EPTYou will know why.
Purgatory Mafia - Page 8
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
You will know why. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
we have like 10 hours.. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
I will vote within the hour. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
what now? | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
On January 15 2012 10:17 Refallen wrote: layabout can you explain why you could only vote in the hour? I am not quite sure what you mean... I said i would vote at that time I did not wish to vote earlier because the last early lynch ruined the atmosphere and killed activity. It also meant that by 8:00KST the lynch would almost certainly happen, which would give RoL plenty of time to help us if he wanted to. He didn't. Also why is HoD trying calling me scummy for using my 250th post to articulate a bullshit law? It's literally called "Laybout's Bullshit law". It is based entirely on Bullshit. I haven't used it to scumhunt whatsoever. But doing it lightens up the reading though filters process and allows me to highlight things i think players have done/said that are misleading bad or wrong etc... | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
Right now HoD is perhaps the scummiest player in the game right now and this should show why. Let's start by looking at the major eventss to happen in the thread and compare them to what HoD has been posting about. Day1 major events: People began by pointing fingers because he said he would be busy IRL and didn't provide much content before he left. We moved on from this because there was nothing was raised that made Bluelights seem likeley to flip scum My "lets not let people lurk" plan is met with resounding apathy Mr. Wiggles posted analysis of Palmar and Palmar received votes Palmar posted a defence/counter-case and WIggles received votes People spoke out against this and the main focus was placed on players who were lurking risk/refallen/Erandor/Tyrran/Grackaroni/RoL were the other players in the spotlight Erandor gathered votes and a case was made against risk.nuke Risk.nuke lead votes and reached 9 votes There was a switch in the last hour/5minutes to lynch Erandorr HoD day1 posts: + Show Spoiler + On January 04 2012 15:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Oh hey, a game of mafia! So as I am sure many of you are aware, the demons have no kp. The angels on the other hand, have 1 kp that they can use on anything, and 1 kp that they can use on demons, or "dark" town players. Given that we also have a demon hunter that can kill anything that isn't an angel, and a town sage that can undo the demonic corruption, I think it is pretty clear that our first priority should be to find and lynch angels. Hell, corrupted town can even help us find the demons. Lynching a demon is certainly preferable to no lynching or lynching town, but our main focus must be on lynching angels. They cannot be killed outside of lynching, and if we manage to lynch either the angel of death or the acolyte we lower their potential kp. If we lose our demon hunter or sage, then we need to start worrying about the demons more, and if we lose both then they become a threat on par with the angels, if not a greater threat. Now, I am not really sure how to distinguish between angel and demon rather than just town or not town until we get an angel or a demon to flip, but if you have a leaning toward one or the other, remember that killing angels is more important for now. All that being said, I don't want to hear about strategies for angels or for demons unless you also have a very good counter to said strategy that you will be sharing with us. They both already have 3 people per team to figure out the best way to play this setup, no sense in helping them out even more. Starts out writing about Angels and Demons Recommends we do not discuss Angel or Demon strategies so that we do not help them out. On January 04 2012 16:17 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: You are informed when you are corrupted. If the sage is still alive you say "I got corrupted" and then the sage cleans you of corruption. 2 cycles of demon powers taken care of. (they only get to corrupt every other night) As I said, I am not very worried about them until we lose our demon hunter or sage. Tells corrupted town to claim, which would allow the acolyte to kill them. On January 04 2012 16:56 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Oh right, kills resolve before corruption removal. T_T This is pointed out, and he acknowledges it. He doesn't say don't claim, but it is implied. Bearing in mind that he later claims sage, he doesn't seem to understand how the sage functions after he received his role, (because he isn't the sage). On January 04 2012 17:19 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: You pointed it out in the post prior, I was reading the thread, and read the whole thread before replying to it, and his was the more recent mention of it so I hit the quote button on that one. I explicitly said don't share them unless you have a counter. I never said I was against sharing ways to fight strategies. If anything my statement implies that you should share if you have a counter to an angel or demon strategy. Don't twist my words. As for the order of action resolution, I read it when the game was posted and for some reason thought I recalled the cleansing being the first thing to resolve, not last. My bad. Emphasises the "Unless you have a counter" part. As if that justifies the don't talk about scum strats in an open setup stance. (it doesn't) On January 05 2012 03:55 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Some things to think about: If the town seer claims after finding a single angel we have a 2/3 chance of reducing their kp, 2/3 chance of making it much safer to claim corruption, and a 100% chance of getting a lot of good information after the angel flips. There are no abilities in the game which make the reads come back incorrect. The angels also DO NOT have a roleblocking ability, so they then have to decide if they want to target the seer and risk missing a kp if the seer is sent to purgatory or leave him be. Obviously this becomes much riskier if we have already lost our channeler. I'd be interested to hear if other people think having the seer claim after their first angel find is a good idea as well. The sage on the other hand probably shouldn't claim unless he has 2 demons identified. If he claims with only one identified, 0% chance of reducing kp or reducing the corruption ability, demons have a roleblock ability, angels can kill the sage to make demons a larger threat to town thereby reducing focus on them. Still gain information obviously, but overall seems like a much weaker play than the seer claiming after finding an angel. The demon hunter is not only useful against demons. His attacks kill anything that isn't an angel....meaning if his target lives and wasn't sent to purgatory, he has successfully identified an angel. However, since he poses a significant threat to both angels and demons, I don't really see much of a reason for the demon hunter to ever claim, except perhaps to avoid a lynch if he fucks up and appears scummy. So please don't do that. On Bluelightz: I will go check out his filter in the newbie game to see what all the fuss is about. On his 12th post he promises to read BL's filter.Everything else before this has been roles and setup-based speculation. This kind of posting is really safe to make at the start of the game as he doesn't need to make a stance on anything. Note the Bolded part. Note that HoD claimed that Grackaroni was "not demon" when he claimed. Not only is this a contradiction, but this time he didn't add a condition whereby what he is saying doesn't apply as he did in his first post. On January 05 2012 04:53 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Lynch the person that seems scummiest, obviously. And still acquiring reads. We have plenty of time left, no need to rush the lynch. Not only is this general easy-to-give general advice but when he later votes, HoD votes to "avoid a no-lynch" On January 05 2012 15:05 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: So how would people feel about lynching Palmar or Erandorr if they don't start posting more? Both have posted nothing of worth so far, Palmar was even active elsewhere on the mafia forum today, and both are known for doing very little as scum. He has now talked a little about lynching lurkers, He suggests lynching Palmar or Erandorr for inactivity. (this is pre-Wiggles case) On January 06 2012 05:08 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: All but two of my posts as of when you said this occurred while I was one of 5 people with posts in the game. Clearly I shoulda been scum hunting hard with all that info in the thread. I also did not and do not want a lurker lynch today. I wanted Palmar and Erandorr to start contributing, and the thread was fairly inactive at the time, so I thought bringing up a more controversial idea like lynching a couple veteran players might help get things moving, or at least get them contributing a bit more. Also, please don't use my first game ever to establish a meta on me. I've obviously adjusted my play since then. Try checking out Steamship or Election (as TotallyNotTwoPeople, starting game day 2 for when I basically began playing solo) to get a better meta read on me. @risk.nuke Isn't carefree play usually a townie trait? How does seeming carefree implicate bluelightz? The "everyone looks town!" is surely incriminating, but I am not finding the carefree being incriminating. Why would town get nervous when accused? They know they are innocent. Explaining themselves, yes, but I know I get annoyed, not nervous. @jackal, erandorr, xsksc and RebirthOfLeGenD Planning on doing...anything? Posting things would be appreciated. @refallen In election mafia I was only able to clear you on the basis of you figuring out exactly what scum had done in several situations when pointing it out was solely detrimental to scum. That is not the most reliable way of establishing your innocence if you are in fact town. Do you have a lynch target yet? He steps up to defend himself and makes two contradictions: underlined: "I didn't want to bolded: "Don't use meta from my first (but recent) game against me. I have changed. Use meta from a game where i was account sharing day1 when you try to analyse my day1 play, or use meta from another game". The "I've obviously adjusted my play" really doesn't hold weight given how few games he has played. The question to risk nuke adds to the discussion topic at the time. The rest is useless. On January 06 2012 12:26 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Grackaroni: + Show Spoiler + On January 06 2012 09:06 Grackaroni wrote: That's basically one of the reasons I'm suspicious. You post a lot at the start and then when scumhunting begins you disappear, not that you didn't scumhunt at the start. The only meta I got from you was that you seemed like somebody who posted a lot and spent a lot of time scumhunting in that game. I should have looked into more recent games but what's wrong with letting me think that of you? the first part of your quote strikes me the wrong way because I get the feeling that you just wanted to downplay my abilities, you don't care if I accuse you and think my opinion should be worth less than a veteran like syllogism. You've done nothing to change my mind, the only person you call scummy is me and your reasoning is that you think my case against you is shitty + you add in my opinion of bluelightz which I don't think you would have even mentioned if I didn't accuse you. Next you make some posts about people lurking and leave. You haven't