gain by putting himself out there to be responsible for a vig shot tonight. Unless they're just expecting him to die tonight to town KP. How likely do you think it is that scum KP go up if they add the Traitor to their number Kita?
The most common formula is #scum/2, rounded up, so it could go up to 3 if the traitor is recruited, but that is of little help if the traitor gets lynched the next day. The one additional kp for one night doesn't seem worth outing the traitor as scum.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 23 2011 05:35 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 04:08 kitaman27 wrote:On December 23 2011 03:02 VisceraEyes wrote:On December 23 2011 02:42 kitaman27 wrote:On December 23 2011 02:24 VisceraEyes wrote:
What about my Traitor theory guys? Hey! Hey! What about my Traitor theory? Everyone's ignoring it! If GM were the traitor, the scum team would still need to shoot a scum to justify him living. I don't think the trade would be worth it, considering GM would then have to deal with having a reason for being alive for the remainder of the game for shooting scum. It looked like LSB was going to be lynched even before the counter-claim, so its not like traitor would have anything to gain by putting himself out there to be responsible for a vig shot tonight. Unless they're just expecting him to die tonight to town KP. How likely do you think it is that scum KP go up if they add the Traitor to their number Kita? The most common formula is #scum/2, rounded up, so it could go up to 3 if the traitor is recruited, but that is of little help if the traitor gets lynched the next day. The one additional kp for one night doesn't seem worth outing the traitor as scum. Would you say that you're willing to lynch GM if scum doesn't die tonight Kita?
It would depend what happens. If GM decided not to fire, I would be willing. If he claims to have hit player X and player X survives the hit, then I would probably want to lynch one of the two, unless there was a legitimate reason not to. I'm not sure how we would approach the situation if he is roleblocked. It would probably depend on who he decides to hit and his reasoning. How about you?
@GM, is your bullet refunded if you are roleblocked?
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 23 2011 14:14 Foolishness wrote:
Please note all the players who have now decided to call me town right before day ends. And please note wherebugsgo
Don't worry, I still don't think you're town.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
As for the RoL shot, I don't really mind it. At least it punishes anyone who thinks they can get by with inactivity the entire day.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 23 2011 14:32 L wrote:
GM seems to have lied about his target in order to lessen the chance that his shot would be medic'd/intercepted/roleblocked/whatevered. His target was probably one of his greens to throw off suspicion, so he probably didn't shoot Jackal. Palmar's shot was claimed.
This means GM either shot VisceraEyes or SamuelLJackson
I'm gonna go back and look through his post list to see if he gave any indication of suspicion with respect to either of them.
If that was the case, why in the world would GM not inform us who he really shot after the 12:00 deadline? He had around 20 minutes to share who he really would have shot, during a time which the scum team wouldn't be able to change their actions. Are you purposely trying to shift focus away from RoL or something?
@RoL,did you receive any notification of receiving a hit?
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 23 2011 15:01 L wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2011 14:39 kitaman27 wrote:On December 23 2011 14:32 L wrote:
GM seems to have lied about his target in order to lessen the chance that his shot would be medic'd/intercepted/roleblocked/whatevered. His target was probably one of his greens to throw off suspicion, so he probably didn't shoot Jackal. Palmar's shot was claimed.
This means GM either shot VisceraEyes or SamuelLJackson
I'm gonna go back and look through his post list to see if he gave any indication of suspicion with respect to either of them. If that was the case, why in the world would GM not inform us who he really shot after the 12:00 deadline? He had around 20 minutes to share who he really would have shot, during a time which the scum team wouldn't be able to change their actions. Are you purposely trying to shift focus away from RoL or something? @RoL,did you receive any notification of receiving a hit? Why wouldn't he? Withholding the information until the last second is a hyper pro-town move. Mafia don't need any additional information and his list is perfectly legible when you recognize that he lied about the RoL shot.
That doesn't make sense at all. GM knows he is a suicide vig, so why would he leave it a mystery to who he really shot? He knows that it is highly likely that he will die if his shot is wrong. He wouldn't leave us in the dark knowing that he would likely never have a chance to reveal his true target. That wouldn't be a hyper pro-town move in the slightest.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Just a heads up, I'm probably going to be incredibly busy over the next few days with three family Christmas parties so I'm not quite sure if I'll be able to be around a computer, but I'll try to keep up with the thread as much as I can. I waited to the last minute again, so I have to go out shopping, but hopefully I'll have some time tonight to share my thoughts.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
I was planning on writing an analysis on Foolishness, but essentially it came down to the fact that he wasn't putting any effort in and didn't care about the direction the town was taking. Looking back at his past games on day one, they all seem pretty similar, with minimal posting and a bit of trolling regardless of alignment. I'm still learning scum on him based on his general attitude and would probably be willing to lynch him today, but I'm having trouble coming up with a strong case against him from the current set of posts. As for his case against bugs, I'm leaning town on bugs at the moment. bugs was one of the leaders of the LSB lynch and I don't think its likely that as scum he would be willing to focus himself as the center of attention on day one causing the green flip.
