Responsibility Mafia!
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Too easy. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
First thing's first, I'm not going to spend much time trying to guess specific role/game mechanics. Why? Because the set-up is closed, and there's no way to figure it out with no flips (Besides people claiming). Everything else is complete conjecture. The game seems like it's been designed to punish bad play though, so I'm just going to try to not play badly. Also, I think Mafia mechanics if they exist will be built around punishing bad play as well. So stuff like lurker-vigs, claim-vigs, maybe stuff like that, but I'm going to stop now. If people want my general thoughts on possible game mechanics, then I'll post them. Secondly, my thoughts on Chezinu. I'm not going to policy lynch him unless someone can prove he's done something worth lynching him for. There's two possibilities as far as lynching him goes, because I don't see him actually giving up information when pressured. 1) We policy lynch him, and waste all of day 1. 2) We don't lynch him, and as the game goes on, he'll either get shot, or give up more information about himself. (Whether he means to or not). Basically, I don't feel like lynching anyone only because they're useless. I want to lynch someone because they're scummy. Maybe they're scummy and useless, but that's just incidental. Chezinu has the ability to contribute to the town, and so he doesn't make a good policy lynch. What we have to look for is if he's still around later in the game, and then at how he's playing. I don't see him exerting too much influence on the town, so as long as people are aware of him, and deal with him later if he remains unreadable or noncontributory, then I think we're good. Next, BC said he's going to post: On December 20 2011 16:47 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Hasn't done so yet, though. I'll give him time, but I think we should pay close attention to players who are lurking. I've had games with BC, Foolishness, and FW where they just lurked as mafia all the way until day 3 or later with minimal contribution to the thread. If a player refuses to help, or contribute, then we should shoot/lynch them before they can make it too far along in the game. This goes for everyone./confirming my role however I will not be posting until I sober the F up. Just got home from a staff party and can barely organize coherent thought. Don't even know how long this took to write without errors. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 20 2011 23:53 SamuelLJackson wrote: Also, I found this curious, in one of the posts that the hydra made, specifically the bolded part, and I'm wondering what other people think about it.GMarshal that's such stupid reasoning. If anything having two people post on the account just gives you twice as many chances to slipup and twice the scum tendencies. It's much more beneficial for Town since we can bounce ideas off each other and feed each other - as Mafia you already have that channel of communication with the rest of your teammates. /Curu GM just said that he wants to kill the hydra because he finds it hard to read. So, in defense, the hydra says what I quoted. What I find interesting, is that he defends the use of the hydra by saying it's more beneficial for town than mafia. However, the choice to play as a hydra comes before the game even starts. So, he's trying to defend his being a hydra as being pro-town, when it was a decision that was made before alignments. As well, why not attack GM's reasoning itself? He does this in part, but it's more that he says the contrary, when either case has a chance of being correct, and is terrible reasoning for keeping someone alive/lynching them anyways. It's like if I said you're scum because your name is Tim, and instead of telling me how silly my argument is, you argue that your name being Tim makes you more likely to be town. It doesn't make a lot of sense. What do people think about the fact that he's defending himself on the basis of a hydra being pro-town when the choice is made before he knows if he's town, and not arguing against GM's reasoning itself, but rather trying to spin himself as being easy to catch as scum? This stuck out for me, and I'm curious as to what others think. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
First the bolded, then the not bolded. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 21 2011 05:22 syllogism wrote: I said that neither case is good as an argument for lynching someone, or for keeping someone alive.Curu's reasoning appears solid; GM asserted that hydra's are inherently hard to read and therefore according to him anti-town, while Curu pointed out they actually benefit town because two players are more effective than one. How can you say that the former is a good reason to lynch someone while the latter isn't a good reason to keep someone alive? In the end all that matters is whether they are being useful and making sense, which is what your previous post was talking about GM's post wasn't a good reason to lynch someone. Curu's post wasn't a good reason to keep someone alive. I said neither were good reasons for anything. On December 21 2011 05:20 SamuelLJackson wrote: Ok, that makes a bit more sense. I still have to ask, though, why do you even bother arguing that hydra's are better for town? GM doesn't say that "hydras are inherently worse for Town", he says that they're hard to read, with no reasoning. So, to counter-act that, you give your own argument with no reasoning that they are easy to read.Is there anything wrong with my reasoning Wiggles? The fact is that a Town hydra is stronger than a scum hydra. I'm not saying it makes me more likely to be Town, I'm saying GMarshal's