been scumhunting but you keep giving me reasons to believe that you have lots of time to do so : [previous game with lots of scumhunting and posting, early signup, post a lot on strategies at the start of the game (early to find out it started too) quick to see my post and has time to defend yourself] You're definitely holding back in your posting. Yes, I give your opinion less weight than I give syllo's. If you want to change that, be correct as often as he is over the course of many games. I am often around, as I work from a computer all day, but my availability fluctuates. I found out about this game through a PM for early signups from Zona, so yes I found out about it pretty early, I don't see what that has to do with anything. If you check when I usually start posting during the day, you will find that it is often around the time you posted your accusations against me. I am not holding back in my posts, I just like to get at least something from everyone before I really start making judgements. If you actually cared, you could easily look up my more recent play and you'd find that I tend to ask a lot of questions during games and I don't usually do a ton of case-building day 1 and realize your meta-argument is useless. If you think inactivity is a scum tell for me, be sure to read day 1 of election mafia. I did roughly nothing, I was town. Basically what I am trying to say is, you are wasting time/effort tunneling me and I'd appreciate it if you put in the effort needed to realize that. Speaking of asking questions, you ignored my question regarding bluelightz. Anyway, on to more useful topics. Re: Palmar I agree that his lack of activity is suspicious and rather out of the ordinary for him, but I am wondering if it is worthwhile to risk lynching a potentially very strong scum-hunter on the grounds of not caring this early into the game. I know of at least one other game where he didn't take day 1 very seriously (XVIII I think it was?). If that is the only one, than obviously his play so far is more damning than if he does this every so often. If any of the vets could fill me in on whether or not he has messed around day 1 in other games as well it would be appreciated. I'd also like to hear syllo's opinion on the matter, since if I am not mistaken syllo is usually quite good at reading Palmar. (If I am mistaken, feel free to correct me) @Refallen You seem more aggressive/bold in your defense than the past two games of yours that I just took a quick look back at. Have any explanation in particular for that? After some more comments about BL he decides to defend Palmar because town Palmar is valuable. He praises syllogism a lot. On January 07 2012 07:47 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Well, it appears as though xsksc is no longer playing this game, as his last post was: January 04 2012 23:24. I don't like lynching lurkers, but from what I know of Erandorr, his lurking makes him likely to be scum, and I do like lynching scum. Barring him showing an actual commitment to playing, I would be fine with lynching him. On risk.nuke, his playstyle seems to vary a good deal between games, so I am not sold on him being scum yet and would certainly like to hear a bit more from him before deciding whether or not I think he is worth a lynch. Tyrran Tyrran's play seems very different from his play in steamship where he was town. He is being much less aggressive so far, and usually people are more aggressive as town than they are as scum. I think he would make a fine lynch for the day. My only qualm with lynching him is that he hasn't interacted with other players much so far, so his flip will be less revealing, but I like our odds of hitting scum here. My vote will be on him for now. His steamship filter: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366&user=57176 His filter so far this game: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&user=57176 ##Vote: Tyrran Based on limited past experience and meta: Eran lynch- fine Risk lynch- unsure, wants to here more Tyrran lynch- very limited arguments for him being scum, "placeholder vote" He then calls Palmar apathetic, generally asks for thoughts on Tyrran. Then he posts this: On January 08 2012 06:41 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Unfortunately I will not be around for the lynch deadline. As stated previously, I am also fine with an Erandorr lynch, so I will be switching my vote to him now as I don't want a no-lynch to occur. Sorry, no birthday sympathy from me. He has shown no commitment to this game, and it is my understanding that this makes him very likely to be scum. In spite of the fact that at this point in time the tide was turning on risk and the votes were 6/5 risk/Eran before he voted. and that he says he voted because he didn't want a no-lynch to occur he votes for Eran tie-ing the vote. The two players that had a chance of being lynched were Erandorr and risk.nuke. This had been evident from before his post in which he voted Tyrran, and wrote a sentence on both risk and Erandor. He avoids giving an opinion on risk.nuke. HoD barely talks about either risk or Erandorr, he was actively taking part in discussion early on but when the lynch drew near he didn't bother to give a proper opinion or try to influence other peoples opinions. Major events Night 2/ Day 3: High levels of inactivity. notable acussations against Jackal, HoD, Tyrran Grackaroni makes the first "spaackel is scum post" because spaackal thought Palmar was town. Cwave killed by Demon Hunter, Mr Wiggles killed by AoD, Syllogism Jailed. Lynch targets and cases against RoL, and HoD. HoD gains 5 votes and people willing to hamer in. Hold off of lynching him and agree to lynch RoL and jail HoD. HoD claims sage during this time. RoL given time to defend self. RoL claims channeller, doesw very little else RoL lynched flip is concealed. HoD day2 posts: + Show Spoiler + On January 08 2012 13:44 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Hmm, should have stayed on Tyrran I guess. Ah well, based on his effort so far in this game/in election mafia, nothing of value was lost (at least not beyond the worth of another warm body). I'm still interested in Tyrran as a lynch target, and I would like to hear more people's opinions of him. He starts out by saying he still think's Tyrran is a good lynch and wants other people to contribute their thoughts. He does not commit to saying why or making a strong case. If you are town and you think a player should be lynched, is this how you would approach it? Asking other people to offer opinions and then give yours? What if you think they are really scummy and have reasons? Wouldn't you provide them and give people a reason to focus on that player? However if you are mafia then saying you find a player scummy but not saying why makes a lot of sense: If people start to indicate that they also feel the player is scum you can hide amongst them and seem like a townie voting for a player they think is scum. It allows you to claim that you started the case or that you had been pressuring the player should player question what you have been doing. It allows you to back off and not bring it up again should you widh because you haven't committed any arguments as to why you think that. On January 09 2012 04:16 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Are people seriously trying to implicate me on the basis of "soft-defending" risk by voting Erandorr instead? Now, I can't speak for the people throwing suspicion on me, but I sure as hell don't know risk's alignment, and unless they somehow do, I don't see how it can be implicate me as being scum. Anyone trying to implicate me on this before risk flips is using shitty logic. If risk flips scum and then you want to come after me, then you have some logic on your side. I did not vote for risk nor comment on it much as I had (and still have) a null read on risk. Risk has been in every game I've played on here, and his play-style has varied too much from game to game for me to be comfortable with a day 1 read on him. @RebirthOfLegend Demons ignore the blues, angels target two, they have a 50% chance of killing the channeler night 1, second night they get him for sure. Best case scenario is we have one blue alive after night 2, worst case they are all dead night 2. In the meantime we roleblock one of our own blues. Alternately, they ignore blues with the angel of death, use that kill on our best scum hunters and use the acolyte on our blues. Also, this plan ignores the possibility of a blue deciding not to go along with it and claim. Basically, I think the plan is quite bad. He defends himself and says that the reason people are calling his actions around the vote are that he was soft-defending risk. He then attacks that logic to defend himself. Actually what is scummy is that he was disinterested in the vote because if he was/is mafia then he knew the players were not on his team but that one of them could have been on the opposite scum team. Should he get involved and one player gets lynched and flips scum and the other later flips scum, he would then receive a ton of attention. If he is town then he should not need to be so cautious and should have been making himself heard. He then comments on RoL's plan by re-hashing outcomes i had previously outlined here and here On January 09 2012 05:03 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: ...because I was leaning scum on Erandorr and was not on Risk. I didn't comment more on it because I was busy yesterday as I had to get shit ready for my girlfriend's birthday party/then was at it. For those wondering why I had a null read on risk, here is what Syllo said about him earlier this game: Here is me asking about him in Steamship: Notice any similarities? Fun fact, he was town in steamship. He was leaning scum on Erandor and Null on risk. Which is interesting because on that day he basically ignored risk and his "leaning scum" was due to inactivity. He draws a parallel between day1 this game and day1 steamship, implies that him not being aggressive day1 in both games and him being town that game means that he must be town this game. Not only is that poor logic, but he has criticised the points made against risk by addressing an aspect of the meta side and ignore the rest. (fun (slightly subjective)fact:risk just ignored the meta side and made weak comments that did not directly address the other points) On January 09 2012 06:12 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Oh shit, he went 24 hours more than he did previously without being aggressive? Clearly scum! Also, when I voted I hadn't read the newer parts of the thread very carefully as I was busy most of yesterday so I went with my best scum read at the time. Deal with it. And there definitely wasn't any aggressive tones in these posts, no, not at all! Before my vote: After it: Now, can I stop talking about somebody I still have a damn null read on, or would you like me to keep wasting time on the matter? Underlined:Clearly a lot of people didn't have null reads on risk nuke as he had reached 9 votes before AND was under a lot of pressure at this time AND was lynched quite a while before the lynch deadline. Why would HoD try to distance himself from a risk lynch? Because he knew that risk was not on his team. Bolded:"when I voted I hadn't read the newer parts of the thread very carefully as I was busy most of yesterday so I went with my best scum read at the time. Deal with it." he basically admits that he didn't put effort into deciding who to vote + On January 07 2012 08:07 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Yes, because I think Tyrran is more likely to be scum than Erandorr at this time. On January 09 2012 10:48 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: What? Why would who flip? I was/am