The person I think we should focus on today as one of our main lynch candidates is prplhz.
In Team Melee Mini , I was able to pick out prpl as town relatively early because he clearly wasn't ever hesitant before pushing the post button. He would post the first thing that came to his mind, without double checking if it would get him in trouble. One-liners are extremely common from him and prpl has always had trouble coming off as a scummy town in the games I have played with him, with the exception of election mafia. In addition, he is always willing to directly argue with a player or call them out for the questionable logic.
Now take a look at his most recent game as scum, TL Mafia XLVII. He starts off with a monster post about town behavior and his campaign for election. He follows by sharing his opinion on all the other candidates and presents the town with his own gameplan. The most striking difference is the effort he puts into being seen as someone who is making a contribution.
Just take a look at these two filters, so see how different the approach is.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=281403&user=126438
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=285690&user=126438&user=126438
So far this game, prpl has extremely few one-liners or overly aggressive posts that could get him in trouble. Instead, he is getting by with a series of posts that attempt to pass as a contribution, however, are actually rather bland in content. Most noteworthy is the fact that he has managed to get by without causing conflict or directly engaging any other players.
One of the only people he references on day one is GMarshal, bringing up a post that appears scummy to him. However, after commenting on it, he mentions that there are better lynch candidates, without specifying who they are or what they have done to be better. He brings up GGQ, but simply mentions that he is a lurker.
He shows back up before the lynch and questions the legitimacy of the analysis on LSB, yet votes for him anyways. He mentions that LSB is the best lynch, without actually providing a reason supporting his claim. This is also the first time he has brought up LSB all day.
After voting, again he brings up how the case on LSB is weak, without moving his vote. He brings up how GMarshal would never claim a suicide vig as scum, yet ignores the fact that LSB just did the same exact thing.
The only major analysis prpl has done so far has been on the three posts of BC.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=295384¤tpage=36#715
To me it seems more like a summary, rather than an analysis. The biggest offense he makes with this post is that he doesn't actually come to a conclusion. He posts that BC has been hostile, but doesn't indicate how that reflects his alignment. prpl mentions how he would rather lynch BC over LSB, but never actually explains why he thinks BC is scum. Furthermore, when day two along, he switches his vote to Cheiznu, only referencing BC.
As for his explanation for voting Chezinu, he makes a huge jump from "Chezinu claims roleblock" to "Chezinu is a lying scum". He explains that Chezinu could be claiming rb as scum as an attempt to gain town cred, but doesn't appear to consider the fact that Chezinu could actually have been roleblocked, which is extremely weird.
Overall, prpl has been skating by without getting in peoples faces and has failed to bring up any new ideas the entire game. I think he is scum.
##Vote prplhz
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 24 2011 04:26 syllogism wrote:
If that's a waste of time, could you tell us who you would lynch? You placeholder voted yesterday and I don't see a single hint in your filter of you even implying who you find scummy
Who do you find scummy syllo? So far today, the only thing you have done is show up to defend yourself about the change in play style comment. What do you think about prplhz?
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
@prplhz, It isn't entirely a meta argument, you act as if I picked a game from ages ago, rather than last month. It was the last one we played together as town. Fine if you say you have changed your playstyle to become a draw early hits from mafia, as in election. What have you done this game that you see as part of that style? The BC analysis? Also, I don't see how the radfield post from another game where you were town applies to your alignment this game.
I'll give you credit for waking up in the middle of the night, but why was there no attempt to do anything earlier in the day? Are you saying you voted for LSB because you felt it was better than a no lynch, even though you thought the case on him was weak?
The conclusion I got from your post on BC is that he is playing "hostile". Was there another conclusion that I missed? Do you think a hostile BC equals a scummy BC?
What makes you think chezinu ragequit the game because he thinks the setup is broken? Sure he mentions it, but he doesn't give that as the reason he wouldn't be posting for a while.
On December 24 2011 16:43 prplhz wrote:
As for me changing my opinion, I don't think I am the greatest scum hunter ever. The most valuable thing I can contribute is my own opinion, but I think that can be wrong. That's why I throw ideas out there and then I see if people latch on to them. There are 10 other townies in this game, if what I am saying is prudent then some of them will listen to it and back me up. For the BloodyC0bbler analysis I got feedback from like three people, one of them turned out to be the traitor, and wherebugsgo didn't like it. That's why I dropped it, it's probably not a good lynch if nobody likes it as a lynch. I still find him scummy though and I'd like to lynch him if people come around, because people will come around if they realize he's a good lynch.