initial reasoning that hydras are inherently worse for Town is flawed. The fact that he tried to justify what he originally said was "irrational hatred" before the game with real reasoning once the game had started doesn't sit right with me. Back to VE's post you ridiculed me for asking Chezinu if he "wants to lynch scum," saying I am trying to appear to contribute. Then you turn around and ask Chezinu if he IS scum with even more useless questions. What's your purpose there? However, both arguments have the potential to be true, but neither of you provided enough explanation or evidence to support your claim. So, why bother even trying to say the opposite? Why not just say that GM's reason for voting you is bad (which it is), and explain why? Instead you try to spin it off that you'll be easy to read this game, which doesn't sit well with me. What's the motivation for doing so? That's what I'm wondering. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Also, Foolishness, do you have any other thoughts you'd like to share? From my experience playing with you, you avoid posting a lot as scum, and also try to avoid having to contribute. This makes you look like an apathetic or busy townie, but in my games with you, you turned out to be scum. So, I'd rather you remain more active than that, so I can get a better read on you. Gonna re-read LSB's posts and WBG's case on him. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
I can guess the reason for the first one, any particular reasons for the latter two statements? About LSB: Right now, I'm getting a null-vibe off him. He hasn't contributed too much to the game so far, besides talking about mechanics/general things. His posts on these seem decently reasoned, and I can follow the logic behind them. He's also questioning people a lot, which I see as pretty normal for such an early stage in the game. He hasn't made any definite posts in regards to his thoughts on other players, though. So, he's null to me, until he starts talking about other players and pushing his opinion in the thread. Edit Before Posting: LSB posted some of his reads, so that makes me feel a little better about him. So, I don't particularly agree with WBG's analysis of LSB. On December 21 2011 07:30 SamuelLJackson wrote: Aren't these phrases contradictory? How can he be avoiding pissing people off when he's "making bullshit conclusions" out of their posts? That doesn't make much sense.Just to clarify, the part about wbg's case I find relevant is the bottom part and I'd like people to comment on it and LSB to respond to it. LSB's posts so far seem very meek to me, always answering something or clarifying something. It really feels like he is actively avoiding pissing off people and he is making bullshit conclusions out of other players' posts. Doesn't feel like the confident townie LSB, it looks exactly the opposite. The points about his response regarding chezinu and the sk thing don't really tell me much though. I'd also like to hear from Sheth, He hasn't really done anything but come in, quote me, and say: "I agree". What are your thoughts? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 21 2011 12:43 Chezinu wrote: Yay! Someone actually asked me in the thread to translate one of my posts! No one has ever done that. Here is a different translationn: As most veterans are fully aware, role claiming will eventually come up. In previous games, I have jokingly and rather skillfully claimed to be a bank. However, I will not conduct such actions this game. This game is different than most games as I softly hinted earlier in hidden links. The mafia has a list of blue roles. If the blues claim, the mafia can verify such roles. If a townie fake claims a blue role, the mafia will know he is lying. With confusion being my specialty tactic, I have developed a strategy where a blue role can fake claim another blue role so that the mafia will believe the blue role is just a lying bored townie or a black role. So, I can pretend to be a blue role that fakeclaims another blue role to come off as a townie or a black role. For an example of a type of role to claim, just think of Ver's motives. He strives not to punish bad play but improper play. Since he wants us to type civilly, he could well have a nazi role that kills people for bad grammar. If he does have this role, he would have another role that will kill the grammar nazi. So if someone would fake claim this role, they would have to be aware of the grammar nazi hunter. Ver can't stand reading fragments where you have to fill information. He wants us to type as well-educated teamliquidians. In this matter, I support the bum rebellion against conforming to Ver's chains. Even if it cost me my life in this game, I will have my joy knowing I played as Chezinu and not Ver's puppet. But let us not get too caught up with the mechanics of the game for we still have to deal with lynches. That plan won't work, though: Mafia will be given a list or some or all of the blue roles in the game but not told how many of each exist in the game. There's the possibility that scum only have a partial list of blues, meaning that they can't punish role-claimers, or claim that someone is fake-claiming. Unless Ver told them if the list is partial or complete, which I doubt. I think the list is meant more to give scum "safe" claims, and also to give them an idea of what town roles in the game look like. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Can any of the older vets tell me how BC plays in their experience? In my experience, when he's town, he is motivated, and posts actively. For example, here's his filter from PTP2: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=245008&user=10200 XLVII: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=285690&user=10200 In both games, he's active, and contributing. In both games, you get the feeling he actually cares about what's happening, and wants to have an influence on the game. Now contrast that to: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=295384&user=10200 One post, that's completely vacuous. Almost everything he says has either already been said, or is useless. This runs completely against my experience with townie BC, and is very similar to my experience with scum BC. In any case, I want him to post more. ##Vote: BloodyC0bbler What do people think? @prplhz: I'd rate it as pretty bad. Kind've reminds me of what I did in Mini Mafia X. In any case, I want to see what GM has to say now, to see whether it's BS, or something that's actually contributory. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Assume 3 scum. Case 1: GM green LSB green Lynch LSB: GM shoots tonight, either kills scum, or hits town and dies. 16-2 or 14-3 Net Loss: 1 scum/1 town, or 3 town. Don't lynch LSB: GM and LSB shoot tonight 17-1, 13-3, 14-2 Net Loss: 2 scum, or 4 town, or 2 town, 1 scum Case 2: GM Red LSB Green Lynch LSB: GM doesn't shoot because he's scum 16-3, Net Loss: 1 Town (We have a scum to lynch) Don't Lynch LSB: GM still doesn't shoot, LSB does. 17-2, 15-3, Net Loss: 1 Scum, or 2 Town (We have a scum to lynch) Case 3: LSB Red GM Green Lynch LSB: GM shoots tonight 17-1, 15-2, Net Loss: 2 Scum, or 2 Town, 1 Scum Don't Lynch LSB: GM shoots tonight, LSB doesn't 17-2, 15-3, Net Loss: 1 Scum, or 2 Town (We have a scum to lynch) Case 4: GM red LSB red lolwut? So, if we lynch LSB, the only way we don't end up hitting scum is if they're both town, and GM misses his shot. If we don't lynch LSB, we get a scum unless they're both town and both miss their shot. I'm kind've tired, so I'm not sure if this makes sense completely, or if I made some stupid mistake. Otherwise, it the outcome looks similarin either case (Lynching LSB or not). However, not lynching LSB means that it's going to take longer to get the same information (about LSB and GM). If we lynch him, then we see his flip, and either kill a scum, or lose a town KP. What are the chances someone claims RB in the morning, though? That means we're either going to have to lynch them out of principle, or deal with bullshit for the next couple days. What do people plan to do, when someone claims RB, or claims their shot but the target doesn't die (vet or protected)? I see this as pretty likely to happen, regardless of if one is scum or not. @GM or LSB: If you shoot a protected town target (medic or vet), do you still commit suicide? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
He actually placed that picture in his post, after he was pressured as well. I think it's so that if the wagon on him actually picked up speed, he could claim. When LSB claimed his role, GM counter-claimed, in order to cause a mislynch. If LSB flips town, Scum GM still knows that Justice Vig is a role, and can claim that Ver put in similar roles with different names to punish claimers. He can then claim RB or that his target was protted in the morning when he fails to deliver a shot, or if scum is really ballsy, they can shoot one of their own or something. The only thing that doesn't make sense about this, is that this would be close to trading 1 for 1 with town, because in the folow-up, GM is likely to die if he's scum. However, it seems likely GM would be put under lots of pressure, and potentially be killed if he was unable to deliver day 2. Especially after pleading for more time, and then it makes more sense to try to kill a vig by lynch on Day 1, if we was on course to a vig shot himself, anyways. This is assuming GM is scum, though. I actually think there's a 50-50 chance between them about who's telling the truth (assuming they're not scum). GM's picture breadcrumb means nothing to me, because he hasn't done anything to prove his role. It's like what Ace always talks about, with breadcrumbs being useless before you flip. WBG did something similar in Mini Mafia X, going jk jk jk, and then claiming Jailkeeper. Town just ate that one up, too. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
##Vote: GMarshal For now. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 22 2011 13:38 wherebugsgo wrote: wow, this is ironic coming from you. What have you done all game? RNG VE? You have no room to talk when it comes to activity. Why are you assuming there are 3 scum, wiggles, when the total mafia number is listed at 4? Oh wow, I'm dumb and can't read the OP, lol. I saw L guess the KP earlier, and thought it was the mafia numbers. It doesn't make a difference for the net outcomes, though, just the town/mafia numbers in the morning. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 22 2011 13:39 kitaman27 wrote: Wiggles, you don't mention which scenario you prefer... Also, why did you assume 3 mafia? OP clearly states the mafia count is four + a traitor. I knew I could count on your support. Now witness the wrath of my town influence as I gather 10 other votes in the next 20 minutes. ##Unvote ##Vote Foolishness It doesn't make much difference. Lynching one of them gives us more information, sooner, though. As well, leaving them both alive has more variance, which can be good or bad (Between 2 scum dead, no town losses, or 4 town dead, no scum losses). If LSB is a vig and shoots me tonight (I'm his red read), we're going to be losing two town tonight, though. Lynch ends in 18 minutes? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