confused that the angel of death didn't kill anyone and think it is most likely that syllo was targeted by the angel of death. Having popped in to defend himself he tries to force discussion about safer topics: Speculation about about night actions! On January 10 2012 03:16 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Why I think I was put in purgatory: I think Palmar and/or his team mistakenly believed that I was the demon hunter due to these posts: + Show Spoiler + Detailed understanding of the role: On January 04 2012 17:56 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Demon Hunter: Twister: Doesn't make any mention of attack (nor of sense). Demon hunter should be good to go on any twisted demons. First to point out that the demon hunter is also effective vs angels: On January 05 2012 03:55 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Some things to think about: If the town seer claims after finding a single angel we have a 2/3 chance of reducing their kp, 2/3 chance of making it much safer to claim corruption, and a 100% chance of getting a lot of good information after the angel flips. There are no abilities in the game which make the reads come back incorrect. The angels also DO NOT have a roleblocking ability, so they then have to decide if they want to target the seer and risk missing a kp if the seer is sent to purgatory or leave him be. Obviously this becomes much riskier if we have already lost our channeler. I'd be interested to hear if other people think having the seer claim after their first angel find is a good idea as well. The sage on the other hand probably shouldn't claim unless he has 2 demons identified. If he claims with only one identified, 0% chance of reducing kp or reducing the corruption ability, demons have a roleblock ability, angels can kill the sage to make demons a larger threat to town thereby reducing focus on them. Still gain information obviously, but overall seems like a much weaker play than the seer claiming after finding an angel. The demon hunter is not only useful against demons. His attacks kill anything that isn't an angel....meaning if his target lives and wasn't sent to purgatory, he has successfully identified an angel. However, since he poses a significant threat to both angels and demons, I don't really see much of a reason for the demon hunter to ever claim, except perhaps to avoid a lynch if he fucks up and appears scummy. So please don't do that. On Bluelightz: I will go check out his filter in the newbie game to see what all the fuss is about. Unfortunately for the demons, and fortunately for us, they were incorrect and Palmar got stabbed in the face. (Yes, it is possible that it was the acolyte, but why would the angels kill someone they could get lynched when lynching is the only way for us to kill the angels?) I already highlighted why this is scummy/ incorrect http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13077558 please read the full exchange for context On January 10 2012 03:52 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Syllo, you're pretty smart, so please tell me why on earth you think Palmar would banish me to purgatory if he thought I was an angel? Let's look at the scenarios: 1) I am the Angelic Observer - sending me to purgatory does nothing for the demons. 2) I am the Acolyte - unless I for some reason decide to go after a demon instead of a blue, does nothing for the demons. If I do go after blues, doing this hurts the demons. 3) I am the Angel of Death - I would never hit Palmar when I could get town to use up a lynch on him as lynching is the only anti-angel kp. Also leading a scum lynch can get some town cred. So one demon (Palmar) is safe. Another demon can be twisted, so now 2 are safe. Note, so far this also applies to the acolyte even if the acolyte is targeting a demon. So now blocking the angel of death is only useful if the third demon is also a likely target for a scum night kill. I don't see how any of those are a better choice than targeting someone you think is a blue, especially if you have no idea which I am and are taking the 1/3 chance of a remotely useful roleblock. As I stated, I think it is much more likely he thought I was blue than an angel. Not only is this stupid but it relies on assumptions about how the angels would act - He would kill Palmar because he could get him lynched? Based on the effort he has put into getting players lynched I sincerely doubt that this is the case. On January 10 2012 04:32 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: *sigh* So if you think this is pure WIFOM, why are you even discussing it? I found a simple explanation for my being sent to purgatory, simple explanations are often correct. And no, I can't know for certain that it was Palmar that did it, but if it was the town channeler then our channeler is dumb as fuck, which I find unlikely. The valuable information is what likely happened in regards to the night actions last night. Knowing our own roles and alignments, Syllo and I have better insight into it than most. Obviously the channeler, demon hunter, and scum teams know a good deal as well, but I doubt they'll be claiming just to clarify this. He asks why i am discussing WIFOM. I am accusing him of using WIFOM. Note that the two are different and that as he is being accused and is scum it makes sense for him to make it seem like a discussion instead. If you believe that we were discussing it then he makes the point that i shouldn't be doing so because i believe it to be WIFOM. If i shouldn't be discussing it why should you be reading it? He calls it a discussion to make you think it was a discussion and then dismiss it. He also uses occams razor, its a simple solution, the simplest solution is usually correct ==> you should believe the simple solution i have suggested. There are many other simple solutions to "what happened and why" that he could have been defending. He is applying the logic to mislead in a situation in which it is not valid. On January 10 2012 04:32 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: ...but there is literally a 0% chance of angels knowing which demon role Palmar was before he flipped so that is irrelevant. And you hit blues over demons because the seer, demon hunter, and channeler are all incredibly potent town assets against angels, and demons being alive gives you valid targets to scum hunt and get lynched instead of your teammates. If town is weak, sure, they might start killing off some demons on purpose, but them doing so now would be stupid. I elaborated point 3 because it was the only one that might actually be worth a damn to the demons. Now, unless anyone has specific questions for me or actually wants to lynch me instead of just saying "I think he might be an angel" and then doing nothing about it, I will no longer be mentioning my trip to purgatory/what I think the reasoning behind it is and will instead focus on more useful shit. Hey look - a list! Care to explain anything about it? Lists without reasons are pretty useless filler. @Tyrran You still have yet to make any real contributions. Planning to start doing so any time soon? @Those suspicious of Syllo I think you are mistaken. The odds of him being a demon after his interactions with Palmar seems quite low to me, unless he was willing to bus Palmar today, he mentioned Palmar was essentially claiming scum during the night. I think it is very likely he was targeted by the angel of death, the only way I could see him not being town is if he is the angel of death. He speculates even more about angels and demons and commits to "focusing on more useful shit" He does this by asking me to explain my "suspicious bastards" list after i had been pressuring him. Now if you have had eve a cursory glance at my filter you will probably observe that i am thorough. I highlight things and i had during the previous day/night mentioned things i found scummy about all but one of these players. Other players have sheep voted or made baseless accusations and HoD could have picked up on one of these. So i then posted a sort explanation of why and he responded: On January 10 2012 05:21 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Why insinuate that I haven't been reading the thread? I assure you I have read every post at least once, and most more than that. Also, I started writing that post (and my one immediately prior) before your explanation of Dirkzor, and had not refreshed since then. I have no way of knowing if you have posted 100% of your reasoning for a player being scum, I saw you had called RoL's plan bad, but so had lots of people, and I don't think merely suggesting it is enough to make him scum and wanted to know if there was anything else. Syllo already pointed out why your reasoning for Refallen is questionable, and I honestly didn't think you would deem him scummy solely on that. Presumably after Palmar's flip Jackal looks better - he strongly wanted people to vote Palmar, so I wanted to know what your reasoning was there. As you said, you hadn't mentioned much on Tyrran yet. Hey look, my question was valid on 5/6 (or 4/6 had I refreshed earlier), sure was redundant! underlined:This is quite a strange statement why would i have posted 100% of my reasoning for all 6 of those players being scum. Since i had barely (if at all) mentioned Tyrran and since before he refreshed i hadn't mentioned Dirkzor, it is obvious that i hadn't posted all of my reasoning, thus he should not have judged my calling them suspicious by the standard of have you posted 100% of your reasoning? +(i do not want to make an issuse of this now) it should be obvious why i believed Refallen lied about his vote on the deadline and it should be obvious why i might find that suspicious. +Palmars flip may have made Jackal look suspicious but given that Jackal always focuses on Palmar day1 to me it didn't even make it much less likely that Jackal was a demon. My suspicion of him was based on his arriving at the last minute and basically deciding the vote having not made his stance on the candidates clear earlier (most of that was in the timeline post) On January 10 2012 05:45 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: I could have asked that, but townies usually like to be transparent in their actions, so I thought asking if you'd like to explain would suffice. Also, please don't use the quote tag and then include something which is not a quote. That is misleading. The actual quote is: Not : his original question was "Hey look - a list! Care to explain anything about it? Lists without reasons are pretty useless filler." I wanted to make the point that given how vague this question was and given that i had raised suspicions about the players in the list i felt that it was redundant question. I then challenged him to make his first real contribution. But alas my inept typing/formatting let me down. And like every other person to lose an argument ever he corrects my grammar and ignores my point. On January 10 2012 05:41 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Zephirdd Care to elaborate on what it is about Tyrran's posting that makes you change your mind between here And here: Changing your mind is obviously fine, but I'd like to know why beyond "his posts are weird". He is still poking people to get them to call Tyrran scummy without providing his own contribution. He then makes a few more posts that speculate about night actions On January 10 2012 15:39 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: While I still agree RoL is far from being the towniest of players, I'm having trouble seeing how he suggests that plan as scum. The only reason for scum to suggest a knowingly anti-town plan is if they also think they will be able to get town to follow through with it. Given the overwhelming negative response to