Have you changed your opinion/think you are wrong based on the feedback or would you still like to lynch him? You seem to indicate both. You're allowed to change your mind, but continuously pushing any of your ideas without confidence is a scum trait.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 24 2011 19:25 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 15:13 kitaman27 wrote:On December 24 2011 04:26 syllogism wrote:
If that's a waste of time, could you tell us who you would lynch? You placeholder voted yesterday and I don't see a single hint in your filter of you even implying who you find scummy Who do you find scummy syllo? So far today, the only thing you have done is show up to defend yourself about the change in play style comment. What do you think about prplhz? This looks exactly like his town play and would be pretty much the last person I would lynch today. I would like to lynch one of the people who have apparently decided not to play the game as by this point it's far more likely that they aren't just busy but rather are using it as a cover. Out of them BC would be my #1 choice.
What exactly has he done so far that "looks exactly like his town play"? Could you be more specific?
As for BC, what makes him different than another lurker, say GGQ?
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 25 2011 20:11 wherebugsgo wrote:
prpl are you seriously still this bad or are you actually scum this game?
What do you think? Would you be willing to vote for him?
@BC. Firstly, what is your role? The sooner the better, as we need as much time as possible to digest the claim. Secondly, if GM could confirm his alignment with his vig shot why did you decide to shoot him anyways?
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
@BC, who are your top scum suspects at the moment? You haven't mentioned anything besides your GM shot the entire four days.
@Foolishness, you finally wrote up a case against someone, but you haven't followed through with it or showed that you really care. What gives?
On December 24 2011 14:46 L wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 12:48 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
So L, you have a lot to say about trying to figure out who killed who, and how the night actions went down. Do you have anything to say about who you want to lynch, today? RE: Lynch choice. I don't have one quite yet because the day's going super slow and my suspicions aren't confirmed. But GGQ is the only person who Jackal's filter throws suspicion onto but I haven't had time to look through his posts properly yet. Also seems conflicting that his analysis, if I recall correctly, said that jackal was mafia killed. He wouldn't want to give that answer if that's why mafia hit jackal. So I'm kinda looking through posts atm to see if anything else pops up.
@L, have you been looking through posts for three days straight or do you just not care? Why does it matter who jackal was suspicious of? I want to know who you are suspicious of.
@GGQ, could you share your opinion of BC. Since you are voting Wiggles does that mean you buy his claim?
Who else will be around for the next 30 minutes? Please post if you are.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
You're always here for me bum.
Really bad reasoning on the vig shot and no evidence that he cares about the town.
##Vote: BloodyC0bbler
Let's see if anyone else is willing to hammer.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Kinda tough to get a majority when only 11 people are voting.
meh bedtime.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
Current Reads:
Probable scum team:
Foolishness- Not relevant in either the day one or day two lynch. Brings up a single case, but doesn't push it at all.
BC- Bad reasoning for the vig shot. Nearly all of his discission has been based on his vig shot, rather than talking about who he suspects as scum.
prplhz- See previous post.
L- Seems to be discussing a lot of things that aren't very relevant distracting town. Hasn't given us any solid analysis.
If not in the top four, the remaining are likely here (I know this is practically the rest of the town but activity has been really awful)
Liquid`Sheth
syllo
Mr.Wiggles
GGQ
RoL
Chezinu
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 28 2011 14:10 prplhz wrote:
I claim wherebugsgo.
GOD THAT FELT GOOD
err sorries.
Bedtime. Will post tomorrow.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 29 2011 04:11 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
Right off the bat early on in the game he noticed the vote count was off. And he had already voted something. For me when I'm town I never look at the voting count amount until much later.
How is me pointing out a flaw in the voting bot even relevant? I noticed it counted a vote which I didn't make and pointed it out. Why does that make me scum?
Also, I didn't even realize you had ever played a forum game as town. Could you link me?
On December 29 2011 04:11 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
He also "Expects more" from Foolishness, BC and GM" So, so far he has been curious or expected more from 4 confirmed townies and myself who is a townie as well.
It was because I did expect more from Foolishness, BC and GM. They were being pretty useless and I brought them up.
On December 29 2011 04:11 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
When the Vigilante showdown AKA "LSB vs GM two vigilantes of different names" occurred his solution was terrible from a town point of view. He wanted them to have one shoot the other one and for the other one to shoot someone who "appears townie". This was I believe the first time I really looked at Kita as Scum . This seems to me silly, because it ends up killing everyone, not really helping us by giving us information and in the end is just a bad idea. We'd like our vigilantes to stay alive as at that point we really didn't know how many we had. I'm sure you can figure out the other reasons this was a bad idea.