##Vote: LSB To avoid random vote-switches to no-lynch. @Above: I don't think there's enough time, or enough players around. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 22 2011 13:55 SamuelLJackson wrote: It has nothing to do with the roles. Do you understand what GM is claiming? It is not like DT or Medic, it is impossible for scum to fulfil the role he is claiming. Sure he can fake RB every night but unless there's more than one RBer that means scum can only really RB their kills (and if one is Medic saved they're screwed doing that) and when the RBer dies GM is screwed. The problem is if he has a scum role. For example, if he's the RB, he can claim RB each night, and people will (hopefully not) let him live. However, just by living, he's doing scum a service. Same thing if he has any other role, whether it's a framer, scum-vig, or whatever. Letting a scum fake-vig live lets them use their ability at least one night, and if he claims RB, then he gets to live multiple nights and continue to use his power. It's beneficial to just continue to live for them. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
That's why I want to hear what people will do if GM claims RB or that his target was protected in the morning. I'd rather not let him live for multiple days, possibly on minimal contributions, just by claiming RB (Which is likely to happen) So, we're going to have to judge him based on his contributions. If he doesn't pick up his game, and start to give us concrete analysis, then I'm not going to sit back and let him live night after night claiming RB. @GM, I want you to contribute more. Give me scum, or I'll hang you. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 22 2011 14:06 Liquid`Sheth wrote: I agree with Samuel L here. Really worried about GM. MrWiggles, why did you post that you find it very unlikely that they're both red? Don't you mean its impossible there both red? Your post up there seems a bit weird to me. IF LSB flips red, I find it unlikely that GM is red too. Why would you counter-claim you fake-claiming scumbuddy with the same role and a different role name to attract a bunch of attention to yourself and get your scumbuddy lynched only to not be able to produce results from your fake-claim except by killing another of your scum-buddies? That would make very little sense. It's highly unlikely, but still a (remote) possibility. I don't see how my post doesn't make sense. Also, I think the motivation for a scum GM to CC is that he was under a lot of suspicion. He was one of the names that was being thrown around to be lynched, and by pleading for more time, he's forced to produce results tomorrow, but if he's scum, he won't actually be able to do so. So, he CCs LSB instead, kills a blue role and causes a mislynch day 1, and then people will probably be content to let him live as long as he keeps claiming RB. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Also palmar is not acting the same as his town meta, somethings off. If BC continues to be inactive, he's scum. Sheth is scummy. Foolishness and VE townie (VE much more so). In case I got shot. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
This makes sense if you know there won't be a shot and you'll claim RB. A townie who dies if he misses would want to take the best shot with the best chance of hitting scum, not gamble. I hope I don't look like a retard when the day post comes. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Also Palmar was weird. SK (Non-BP?) or traitor, or something. RoL was protted, or GM was RBed. There are similar role-names that punish claiming. Don't counter-claim based on names. BBL. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
This is relevant to your discussion, it's FW's filter from personality mafia: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=252145&user=56990 He was scum, and he lived until the end of the game, because no one would lynch him. The defense that scum BC wouldn't play badly/scummily isn't a very good one. By reputation, FW is a very good player, but he was forced to lurk on Day 1 in Personality Mafia, so he just continued to do so throughout the game, making excuses for his inactivity, and being ignored. BC's given us an excuse for Day 1, but if he doesn't pick up his activity, or give us any content, then we need to either lynch or shoot him, because what he'll do is just slink through lurking. Same thing goes for Foolishness, or any vet who doesn't actually do anything now that it's Day 2. About my post before day: GGQ's saying I'm scummy for it, but at that point, I was pretty sure that GM was scum. I would've thought that he'd consider that there's multiple roles with different names, when this game's made to punish bad play. I would've thought that he wouldn't lurk all of day 1 and act scummy, and then I would've thought he'd give us stronger reads and a much better shot before the day post. So, I was mad, because I thought he was scum, and was pretty certain that he'd be claiming RB after the day post to cover for that. Also: ##Vote: Sheth | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 24 2011 04:10 syllogism wrote: I considered that scenario likely for a few reasons:Jackal as a n1 mafia kill seems bizarre to me unless NKs are based on some sort of triggers as well. He only pushed for LSB and didn't post anything relevant during the night @GGQ: do you believe mafia has two role blockers or that chezinu is lying? One of the two have to be true for your scenario to be possible Wiggles: what exactly did you mean here Why did you consider such a scenario likely? Do you have the list of blues? Even if the setup has a bunch of vets/medics, it actually seems quite unlikely for a town vig to hit someone who is medic protected. Regardless, now that something like that has happened, what do you think should be done with RoL? Despite flipping traitor, I think Palmar was ironically right about you 1) If GM is scum, then he can't actually shoot. So, he's forced to either claim RB or that his target was scum and protected. 