the plan, I think it was quite clear to most people that a town would never follow through with that plan. Also, this is the guy that suggested we lynch 7 people in one day in steamship when there was an explicit warning about dangers in store for a town that lynches too many people in one day (for those not aware, we could vote for and lynch as many as we wanted to in one day in that game), so I am not sold on him being too bright to suggest this plan as town. I'm not sure if anyone else picked up on it, but despite all of the legitimate concerns voiced against the plan during the night, Tyrran had this to say earlier today: I would obviously prefer to lynch Tyrran over Risk today, but I don't like how Risk has fallen off the face of the earth now that there has been less suspicion on him/pushing for his lynch. He hasn't gotten himself into any real shouting matches yet either, which is unlike him. Also the fact that Syllo is still suspicious of him is of interest of me, because Syllo is often right, and the later into the game it goes, the more likely it is that he is correct. @Syllo Is there anything in particular that makes you think Risk is a better lynch than Tyrran? He post's this. most of the points are already made by sylloigsm here (clicky)here and The reasoning was also outlined here from an exchange between myself and syllogism. I later try to explain this to BH much to my own frustration. This argument is completely not original. He also makes it in a peculiar way Bolded: they fact that the town response was negative does not also mean that scum would have expected an entirely negative response. Underlined: In steamship, if town had lynched those 7 players you would have killed zephird, Greymist and cyber cheese, since Greymists role is what killed town after the roleclaim then that plan arguably would have won the game, so i don't get what your point is. Your say you would like a tyrran lynch and you also encourage people to listen to syllo who wants to lynch risk. Scum HoD would have known for certain that a risk lynch was not going to kill his team-mate. On January 10 2012 17:14 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Grackaroni At the start of this game it looked like you were going to be useful and do things and say stuff. Then the day one lynch happened and you apparently decided that you had done quite enough of that 'being involved in the game' nonsense. Since then the only real post you've made is still not particularly useful or insightful: + Show Spoiler + On January 10 2012 13:07 Grackaroni wrote: I agree with you BH, RoL looks really scummy. It's not the fact that he has been fairly inactive and "hustling" like erandorr but that he's been actively using his time to push a plan that is bad for town and defending his plan rather than scumhunting. Since he is already coming kind of close to the lynch (would be 5/9) I'm going to refrain from voting until he comes in to defend himself. Why the loss of interest? Are you planning on going back to being active/useful anytime soon? Do you have any other reads you might like to share? You criticise Grack for behaviour that matches yous (saying stuff early and then not contributing) and ask him a bunch of questions On January 11 2012 14:02 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @RoL See this post for the current time remaining in the day: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603#6 Anyway, I got the chance to spend some time today doing a bunch of rereading, and after doing so I will not be voting for RoL nor Risk today. Maybe I'm being dense, but I really don't see them as being leading candidates for flipping scum. If I end up having to choose between the two to avoid a no lynch, I favor lynching Risk over RoL, but I'd prefer to lynch neither. My top target remains Tyrran. His passivity and seeming lack of confidence in his reads and overall disinterest in the lynches just seems unlike most townies, and unlike how he played in my prior game with him. While I didn't want to make the following point yet to see if he would keep doing it, Dirkzor already brought it up and stated it quite well, so no reason not to restate it now: While I think that alone is scummy for any player to do, here's some examples of how Tyrran himself presented cases in his prior game: + Show Spoiler + On November 16 2011 20:07 Tyrran wrote: So you were a fervent defender of only lynching 'scummy' lurkers. And now you suddenly decide to vote for kenpachi without giving any reason Could you please detail a bit more on why you like kenpachi as a vote, other than the fact that he did not post much ? His townie claim basically does not mean anything Keeping an eyes on lurkers is good, but i would wait to the end on day 1(the last 24 hours) before voting for one of them. It seems to me that blanket voting this early on day one can only lead us divide our attention. Voting for someone whenever he says something strange without trying to pressure him more/confirm him as scum is a great way to lynch a lot of townies and seems to be a good strategy for the mafia side, but not that great for town ( obviously). Bumatlarge espescially has been trying to push the town into lynching as many people as possible. Almost each one of his post include a quote on how we should lynch every single player. Spoiler below shows some example from this filter : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366&user=31777 + Show Spoiler + On November 16 2011 10:36 bumatlarge wrote: Why would you FoS when you can just vote them. Don't be pansies. Realized I didn't properly vote. I doubt I will ever take my vote off of kenpachi, it's not that I don't like him, but he is not an asset to the town at the moment, or the forseeable future. Nisani has proceeded to call me dumb or scum, but that doesn't change the fact that his fluffy posts stick out, so it will stay there until he remedies it. ##Vote: Kenpachi ##Vote: Nisani201 And this Is why LAL is bad. What possible reason would cause mafia to post this instead of town. By all means keep up the detective work and checking out all the inconsistencies, but use a little sense. This definetely contradicts itself, and it could very well be an intentional lie, but even that doesn't make him scum. The bad strategy reason tht DCL brought up is actually something to go on. You are pushing your luck by trying to find lies a day into the game. Use that energy to filter a suspicious person instead and get a general vibe, and see if their future posts push you one way or the other. If there wasn't a majority lynch in play, I'd put my vote on everyone, and start taking off people who don't register as scum. That's about how many people I think should be lynched each day. On November 16 2011 02:32 bumatlarge wrote: Next person that mentions LAL is getting a vote placed on them. Seriously enough with the useless shit. We will be lynching however many scummy people we can find on the particular day. We are restricting ourselves when we don't have a clue as to what our boundaries are. Nisani has posted complete fluff and none of it shows any effort in actually heling town. I don't think the new people are brain-dead, so unless the specifically ask about something, don't use them as an excuse to post asinine shit. Oh, hi kibbibit  ##Vote Nisani201 On November 16 2011 12:37 bumatlarge wrote: We got 48 hours from now, right? This time tomorrow we need to look at the votes and see where people stand. I'm honestly surprised how few votes there are, you get as many as you want, a decent townie can take advantage of this. There is no comparing how scummy certain players are to others, you just lynch them or you don't. I guess it's still early, and I'm still fishing for reads here. Oh and surprise, the only post not advocating to lynch the entire town is to defend chaoser, the ONLY person that agreed with the 'vote for everyone' strategy, after he got pressured by WBG. And by defending him, he explains than chaoser should stop doing just what he was advocating the town to do i.e: vote for everyone that seems scummy. So you spend all your post explaining we should vote for anyone who seems scummy, and you defend chaoser that was doing exactly that by saying "he should focus his attention more". How is that not a huge contradiction ? FoS bumatlarge. On November 17 2011 06:55 Tyrran wrote: Actually, i think that's a good point. However, if kenpachi flips red, i still think we should auto lynch lanaia. We cant let someone that anti voted a scum go free. Also, if lanaia is blue, she will most likely be a priority kill for the mafia ( who now knows she isnt green), and migth not live to see day 2 anyway. Also kenpachi, you're only defense is : "LOL TOWN IS BAD". I seriously hope that you can do better than that. ##Vote Kenpachi On November 18 2011 07:20 Tyrran wrote: So within four hours, we must focus on getting another lynch. We already have 2 people a 8 votes, i suggest we focus on them. Both look scummy, both are in my likely scum list, yet Drazerk voted for Sinani206 so its unlikely that both are scum. First of all, Sinani was a big partisan of dividing our attention . Quite amusingly he used the divide and conquer analogy, where as pointed by WBG, you are suppose to divide you enemy. Meaning we town are the enemy? He Bandwagoned against Lanaia, which as i explained before, is something that is very pro-mafia. Just look at his post just before, when we already established that Lanaia should not be lynched. Both his votes are given without any explanation other than "its obvious". He is either scum or an extremely bad town. Even Drazerk looks good in comparison. I dont think town needs him. ##Vote Sinani206 On November 22 2011 07:19 Tyrran wrote: Also, while I'm at it : ##Vote: Coagulation ##Vote: Sabin010 ##Vote: xsksc You lurkers unburrow just to lynch an innocent WITHOUT any justification at all, and completely disregarding the post where I understand that prp is a potential blue ( yes i called him vigi which he denied but still) and Palmar huge post in his defence. You are either scum or really crappy town, i dont want you in the game either way. I also dislike the look of xsksc->spaackle so far. I think the only original contribution either has made was spaackle's argument of Palmar looking town...which is not the best contribution to have. xsksc's filter: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&user=149333 Spaackle takes over: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&user=164534 I would appreciate it if others would take a look at bluelightz and tell me what they think. I am having trouble seeing how his posts make sense from a town perspective or a scum perspective, which is baffling to me. He seems to really like doing post by post...but then summarizing instead of analyzing. I don't think I've ever seen such a style before. @Cwave Please try to make your posts a bit more clear. I understand that english may not be your native language, but reading your filter hurts my head. Also, a good deal of your logic seems questionable, but I am not sure if that makes you scum yet. Some examples: + Show Spoiler + Palmar creates information spam, useless stuff and usefull stuff. I don't see how that observation by me makes me his buddy? I've played games with Palmar outside of the TL context and he is known for his textwalling and informationgathering skills, no matter what side he is on. Information and interaction is good for our town. Unless Palmar plays very differently outside of TL, I don't see how this can be true.Looking into Palmar his filter, he and Wiggles go off on some sort of duet where they distance eachother and vote for eachother. This logic is flimsy at best.Then they both switch and nothing is said of it and right before Palmar flips, he lists Wiggles as town. Where as