Your analysis completely falls apart at this point. In fact, you come off looking pretty hypocritical. My proposed plan was that one of the two shoots the other, while the other shoots a scum suspect. I still feel this was the best proposed solution to the GM/LSB counter claim. This is what you proposed instead:
On December 22 2011 12:13 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
I'd say leave them both alive, and only let them shoot each other. Clearly the one who really was vigilante prevails. Or if there both vigilante they both die. o.o; This seems like a solid idea to me. And we could use our lynch today on someone else.
My plan was exactly the same as yours, except mine yielded us an additional vig shot to shoot scum. If my plan was "terrible" from a town perspective and my plan was better than yours, what does that make your plan?
You say this is the first time I became part of your radar because you want the vigilantes to stay alive. According to your plan, they would both be dead night one!
On December 22 2011 12:13 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
He then says that he wouldn't mind putting 7-8 votes on a lurker (Sheth, myself), but then really never tries to do that at all. He almost instantly changes his thought process and goes after someone else. Honestly I think it would have been smart to try and put more votes on me. I wouldn't have answered, but if I was just scumlurking then it would have pressured me out into at least saying something.
Wait, so my plan was a good one, but I'm scum because other people didn't follow it?
On December 22 2011 12:13 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
He is then very curious about GM and his role and if he is roleblocked. I think it VERY likely that GM was in fact roleblocked. He was the obvious best choice for mafia to role block hands down. Kitaman27 then proceeds to ask "Would your bullet be refunded?" He is very curious about this townies power and what would happen if he was roleblocked. Just an interesting point for sure.
Now you're just trying to skew my posts. I was arguing with L because he seemed to think that GM lied about his shots. I think that is crazy and stated as so. I don't even understand what you are trying to say here.
On December 22 2011 12:13 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
He then proceeds to say in his big list that he is "leaning town on bugs" and that his main lynch candidate is on Prplhz. I don't know why he stopped pressuring the lurker (myself) or why he instantly went onto Prplhz here. I was very happy with what I'd seen from prplhz at this point. Syllogism was as well, pointing out that "prplhz has appeared very protown". Bugs then proceeded to try and start suspicion against Prplhz by asking if he was just bad in general or only as scum. Something I also thought was out of place. This didn't go anywhere and then he Bugs proceeds to switch his case onto BC when no one else agrees with voting out Prplhz. Kitaman27 has never really caused ANYONE major pressure. He hasn't had a passion of scum hunting. He has in the end done very nearly nothing for us. He should have at least kept up his pressure on the lurker (Myself) and been more passionate against Prplhz if he truly felt he was scummy.
I admit my reads have been off this game, but at least I'm trying to share my opinion. Don't say I'm not trying to scum hunt, when your first real post hasn't come until more than a week into the game.
think that is crazy and stated as so. I don't even understand what you are trying to say here.
On December 22 2011 12:13 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
After Prplhz reveals that he had killed WhereBugsGo Kita says sorry for accusing Prplhz. He was very against apologizing early and one of the reads early that we had was that in most cases here scum would be apologetic and simply try not to die by lynch or agravating someone by trigger or simply vig shot.
lolol I asked you to stop apologizing because you did so in every single post. I was wrong on prpl and I'm allowed to say sorry.
Overall, everything just looks really weak.
I'll write something up against L later today.
|
kitaman27
United States9245 Posts
On December 29 2011 07:09 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
You were asking very specific questions about how roleblock affects a vigilante. Especially now doesn't this seem like something mafia would like to know, especially if they don't kill him that night.
If I wanted the answer, I could have just asked the host if vig shots are refunded. The reason I wanted to know was if GM claimed roleblock that night, I wanted him to state whether or not he could shoot again so he wouldn't use it as an excuse for not trying to shoot scum after night one. This was still at the point where I thought he could be scum.
On December 29 2011 07:09 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
What do you think about me saying I'm sure RoL is telling the truth and thus town? I can prove this, so please be careful on how you answer.
Telling the truth about what? That GM shot RoL and was roleblocked? I agree that he shot RoL since lying about that doesn't make sense. RoL either lived since he was rb'd or mafia has a medic. Same thing for the Foolishness shot on L. Are you a watcher or something?
On December 29 2011 07:09 Liquid`Sheth wrote:
L / Syllogism / Chezinu / Bumatlarge would be the 4. Do you think this situation isn't possible? I veer off point here.
Err bugs already flipped scum? Those four wouldn't need to be scum. I think L is scum, either chez or RoL is scum, and either you or syllo is the third.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