2) If GM was a Townie, and was telling the truth, then there's a good chance of Mafia RBing him to cause confusion. It would look the same as in case 1. 3) There's the possibility mafia have a medic. A mafia medic is only ever going to be protecting one of their own members on night 1, barring very odd circumstances. So, if GM had good aim, was town, but shot a protected scum, it would again look like case 1. I didn't need a list of blues to be able to tell that there was a pretty decent chance GM's shot wasn't going through. If he's scum, it's not going through for sure, and if he's town, then it's not going through if he gets RBed or shoots protected scum. Based on how he had been acting, I thought he was likely to be scum, and then we'd fall into case 1. When I said someone there, I was referring specifically to LSB and GM. I was asking what people wanted to do, because a lot of the time, people just let claimed RBed fake-claims live night after night. What I wanted, was to threaten GM with lynch if he claimed his shot didn't go through, and follow through on it, unless he actually gave us a very credible case for why someone else was scum, or some other kind of significant contribution. So, that post had nothing to do with if other people claim RB or not, just the claimed vigs. The reasons for RoL living right now, are as follows: 1) He was medic protected: Verdict: Unlikely, but possible While in a normal game, this might make sense, as he is considered a good vet, I don't see a good reason for it in this game. He had only one or two posts, with little content in them. He wasn't likely to be shot, and then if protected on the principle of being a vet, there are other players who fit that bill too, being Foolishness, BC, and L, and they were all more active and easier to get a read on than RoL. 2) GM was roleblocked: Verdict: Likely Like I wrote above, mafia would do this to cause confusion and make it look the same as if GM was scum. 3) GM shot someone else: Verdict: Possible I don't really see a reason for it, and like others have said, if he did, he bread-crumbed it in his list of reads. However, I don't really see the point in fake-claiming your shot after the deadline. What's the point? However, a lot of GM's other play didn't make sense to me, so maybe he did this, too. -_- 4) RoL is a Vet: Verdict: RoL didn't claim taking a hit, so no. So, right now, I think that we should treat RoL the same as any other player. I don't see a reason why GM's claimed shot on RoL should make a difference in how we treat RoL. RoL's failure to die, doesn't say much about his alignment, as we are unsure of who hit who, and if GM was possibly RBed. Instead, we just look at his posts, and pressure him to post, like any other player in this game. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 24 2011 05:14 GGQ wrote: Wiggles, here you criticize GM for calling people scum for bad reasons, then you use those same reasons to call a bunch of other people scum (sheth for lurking, palmar for bad meta, BC for not playing as good as you think he should). What gives? Nah, I said I got a weird feeling from Palmar, not that he was necessarily scum. I was disagreeing with GMarshal's assessment that he was playing exactly to his meta. Sheth is scummy for lurking, but also because of how he is lurking. He has enough time to read the thread and post in the other game he was in, but all he can do in this one is quote and say "I agree?", that's pretty bad. Also, I don't care how good BC is playing, but right now, he's just kind've gliding along as an inactive/lurker. He said he'd be busy on day 1, which implies that he'll be back to post on day 2. If he doesn't, then I find it likely he's scum. It's the same thing FW did in Personality mafia, where he would just come in with a post every now and then and make excuses. It's day 2, and we have 4 vets, RoL, BC, Foolishness, and L, who haven't actually bothered to commit to anything with regards to other players. They aren't all going to be town, and there's no way they're all scum. So, some of them are just not doing (or at least contributing) anything as town. Also, the difference between GM's post and mine, was I just wanted to give a quick summary of my reads in case I was dead. GM's was his grand contribution to make up for a whole 48 hours of lurking, and was meant to astound us and completely redeem him for his scummy behaviour. It wasn't just that GM called people scum for bad reasons, but also because those were the only reasons he could come up with when his life was probably (and almost literally) on the line, when it came to finding scum. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 24 2011 04:56 prplhz wrote: @RebirthOfLeGenD If you don't want to talk to me, then don't. I don't see the town motivation for being so harsh to me like that unless you think that I'm scum. I asked you about this very clearly but you are avoiding the question. You seem too obsessed with clearing yourself through GMarshal having hit you while I think most of the indications we've had points to GMarshal actually only dying from killing a townie if that townie also dies. Why don't you clear yourself through some scum hunting instead? @Mr. Wiggles Is Liquid`Sheth the best lynch for us today? Sheth is a good starting point for today. I encourage you to vote for him. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