before in his filter, nowhere does it come forward that he has really changed his mind or that Wiggles has him convinced that he is town. Seeing as Palmar flipped scum, im thinking MrWiggles might be one of his demonic dancing partners. -snip- In conclusion, these two were giving eachother nothing but hate right up until ~7:30 on the 8th of januari. Looks like a planned and organised move to move the votes of eachother after they created some distance of eachother on day1. He said he would claim. He didnt say he would claim VT like the states in his last post i quoted here. Wonder if that's semantics or a slip that he said he would claim VT against his scumbuddies and then thought he claimed it in here aswell. ...seriously? If he said he would claim, and he is a vt, then "I will claim" and "I will claim vt" are equivalent. Also, how could someone say they are going to claim VT later without having claimed... "Guys, I'm going to claim floridian later, but not yet!" His statement here has no logical thought in it whatsoever. You only have to fear the lynch if you are an angel..... (this quote was said in the context of him/layabout pressuring me) What the fuck? Why wouldn't demons or towns fear being lynched? In short, lynching Risk but hammering RoL is second best option. Syllo doesn't seem to agree on this, why i don't know. Unlike RoL(aka the guy who doesn't post) risk.nuke is still producing reactions and information in the progress, so RoL is a good option in my book. Hence i vote for him at this point as lynchtarget. No, i say Risk is my number one case. Calls Risk his strongest case, then votes for RoL instead...then seems to imply risk.nuke is producing useful information while RoL is not...then reiterates that Risk is his best case. What?If we can lynch him today, i will vote. Also, why did you say this: And then never vote for me? Geez that post came out longer than I expected. Ending with a vote on Tyrran, of course. ##Vote: Tyrran FINALLY you post WHY you think Tyrran is scum! why? because "His passivity and seeming lack of confidence in his reads and overall disinterest in the lynches just seems unlike most townies, and unlike how he played in my prior game with him. While I didn't want to make the following point yet to see if he would keep doing it, Dirkzor already brought it up and stated it quite well, so no reason not to restate it now" dirkzor wrote: In the end I'll just quote how Tyrran have taken no stance on anybody he have written a case on. Note: These quotes are cut, but they are all the last part of Posts by Tyrran. The point has been made that this matches your behavior around the lynch. You yourself highlight that Dirkzor had already made the point you are making. It is not original. You then cast doubt of spaackle because he thought Palmar was town. You encourage people to look at Bluelightz and tell you what they think. You ask Cwave to clarify something. You say a risk lynch is better than a RoL (which is relevant only because tehy are the two people that might ACTUALLY get lynched) You say that would would prefer we lynch neither yet you fail to say why they are bad lynches and you do not provide any convincing reasons for why we should lynch others. You then vote Tyrran, having stated a reason that applies to you, having made next to no effort to convince others to do so. The only other person to vote tyrran was Dirkzor, i wonder why... (it was his argument you were using) + here is a fun activity to try: click on HarbingerOfDoom click all hit Ctrl F type "Tyrran" what do you notice? | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
instead of Major events Night 2/ Day 3: it should be Night1/Day2 events: Night Discussion was focused on RoL's plan Palmar flips courier Syllogism/ HoD jailed Discussion about night events and possible actions Priamry lynch candidates: risk.nuke RoL Arguements about the plan +Accusations against: 2 votes on tyrran (HoD, Dirkzor) 1 vote on cwave (Tyrran) 1 vote on Drikzor (Jackal) risknuke hammered with half of the day left HoD day2 posts: + Show Spoiler + On January 08 2012 13:44 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Hmm, should have stayed on Tyrran I guess. Ah well, based on his effort so far in this game/in election mafia, nothing of value was lost (at least not beyond the worth of another warm body). I'm still interested in Tyrran as a lynch target, and I would like to hear more people's opinions of him. He starts out by saying he still think's Tyrran is a good lynch and wants other people to contribute their thoughts. He does not commit to saying why or making a strong case. If you are town and you think a player should be lynched, is this how you would approach it? Asking other people to offer opinions and then give yours? What if you think they are really scummy and have reasons? Wouldn't you provide them and give people a reason to focus on that player? However if you are mafia then saying you find a player scummy but not saying why makes a lot of sense: If people start to indicate that they also feel the player is scum you can hide amongst them and seem like a townie voting for a player they think is scum. It allows you to claim that you started the case or that you had been pressuring the player should player question what you have been doing. It allows you to back off and not bring it up again should you widh because you haven't committed any arguments as to why you think that. On January 09 2012 04:16 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Are people seriously trying to implicate me on the basis of "soft-defending" risk by voting Erandorr instead? Now, I can't speak for the people throwing suspicion on me, but I sure as hell don't know risk's alignment, and unless they somehow do, I don't see how it can be implicate me as being scum. Anyone trying to implicate me on this before risk flips is using shitty logic. If risk flips scum and then you want to come after me, then you have some logic on your side. I did not vote for risk nor comment on it much as I had (and still have) a null read on risk. Risk has been in every game I've played on here, and his play-style has varied too much from game to game for me to be comfortable with a day 1 read on him. @RebirthOfLegend Demons ignore the blues, angels target two, they have a 50% chance of killing the channeler night 1, second night they get him for sure. Best case scenario is we have one blue alive after night 2, worst case they are all dead night 2. In the meantime we roleblock one of our own blues. Alternately, they ignore blues with the angel of death, use that kill on our best scum hunters and use the acolyte on our blues. Also, this plan ignores the possibility of a blue deciding not to go along with it and claim. Basically, I think the plan is quite bad. He defends himself and says that the reason people are calling his actions around the vote are that he was soft-defending risk. He then attacks that logic to defend himself. Actually what is scummy is that he was disinterested in the vote because if he was/is mafia then he knew the players were not on his team but that one of them could have been on the opposite scum team. Should he get involved and one player gets lynched and flips scum and the other later flips scum, he would then receive a ton of attention. If he is town then he should not need to be so cautious and should have been making himself heard. He then comments on RoL's plan by re-hashing outcomes i had previously outlined here and here On January 09 2012 05:03 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: ...because I was leaning scum on Erandorr and was not on Risk. I didn't comment more on it because I was busy yesterday as I had to get shit ready for my girlfriend's birthday party/then was at it. For those wondering why I had a null read on risk, here is what Syllo said about him earlier this game: Here is me asking about him in Steamship: Notice any similarities? Fun fact, he was town in steamship. He was leaning scum on Erandor and Null on risk. Which is interesting because on that day he basically ignored risk and his "leaning scum" was due to inactivity. He draws a parallel between day1 this game and day1 steamship, implies that him not being aggressive day1 in both games and him being town that game means that he must be town this game. Not only is that poor logic, but he has criticised the points made against risk by addressing an aspect of the meta side and ignore the rest. (fun (slightly subjective)fact:risk just ignored the meta side and made weak comments that did not directly address the other points) On January 09 2012 06:12 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Oh shit, he went 24 hours more than he did previously without being aggressive? Clearly scum! Also, when I voted I hadn't read the newer parts of the thread very carefully as I was busy most of yesterday so I went with my best scum read at the time. Deal with it. And there definitely wasn't any aggressive tones in these posts, no, not at all! Before my vote: After it: Now, can I stop talking about somebody I still have a damn null read on, or would you like me to keep wasting time on the matter? Underlined:Clearly a lot of people didn't have null reads on risk nuke as he had reached 9 votes before AND was under a lot of pressure at this time AND was lynched quite a while before the lynch deadline. Why would HoD try to distance himself from a risk lynch? Because he knew that risk was not on his team. Bolded:"when I voted I hadn't read the newer parts of the thread very carefully as I was busy most of yesterday so I went with my best scum read at the time. Deal with it." he basically admits that he didn't put effort into deciding who to vote + On January 07 2012 08:07 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Yes, because I think Tyrran is more likely to be scum than Erandorr at this time. On January 09 2012 10:48 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: What? Why would who flip? I was/am confused that the angel of death didn't kill anyone and think it is most likely that syllo was targeted by the angel of death. Having popped in to defend himself he tries to force discussion about safer topics: Speculation about about night actions! On January 10 2012 03:16 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Why I think I was put in purgatory: I think Palmar and/or his team mistakenly believed that I was the demon hunter due to these posts: + Show Spoiler + Detailed understanding of the role: On January 04 2012 17:56 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Demon Hunter: Twister: Doesn't make any mention of attack (nor of sense). Demon hunter should be good to go on any twisted demons. First to point out that the demon hunter is also effective vs angels: On January 05 2012 03:55 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Some things to think about: If the town seer claims after finding a single angel we have a 2/3 chance of reducing their kp, 2/3 chance of making it much safer to claim corruption, and a 100% chance of getting a lot of good information after the angel flips. There are no abilities in the game which make the reads come back incorrect. The angels also DO NOT have a roleblocking ability, so they then have to decide if they want to target the seer and risk missing a kp if the seer is sent to purgatory or leave him be. Obviously this becomes much riskier if we have already lost our channeler. I'd be interested to hear if other people think having the seer claim after their first angel find is a good idea as well. The sage on the other hand probably shouldn't claim unless he has 2 demons identified. If he claims with only one identified, 0% chance of reducing kp or reducing the corruption ability, demons have a roleblock ability, angels can kill the sage to make demons a larger threat to town thereby reducing focus on them. Still gain information obviously, but overall seems like a much weaker play than the seer claiming after finding an angel. The demon hunter is not only useful against demons. His attacks kill anything that isn't an angel....meaning if his target lives and wasn't sent to purgatory, he has successfully identified an angel. However, since he poses a significant threat to both angels and demons, I don't really see much of a reason for the demon hunter to ever claim, except perhaps to avoid a lynch if he fucks up and appears scummy. So please don't do that. On Bluelightz: I will go check out his filter in the newbie game to see what all the fuss is about. Unfortunately for the demons, and fortunately for us, they were incorrect and Palmar got stabbed in the face. (Yes, it is possible that it was the acolyte, but why would the angels kill someone they could get lynched when lynching is the only way for us to kill the angels?) I already highlighted why this is scummy/ incorrect http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13077558 please read the full exchange for context On January 10 2012 03:52 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Syllo, you're pretty smart, so please tell me why on earth you think Palmar would banish me to purgatory if he thought I was an angel? Let's look at the scenarios: 1) I am the Angelic Observer - sending me to purgatory does nothing for the demons. 2) I am the Acolyte - unless I for some reason decide to go after a demon instead of a blue, does nothing for the demons. If I do go after blues, doing this hurts the demons. 3) I am the Angel of Death - I would never hit Palmar when I could get town to use up a lynch on him as lynching is the only anti-angel kp. Also leading a scum lynch can get some town cred. So one demon (Palmar) is safe. Another demon can be twisted, so now 2 are safe. Note, so far this also applies to the acolyte even if the acolyte is targeting a demon. So now blocking the angel of death is only useful if the third demon is also a likely target for a scum night kill. I don't see how any of those are a better choice than targeting someone you think is a blue, especially if you have no idea which I am and are taking the 1/3 chance of a remotely useful roleblock. As I stated, I think it is much more likely he thought I was blue than an angel. Not only is this stupid but it relies on assumptions about how the angels would act - He would kill Palmar because he could get him lynched? Based on the effort he has put into getting players lynched I sincerely doubt that this is the case. On January 10 2012 04:32 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: *sigh* So if you think this is pure WIFOM, why are you even discussing it? I found a simple explanation for my being sent to purgatory, simple explanations are often correct. And no, I can't know for certain that it was Palmar that did it, but if it was the town channeler then our channeler is dumb as fuck, which I find unlikely. The valuable information is what likely happened in regards to the night actions last night. Knowing our own roles and alignments, Syllo and I have better insight into it than most. Obviously the channeler, demon hunter, and scum teams know a good deal as well, but I doubt they'll be claiming just to clarify this. He asks why i am discussing WIFOM. I am accusing him of using WIFOM. Note that the two are different and that as he is being accused and is scum it makes sense for him to make it seem like a discussion instead. If you believe that we were discussing it then he makes the point that i shouldn't be doing so because i believe it to be WIFOM. If i shouldn't be discussing it why should you be reading it? He calls it a discussion to make you think it was a discussion and then dismiss it. He also uses occams razor, its a simple solution, the simplest solution is usually correct ==> you should believe the simple solution i have suggested. There are many other simple solutions to "what happened and why" that he could have been defending. He is applying the logic to mislead in a situation in which it is not valid. On January 10 2012 04:32 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: ...but there is literally a 0% chance of angels knowing which demon role Palmar was before he flipped so that is irrelevant. And you hit blues over demons because the seer, demon hunter, and channeler are all incredibly potent town assets against angels, and demons being alive gives you valid targets to scum hunt and get lynched instead of your teammates. If town is weak, sure, they might start killing off some demons on purpose, but them doing so now would be stupid. I elaborated point 3 because it was the only one that might actually be worth a damn to the demons. Now, unless anyone has specific questions for me or actually wants to lynch me instead of just saying "I think he might be an angel" and then doing nothing about it, I will no longer be mentioning my trip to purgatory/what I think the reasoning behind it is and will instead focus on more useful shit. Hey look - a list! Care to explain anything about it? Lists without reasons are pretty useless filler. @Tyrran You still have yet to make any real contributions. Planning to start doing so any time soon? @Those suspicious of Syllo I think you are mistaken. The odds of him being a demon after his interactions with Palmar seems quite low to me, unless he was willing to bus Palmar today, he mentioned Palmar was essentially claiming scum during the night. I think it is very likely he was targeted by the angel of death, the only way I could see him not being town is if he is the angel of death. He speculates even more about angels and demons and commits to "focusing on more useful shit" He does this by asking me to explain my "suspicious bastards" list after i had been pressuring him. Now if you have had eve a cursory glance at my filter you will probably observe that i am thorough. I highlight things and i had during the previous day/night mentioned things i found scummy about all but one of these players. Other players have sheep voted or made baseless accusations and HoD could have picked up on one of these. So i then posted a sort explanation of why and he responded: On January 10 2012 05:21 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Why insinuate that I haven't been reading the thread? I assure you I have read every post at least once, and most more than that. Also, I started writing that post (and my one immediately prior) before your explanation of Dirkzor, and had not refreshed since then. I have no way of knowing if you have posted 100% of your reasoning for a player being scum, I saw you had called RoL's plan bad, but so had lots of people, and I don't think merely suggesting it is enough to make him scum and wanted to know if there was anything else. Syllo already pointed out why your reasoning for Refallen is questionable, and I honestly didn't think you would deem him scummy solely on that. Presumably after Palmar's flip Jackal looks better - he strongly wanted people to vote Palmar, so I wanted to know what your reasoning was there. As you said, you hadn't mentioned much on Tyrran yet. Hey look, my question was valid on 5/6 (or 4/6 had I refreshed earlier), sure was redundant! underlined:This is quite a strange statement why would i have posted 100% of my reasoning for all 6 of those players being scum. Since i had barely (if at all) mentioned Tyrran and since before he refreshed i hadn't mentioned Dirkzor, it is obvious that i hadn't posted all of my reasoning, thus he should not have judged my calling them suspicious by the standard of have you posted 100% of your reasoning? +(i do not want to make an issuse of this now) it should be obvious why i believed Refallen lied about his vote on the deadline and it should be obvious why i might find that suspicious. +Palmars flip may have made Jackal look suspicious but given that Jackal always focuses on Palmar day1 to me it didn't even make it much less likely that Jackal was a demon. My suspicion of him was based on his arriving at the last minute and basically deciding the vote having not made his stance on the candidates clear earlier (most of that was in the timeline post) On January 10 2012 05:45 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: I could have asked that, but townies usually like to be transparent in their actions, so I thought asking if you'd like to explain would suffice. Also, please don't use the quote tag and then include something which is not a quote. That is misleading. The actual quote is: Not : his original question was "Hey look - a list! Care to explain anything about it? Lists without reasons are pretty useless filler." I wanted to make the point that given how vague this question was and given that i had raised suspicions about the players in the list i felt that it was redundant question. I then challenged him to make his first real contribution. But alas my inept typing/formatting let me down. And like every other person to lose an argument ever he corrects my grammar and ignores my point. On January 10 2012 05:41 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Zephirdd Care to elaborate on what it is about Tyrran's posting that makes you change your mind between here And here: Changing your mind is obviously fine, but I'd like to know why beyond "his posts are weird". He is still poking people to get them to call Tyrran scummy without providing his own contribution. He then makes a few more posts that speculate about night actions On January 10 2012 15:39 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: While I still agree RoL is far from being the towniest of players, I'm having trouble seeing how he suggests that plan as scum. The only reason for scum to suggest a knowingly anti-town plan is if they also think they will be able to get town to follow through with it. Given the overwhelming negative response to the plan, I think it was quite clear to most people that a town would never follow through with that plan. Also, this is the guy that suggested we lynch 7 people in one day in steamship when there was an explicit warning about dangers in store for a town that lynches too many people in one day (for those not aware, we could vote for and lynch as many as we wanted to in one day in that game), so I am not sold on him being too bright to suggest this plan as town. I'm not sure if anyone else picked up on it, but despite all of the legitimate concerns voiced against the plan during the night, Tyrran had this to say earlier today: I would obviously prefer to lynch Tyrran over Risk today, but I don't like how Risk has fallen off the face of the earth now that there has been less suspicion on him/pushing for his lynch. He hasn't gotten himself into any real shouting matches yet either, which is unlike him. Also the fact that Syllo is still suspicious of him is of interest of me, because Syllo is often right, and the later into the game it goes, the more likely it is that he is correct. @Syllo Is there anything in particular that makes you think Risk is a better lynch than Tyrran? He post's this. most of the points are already made by sylloigsm here (clicky)here and The reasoning was also outlined here from an exchange between myself and syllogism. I later try to explain this to BH much to my own frustration. This argument is completely not original. He also makes it in a peculiar way Bolded: they fact that the town response was negative does not also mean that scum would have expected an entirely negative response. Underlined: In steamship, if town had lynched those 7 players you would have killed zephird, Greymist and cyber cheese, since Greymists role is what killed town after the roleclaim then that plan arguably would