##Unvote: Sheth ##Vote: BloodyC0bbler | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 25 2011 14:07 L wrote: Please do. Everyone's obviously experiencing some serious turkey coma. Yeah, that'd be cool, Ver. I'll respond to Bum when I'm soberer, or if I feel like doing it drunk/tipsy. I think his reasons for voting me are pretty weak, and some of them are nonsensical, and flat out wrong. For example, Chaoser didn't claim the shot on GM, he claimed the shot on Palmar. That's just one easy error I saw reading through quickly, and something Bum should take note of if he's using it to inform his reads. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On December 25 2011 13:22 bumatlarge wrote: Monsieur Caterpillar I like when jackal and palmar (even though he was a traitor) rofl'd at wiggles first post. I looked at his first post in cosmic horror, and thought they were fairly different. Still it was useful to see what wiggles posting as scum looks like, because hes someone I've mis-analyzed a few times (Sleeper Cell, was pretty sure scum, was town; Town in Insane Mafia 2, black). By the way, thanks -_- I just spent an hour reading through insane2. I'll say what scummy similarities I do see. + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2011 05:00 Mr. Wiggles wrote: Hi everybody. Just finished exams, so it's time to start the game. First thing's first, I'm not going to spend much time trying to guess specific role/game mechanics. Why? Because the set-up is closed, and there's no way to figure it out with no flips (Besides people claiming). Everything else is complete conjecture. The game seems like it's been designed to punish bad play though, so I'm just going to try to not play badly. Also, I think Mafia mechanics if they exist will be built around punishing bad play as well. So stuff like lurker-vigs, claim-vigs, maybe stuff like that, but I'm going to stop now. If people want my general thoughts on possible game mechanics, then I'll post them. Secondly, my thoughts on Chezinu. I'm not going to policy lynch him unless someone can prove he's done something worth lynching him for. There's two possibilities as far as lynching him goes, because I don't see him actually giving up information when pressured. 1) We policy lynch him, and waste all of day 1. 2) We don't lynch him, and as the game goes on, he'll either get shot, or give up more information about himself. (Whether he means to or not). Basically, I don't feel like lynching anyone only because they're useless. I want to lynch someone because they're scummy. Maybe they're scummy and useless, but that's just incidental. Chezinu has the ability to contribute to the town, and so he doesn't make a good policy lynch. What we have to look for is if he's still around later in the game, and then at how he's playing. I don't see him exerting too much influence on the town, so as long as people are aware of him, and deal with him later if he remains unreadable or noncontributory, then I think we're good. Next, BC said he's going to post: Hasn't done so yet, though. I'll give him time, but I think we should pay close attention to players who are lurking. I've had games with BC, Foolishness, and FW where they just lurked as mafia all the way until day 3 or later with minimal contribution to the thread. If a player refuses to help, or contribute, then we should shoot/lynch them before they can make it too far along in the game. This goes for everyone. On August 24 2011 02:51 Mr. Wiggles wrote: ##Vote: Eiii Where you at? Killing Eldricht would be nice to get rid of the third party, but it's not the biggest priority for town on Day 1, because it takes him a while to achieve his win condition. (Like at least 7 nights if greens aren't killed/lynched, unrealistic, I know, but just an example) As well, we have the psychologist who can cure insanity. So, to talk about the set-up a little, do people think it would be a good idea for the psychologist to claim his target at the end of night 1? It makes the psychologist claim early, but that way if he dies, then we have probably found the Eldricht Horror. The only way this wouldn't be the case, would be if mafia shot him, but then he could just claim earlier. (Because mafia don't really want to shoot him right away without reason, as he keeps them from losing the game to insanity as well) There's both Pro's and Con's to this, and it depends on the relative threat that we perceive the Eldricht Horror as. Pros: -Lets us catch the Eldricht Horror more easily, knowing as soon as the Psychologist dies. -Let's us coordinate the Psychologist a little (don't know if this is necessary) Cons: -Mafia know not to shoot the Psychologist, reducing the pool of townies (1 person so not that terrible) -Mafia can screw with town by killing the Psychologist and trying for a mislynch on his target. Personally, I don't really think it's worth it after actually writing out the Pros and Cons, but I don't think I'm going to delete this post because I spent like 5 minutes writing it, and it provides a good start for actual discussion. In my opinion, a better option is actually having the psychologist bread-crumb his visits, so that way, if he ever dies and flips, then we have a list of players cleared of being the Eldricht Horror, and we have a possible target for who the Third Party actually is. Discuss! One he goes right into the set-up and the other he completely ignores it. The most similar thing is how desperate wiggles is to talk about something. He doesn't want to talk about the set-up so he makes up whole paragraph instead of simply not talking about it. Though how can we blame him when every other person posts 5 lines of questions about every little thing. Maybe he was just covering his townie bases. Of course I'm desperate to talk about something, because the thread wasn't moving very well, and we need things to talk about if we want to get the game moving along (which is partially the reason I'm taking the time to form a detailed response to this). So, I responded to some of the topics I found relevant. Also note, I said I didn't want to talk "much" about the mechanics, not that I didn't want to