have won the game, so i don't get what your point is. Your say you would like a tyrran lynch and you also encourage people to listen to syllo who wants to lynch risk. Scum HoD would have known for certain that a risk lynch was not going to kill his team-mate. On January 10 2012 17:14 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Grackaroni At the start of this game it looked like you were going to be useful and do things and say stuff. Then the day one lynch happened and you apparently decided that you had done quite enough of that 'being involved in the game' nonsense. Since then the only real post you've made is still not particularly useful or insightful: + Show Spoiler + On January 10 2012 13:07 Grackaroni wrote: I agree with you BH, RoL looks really scummy. It's not the fact that he has been fairly inactive and "hustling" like erandorr but that he's been actively using his time to push a plan that is bad for town and defending his plan rather than scumhunting. Since he is already coming kind of close to the lynch (would be 5/9) I'm going to refrain from voting until he comes in to defend himself. Why the loss of interest? Are you planning on going back to being active/useful anytime soon? Do you have any other reads you might like to share? You criticise Grack for behaviour that matches yous (saying stuff early and then not contributing) and ask him a bunch of questions On January 11 2012 14:02 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @RoL See this post for the current time remaining in the day: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603#6 Anyway, I got the chance to spend some time today doing a bunch of rereading, and after doing so I will not be voting for RoL nor Risk today. Maybe I'm being dense, but I really don't see them as being leading candidates for flipping scum. If I end up having to choose between the two to avoid a no lynch, I favor lynching Risk over RoL, but I'd prefer to lynch neither. My top target remains Tyrran. His passivity and seeming lack of confidence in his reads and overall disinterest in the lynches just seems unlike most townies, and unlike how he played in my prior game with him. While I didn't want to make the following point yet to see if he would keep doing it, Dirkzor already brought it up and stated it quite well, so no reason not to restate it now: While I think that alone is scummy for any player to do, here's some examples of how Tyrran himself presented cases in his prior game: + Show Spoiler + On November 16 2011 20:07 Tyrran wrote: So you were a fervent defender of only lynching 'scummy' lurkers. And now you suddenly decide to vote for kenpachi without giving any reason Could you please detail a bit more on why you like kenpachi as a vote, other than the fact that he did not post much ? His townie claim basically does not mean anything Keeping an eyes on lurkers is good, but i would wait to the end on day 1(the last 24 hours) before voting for one of them. It seems to me that blanket voting this early on day one can only lead us divide our attention. Voting for someone whenever he says something strange without trying to pressure him more/confirm him as scum is a great way to lynch a lot of townies and seems to be a good strategy for the mafia side, but not that great for town ( obviously). Bumatlarge espescially has been trying to push the town into lynching as many people as possible. Almost each one of his post include a quote on how we should lynch every single player. Spoiler below shows some example from this filter : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366&user=31777 + Show Spoiler + On November 16 2011 10:36 bumatlarge wrote: Why would you FoS when you can just vote them. Don't be pansies. Realized I didn't properly vote. I doubt I will ever take my vote off of kenpachi, it's not that I don't like him, but he is not an asset to the town at the moment, or the forseeable future. Nisani has proceeded to call me dumb or scum, but that doesn't change the fact that his fluffy posts stick out, so it will stay there until he remedies it. ##Vote: Kenpachi ##Vote: Nisani201 And this Is why LAL is bad. What possible reason would cause mafia to post this instead of town. By all means keep up the detective work and checking out all the inconsistencies, but use a little sense. This definetely contradicts itself, and it could very well be an intentional lie, but even that doesn't make him scum. The bad strategy reason tht DCL brought up is actually something to go on. You are pushing your luck by trying to find lies a day into the game. Use that energy to filter a suspicious person instead and get a general vibe, and see if their future posts push you one way or the other. If there wasn't a majority lynch in play, I'd put my vote on everyone, and start taking off people who don't register as scum. That's about how many people I think should be lynched each day. On November 16 2011 02:32 bumatlarge wrote: Next person that mentions LAL is getting a vote placed on them. Seriously enough with the useless shit. We will be lynching however many scummy people we can find on the particular day. We are restricting ourselves when we don't have a clue as to what our boundaries are. Nisani has posted complete fluff and none of it shows any effort in actually heling town. I don't think the new people are brain-dead, so unless the specifically ask about something, don't use them as an excuse to post asinine shit. Oh, hi kibbibit ##Vote Nisani201 On November 16 2011 12:37 bumatlarge wrote: We got 48 hours from now, right? This time tomorrow we need to look at the votes and see where people stand. I'm honestly surprised how few votes there are, you get as many as you want, a decent townie can take advantage of this. There is no comparing how scummy certain players are to others, you just lynch them or you don't. I guess it's still early, and I'm still fishing for reads here. Oh and surprise, the only post not advocating to lynch the entire town is to defend chaoser, the ONLY person that agreed with the 'vote for everyone' strategy, after he got pressured by WBG. And by defending him, he explains than chaoser should stop doing just what he was advocating the town to do i.e: vote for everyone that seems scummy. So you spend all your post explaining we should vote for anyone who seems scummy, and you defend chaoser that was doing exactly that by saying "he should focus his attention more". How is that not a huge contradiction ? FoS bumatlarge. On November 17 2011 06:55 Tyrran wrote: Actually, i think that's a good point. However, if kenpachi flips red, i still think we should auto lynch lanaia. We cant let someone that anti voted a scum go free. Also, if lanaia is blue, she will most likely be a priority kill for the mafia ( who now knows she isnt green), and migth not live to see day 2 anyway. Also kenpachi, you're only defense is : "LOL TOWN IS BAD". I seriously hope that you can do better than that. ##Vote Kenpachi On November 18 2011 07:20 Tyrran wrote: So within four hours, we must focus on getting another lynch. We already have 2 people a 8 votes, i suggest we focus on them. Both look scummy, both are in my likely scum list, yet Drazerk voted for Sinani206 so its unlikely that both are scum. First of all, Sinani was a big partisan of dividing our attention . Quite amusingly he used the divide and conquer analogy, where as pointed by WBG, you are suppose to divide you enemy. Meaning we town are the enemy? He Bandwagoned against Lanaia, which as i explained before, is something that is very pro-mafia. Just look at his post just before, when we already established that Lanaia should not be lynched. Both his votes are given without any explanation other than "its obvious". He is either scum or an extremely bad town. Even Drazerk looks good in comparison. I dont think town needs him. ##Vote Sinani206 On November 22 2011 07:19 Tyrran wrote: Also, while I'm at it : ##Vote: Coagulation ##Vote: Sabin010 ##Vote: xsksc You lurkers unburrow just to lynch an innocent WITHOUT any justification at all, and completely disregarding the post where I understand that prp is a potential blue ( yes i called him vigi which he denied but still) and Palmar huge post in his defence. You are either scum or really crappy town, i dont want you in the game either way. I also dislike the look of xsksc->spaackle so far. I think the only original contribution either has made was spaackle's argument of Palmar looking town...which is not the best contribution to have. xsksc's filter: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&user=149333 Spaackle takes over: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&user=164534 I would appreciate it if others would take a look at bluelightz and tell me what they think. I am having trouble seeing how his posts make sense from a town perspective or a scum perspective, which is baffling to me. He seems to really like doing post by post...but then summarizing instead of analyzing. I don't think I've ever seen such a style before. @Cwave Please try to make your posts a bit more clear. I understand that english may not be your native language, but reading your filter hurts my head. Also, a good deal of your logic seems questionable, but I am not sure if that makes you scum yet. Some examples: + Show Spoiler + Palmar creates information spam, useless stuff and usefull stuff. I don't see how that observation by me makes me his buddy? I've played games with Palmar outside of the TL context and he is known for his textwalling and informationgathering skills, no matter what side he is on. Information and interaction is good for our town. Unless Palmar plays very differently outside of TL, I don't see how this can be true.Looking into Palmar his filter, he and Wiggles go off on some sort of duet where they distance eachother and vote for eachother. This logic is flimsy at best.Then they both switch and nothing is said of it and right before Palmar flips, he lists Wiggles as town. Where as before in his filter, nowhere does it come forward that he has really changed his mind or that Wiggles has him convinced that he is town. Seeing as Palmar flipped scum, im thinking MrWiggles might be one of his demonic dancing partners. -snip- In conclusion, these two were giving eachother nothing but hate right up until ~7:30 on the 8th of januari. Looks like a planned and organised move to move the votes of eachother after they created some distance of eachother on day1. He said he would claim. He didnt say he would claim VT like the states in his last post i quoted here. Wonder if that's semantics or a slip that he said he would claim VT against his scumbuddies and then thought he claimed it in here aswell. ...seriously? If he said he would claim, and he is a vt, then "I will claim" and "I will claim vt" are equivalent. Also, how could someone say they are going to claim VT later without having claimed... "Guys, I'm going to claim floridian later, but not yet!" His statement here has no logical thought in it whatsoever. You only have to fear the lynch if you are an angel..... (this quote was said in the context of him/layabout pressuring me) What the fuck? Why wouldn't demons or towns fear being lynched? In short, lynching Risk but hammering RoL is second best option. Syllo doesn't seem to agree on this, why i don't know. Unlike RoL(aka the guy who doesn't post) risk.nuke is still producing reactions and information in the progress, so RoL is a good option in my book. Hence i vote for him at this point as lynchtarget. No, i say Risk is my number one case. Calls Risk his strongest case, then votes for RoL instead...then seems to imply risk.nuke is producing useful information while RoL is not...then reiterates that Risk is his best case. What?If we can lynch him today, i will vote. Also, why did you say this: And then never vote for me? Geez that post came out longer than I expected. Ending with a vote on Tyrran, of course. ##Vote: Tyrran FINALLY you post WHY you think Tyrran is scum! why? because "His passivity and seeming lack of confidence in his reads and overall disinterest in the lynches just seems unlike most townies, and unlike how he played in my prior game with him. While I didn't want to make the following point yet to see if he would keep doing it, Dirkzor already brought it up and stated it quite well, so no reason not to restate it now" dirkzor wrote: In the end I'll just quote how Tyrran have taken no stance on anybody he have written a case on. Note: These quotes are cut, but they are all the last part of Posts by Tyrran. The point has been made that this matches your behavior around the lynch. You yourself highlight that Dirkzor had already made the point you are making. It is not original. You then cast doubt of spaackle because he thought Palmar was town. You encourage people to look at Bluelightz and tell you what they think. You ask Cwave to clarify something. You say a risk lynch is better than a RoL (which is relevant only because tehy are the two people that might ACTUALLY get lynched) You say that would would prefer we lynch neither yet you fail to say why they are bad lynches and you do not provide any convincing reasons for why we should lynch others. You then vote Tyrran, having stated a reason that applies to you, having made next to no effort to convince others to do so. The only other person to vote tyrran was Dirkzor, i wonder why... (it was his argument you were using) | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