talk about them at all. I have thoughts on the mechanics that could be possible in this game, but I'm not going to write an essay about it, because it won't do much to help us, as it is conjecture, and it won't do anything to reveal my own, or others, alignments. + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2011 05:12 Mr. Wiggles wrote: Also, I found this curious, in one of the posts that the hydra made, specifically the bolded part, and I'm wondering what other people think about it. GM just said that he wants to kill the hydra because he finds it hard to read. So, in defense, the hydra says what I quoted. What I find interesting, is that he defends the use of the hydra by saying it's more beneficial for town than mafia. However, the choice to play as a hydra comes before the game even starts. So, he's trying to defend his being a hydra as being pro-town, when it was a decision that was made before alignments. As well, why not attack GM's reasoning itself? He does this in part, but it's more that he says the contrary, when either case has a chance of being correct, and is terrible reasoning for keeping someone alive/lynching them anyways. It's like if I said you're scum because your name is Tim, and instead of telling me how silly my argument is, you argue that your name being Tim makes you more likely to be town. It doesn't make a lot of sense. What do people think about the fact that he's defending himself on the basis of a hydra being pro-town when the choice is made before he knows if he's town, and not arguing against GM's reasoning itself, but rather trying to spin himself as being easy to catch as scum? This stuck out for me, and I'm curious as to what others think. On December 21 2011 05:38 Mr. Wiggles wrote: I said that neither case is good as an argument for lynching someone, or for keeping someone alive. GM's post wasn't a good reason to lynch someone. Curu's post wasn't a good reason to keep someone alive. I said neither were good reasons for anything. Ok, that makes a bit more sense. I still have to ask, though, why do you even bother arguing that hydra's are better for town? GM doesn't say that "hydras are inherently worse for Town", he says that they're hard to read, with no reasoning. So, to counter-act that, you give your own argument with no reasoning that they are easy to read. However, both arguments have the potential to be true, but neither of you provided enough explanation or evidence to support your claim. So, why bother even trying to say the opposite? Why not just say that GM's reason for voting you is bad (which it is), and explain why? Instead you try to spin it off that you'll be easy to read this game, which doesn't sit well with me. What's the motivation for doing so? That's what I'm wondering. On December 21 2011 10:37 Mr. Wiggles wrote: I can guess the reason for the first one, any particular reasons for the latter two statements? About LSB: Right now, I'm getting a null-vibe off him. He hasn't contributed too much to the game so far, besides talking about mechanics/general things. His posts on these seem decently reasoned, and I can follow the logic behind them. He's also questioning people a lot, which I see as pretty normal for such an early stage in the game. He hasn't made any definite posts in regards to his thoughts on other players, though. So, he's null to me, until he starts talking about other players and pushing his opinion in the thread. Edit Before Posting: LSB posted some of his reads, so that makes me feel a little better about him. So, I don't particularly agree with WBG's analysis of LSB. Aren't these phrases contradictory? How can he be avoiding pissing people off when he's "making bullshit conclusions" out of their posts? That doesn't make much sense. I'd also like to hear from Sheth, He hasn't really done anything but come in, quote me, and say: "I agree". What are your thoughts? I'm not sure if wiggles just feels an attachment to these players or if really no one else was talking, but he went the extra mile to pressure townies who are dead now. In hindsight, it looks fairly distracting. He also put's in an extraordinary amout of effort into what happened last night, which honestly doesn't seem incredibly important. At a first glance it seems like scum picked off lesser vets to prevent suspicion on bigger names, which is alot of the people left. LSB seemed like the last thought on his mind, but I can't blame him for forcing the lynch through. + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2011 04:32 Mr. Wiggles wrote: I considered that scenario likely for a few reasons: 1) If GM is scum, then he can't actually shoot. So, he's forced to either claim RB or that his target was scum and protected. 2) If GM was a Townie, and was telling the truth, then there's a good chance of Mafia RBing him to cause confusion. It would look the same as in case 1. 3) There's the possibility mafia have a medic. A mafia medic is only ever going to be protecting one of their own members on night 1, barring very odd circumstances. So, if GM had good aim, was town, but shot a protected scum, it would again look like case 1. I didn't need a list of blues to be able to tell that there was a pretty decent chance GM's shot wasn't going through. If he's scum, it's not going through for sure, and if he's town, then it's not going through if he gets RBed or shoots protected scum. Based on how he had been acting, I thought he was likely to be scum, and then we'd fall into case 1. When I said someone there, I was referring specifically to LSB and GM. I was asking what people wanted to do, because a lot of the time, people just let claimed RBed fake-claims live night after night. What I wanted, was to threaten GM with lynch if he claimed his shot didn't go through, and follow through on it, unless he actually gave us a very credible case for why someone else was scum, or some other kind of significant contribution. So, that post had nothing to do with if other people claim RB or not, just the claimed vigs. The reasons for RoL living right now, are as follows: 1) He was medic protected: Verdict: Unlikely, but possible While in a normal game, this might make sense, as he is considered a good vet, I don't see a good reason for it in this game. He had only one or two posts, with little content in them. He wasn't likely to be shot, and then if protected on the principle of being a vet, there are other players who fit that bill too, being Foolishness, BC, and L, and they were all more active and easier to get a read on than RoL. 2) GM was roleblocked: Verdict: Likely Like I wrote above, mafia would do this to cause confusion and make it look the same as if GM was scum. 3) GM shot someone else: Verdict: Possible I don't really see a reason for it, and like others have said, if he did, he bread-crumbed it in his list of reads. However, I don't really see the point in fake-claiming your shot after the deadline. What's the point? However, a lot of GM's other play didn't make sense to me, so maybe he did this, too. -_- 4) RoL is a Vet: Verdict: RoL didn't claim taking a hit, so no. So, right now, I think that we should treat RoL the same as any other player. I don't see a reason why GM's claimed shot on RoL should make a difference in how we treat RoL. RoL's failure to die, doesn't say much about his alignment, as we are unsure of who hit who, and if GM was possibly RBed. Instead, we just look at his posts, and pressure him to post, like any other player in this game. I wanted to pressure those people, so I could get a better read off of them. I don't see how you can fault me for that, and how it matters at all if they're townies. If they're townies, they shouldn't react scummily, and they didn't. That's why, when I initially thought the hydra was suspicious, I didn't end up pushing for his lynch, because I didn't think he was scummy enough to. How do you get information out of people if they won't give it up voluntarily? You pressure them, and ask them questions. If you're direct, they shouldn't be able to ignore you, and if they do, that still gives you information about them. About the other post, that was prompted by a question by Syllogism. He asked me what I meant by one of my posts, so I explained it to him. Would you rather I ignored him? I don't see how that could help things. As well, it didn't require an "extraordinary amount of effort", just 10 minutes of thinking of what the possibilities are. I'd personally be more interested in GGQ or L right now, who seem to have been able to put lots of effort into coming up with possible (and sometimes contorted) versions of last nights events, but who haven't seemed to have put as much effort into actually finding scum. It seems wrong to accuse wiggles for posting, but he is doing it and none of what he is saying is pushing any useful thoughts forward. I'm all for analyzing possible occurrences, but GM is already dead, and chaoser said he shot him. I can lay alot of blame on syllogism to. Honestly, next mafia game I'm on a team with syllo, I'll just tell him to ask all of us a bunch of questions so it looks like we are all doing something. When you post a question, and someone answers it, please explain why you did. Are you legitimately asking something you don't know the answer to? Or do you have some notebook you never plan on revealing until the game is over? Wiggles is scummy to me, but people are too quiet, and he isn't. I'd rather wait for BC to have a catfight with RoL or something to see if wiggles is still worth wasting an hour reading some game that I screwed up in a year ago. I'm unsure of what you mean by not "pushing any useful thoughts forward". Can you explain what you mean by useful? So far, I've been trying to pressure people, and get more information out of them to inform my reads. I think I've been moderately successful in that endeavor, as well. Also, your point about GM is bad, because Chaoser did not claim the shot on him, so talking about the possibilities of last night is perfectly valid. In fact, if you thought Chaoser claimed the shot, I'm even more surprised you didn't look at L or GGQ, as they (and others I can't remember off the top of my head) spent significantly more time trying to come up with theories about what happened last night, but you've seemed to have ignored them. That seems suspicious, as you call out my one post as an extraordinary effort and a waste of time, but ignore those others who did the same and more. Why did you choose to do that? @BC: Why did you wait so long to claim the shot on GM? Why did you shoot GM? (I'm basically echoing RoL's sentiments here, I want to hear an answer). | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Nobody has been lynched! Hey, we lynched scum! Also, what gives, GGQ? | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
THE END | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
| ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On January 08 2012 14:29 bumatlarge wrote: For whatever reason you looked really scummy this game, I probably would have shot you if I could. I was going to shoot you, too. But then I didn't. I guess I'm just a bullet magnet Almost shot WBG n1 for fun too, because he was the only one who PBP'ed, but didn't. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On January 10 2012 03:13 chaoser wrote: I really think we should just get another bang-bang mafia going. seriously that game was hilarious. Or another toy death factory. Let's do Guts and Glory again. Also, I'll remember Death Factory forever, you helped kill us all | ||
| ||