Times for reference: pg41 day1 ends January 8 2012 9:45 KST pg49 night1 ends January 09 2012 10:25 KST pg67Day2 ends January 11 2012 23:47 KST pg 76 night2 ends January 13 2012 10:11 KST pg 90 day3 ends January 15 2012 07:06 KST | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
no to the first yes to the second | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
maybe they are on this page. cough Hod is Scum cough | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
I don't have word so i used a bit of notepad. Spelling and grammar could be disastrous. Major events Night 2/ Day 3 High levels of inactivity. night: notable acussations against Jackal, HoD, Tyrran Grackaroni makes the first "spaackel is scum post" because spaackal thought Palmar was town. day: Cwave killed by Demon Hunter, Mr Wiggles killed by AoD, Syllogism Jailed. Lynch targets and cases against RoL, and HoD. HoD gains 5 votes and people willing to hamer in. Hold off of lynching him and agree to lynch RoL and jail HoD. HoD claims sage during this time. RoL given time to defend self. RoL claims channeller, doesw very little else RoL lynched flip is concealed. HoD's posts on Day 3: + Show Spoiler + On January 12 2012 04:16 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Alright Syllo, what the fuck is this: First of all, if you had stopped your tunnel vision you would have seen he wasn't such a great lynch, especially in comparison to some of the other players in this game. Being wrong on one of your day 1 lynch targets is also no reason for scum to not try killing you, and you should know that. As for my post, I didn't know what he was going to flip, but I thought it was a lot more likely that he would flip town than most people seemed to be expecting, and it would have given people some reason to go after me. It was not confidence that he would flip town, but merely confidence that if he didn't, I could defend myself. I defended him, and if he flipped scum, I was aware I would look bad. But, I thought the case against him wasn't very good, so I defended him and pushed someone I thought was much more likely to flip scum. I asked you why you wanted to lynch Risk over Tyrran and the only explanation you gave me was: I asked that because I honestly didn't see how a good player could look at the cases against both Risk and Tyrran and come out thinking Risk was the better lynch. Having ensured that your vote would not be killing anyone you then start to criticism syllogism for pushing risk.nuke after syllogism says one of your posts sounds like you knew risk was going to flip town (or other scum team). (+syllo was one of the people calling tyrran suspicious earlier and saying why) Despite the absence of a case by you against Tyrran you conclude "I honestly didn't see how any player could look at the cases against risk.nuke and Tyrran and think Risk was the better lynch". Given that we all knew risk was vanilla this is quite a safe thing to say as you now know that risk was a mislynch. Quite clearly you aren't talking about this game because only you then Bluelightz voted for HoD, yet 9 voted for risk.nuke and another was prepared to hammer but switch to Erandorr at the end. If you cared about the lynch at all and you were right then you could have made it so that nobody else could see why risk was a better lynch. You didn't. As soon as Syllogism starts to point the "might be scum" finger at you you try to discredit HoD now presents his day1 actions in a new way: Apparantly he knew what the best lynch was, he pushed for it and everyone else was blind to it. Bolded: Only scum should should let those fears determine their actions On January 12 2012 04:42 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: gasdjafeaiuhfaisdf ...you think a guy who nearly got lynched wasn't interested in the lynch? Are you being serious right now? Yup, no confidence in any of those, certainly no aggressive tones or anything either. Also, as I stated before, Risk's play varies quite widely from game to game, despite him having been town in every game I have played with him. That is certainly not the norm for most players. But, the real deciding factor for me was nothing to do with that, it was simply that Risk's play seemed to be explainable from the perspective of a townie on the verge of being lynched and frustrated at having to defend himself. Knowing my own alignment, it was also odd to me that I was his main defender, I figured if he was scum surely a scum buddy would support my defense of him. Obviously that point doesn't get to apply to other people though, as they don't know my alignment. Was I sold on him being town? No, but he also didn't make my top 5 most likely to be scum. Tyrran on the other hand was doing that shit with me being the only real source of pressure on him. top part just isn't valid. + you had no reason to mash your keyboard as if the other person is wrong and can't see it because you are wrong. You then produce an bunch more reasons as to why risk was town. risk.nuke had flipped town by this point and you had avoided providing thoughts day1 and called him null and ignore him on day2. You were not entitled to make these criticism and since you know his alignment now you are not in a position to legitimately criticise those they thought he was scum when his alignment was unknown. +risk.nuke really didn't do anything day2 to show us that he was town "he didn't make my top 5 most likely scum" If what you have so far written can be trusted that is BULLSHIT On January 12 2012 04:54 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Err, then what was this post? I was ok with it over a no-lynch, but I clearly stated I wanted neither Risk nor RoL lynched. And you know as well as I do that pushing someone else to be lynched is a way to defend someone. Cwave and Spaackle were two others I would have preferred over Risk. Bluelightz I wanted to hear some more on (and still do), but was favoring him over Risk as well, although only slightly. Cwave Spaackle and Bluelightz are all players that you had not taken stances on but rather asked other to do so and vaguely hinted that they might be scum. "You wanted neither risk nor RoL lynched" if you are town and you felt that way then fuck you. On January 12 2012 12:05 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Grackaroni, Spaackle, Cwave I would like to hear a couple scum reads from each of you, along with brief explanations. @Jackal Zbot can count votes from a thread, not sure why Zona chose to use PM's for voting for this game (maybe because of the corrupted town deal?), but so be it. That thing is still fucking cool. Another quote in which he tries to make others contribute without actually doing so himself. On January 13 2012 03:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: So your case seems to largely revolve around me tunneling you, which is interesting because that doesn't say much about alignment, and if you want to bring meta into it, feel free to look at my play in Election Mafia (as TotallyNotTwoPeople) and Steamship - here's a hint, I focus on the person I think is scummiest. You also conveniently snipped out the part of that post where I talk about other people and pretty well prove I have been extensively reading the thread/filters instead of just tunneling. As for the lack of interest in the person being lynched, that is pure bullshit. I've been pushing you for the lynch, and if you ctrl+f my filter for mentions of Risk, I talk about him plenty. And yes, I have only played one game with Erandorr and he was part of a hydra that game, so I qualified it with "from what I know about him". Already addressed in my filter, but apparently you aren't really reading it. Meta ON RISK is pretty useless because his play style varies so much every game, which as I have already stated IS NOT THE NORM for most players. I also already stated that your actions would be scummy even without accounting for meta. You also say my posts are full of contradiction and then that is the only example you cite. Care to point out the others? Fun tidbit about me - I use "what in the fuck" for confusion, "what the fuck" for annoyance/anger/etc. You might be able to look up other uses of this through my profile, but you might just have to take my word on it. A quick check shows I have used both once in this game so far. Being sent to purgatory didn't bother me, it confused me. I wasn't exactly fearful of night actions night one, I've never been shot night one, demons couldn't corrupt night one, and why would I care if I get investigated? That would just help me prove my innocence. If you think this, I don't know what to tell you. Say a day starts with 1 corrupted town, 3 demons, and 3 angels. In this situation, demons win nearly 100% of the time. Given the fact that there are investigative roles and an anti-corruption role, demons are definitely not looking to drag this game out more than they have to so long as those roles are still alive. If the demon hunter hits someone, they live, and they weren't banished to purgatory, he knows that person is an angel - no exceptions. He is not working for the angels, he is nearly as anti-angel as he is anti-demon. This has already been pointed out as well. I also don't see how they could find demons to be a bigger threat early game than town. The channeler, seer, and demon hunter combined have about as much anti-angel ability as the entire demon team...and then you have 1 more blue and a bunch of vanillas as well for town. The only way they might consider town less dangerous is the lack of coordination. Whilst the word "risk" is in your filter a lot in terms of actually talking about risk.nuke before the lynch: the word risk appears 48 times posts that mention risk nuke himself are: here Day 2 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/postmessage.php?quote=1262&topic_id=298603 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13083116 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13083116 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13061983 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13061400 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13060795 on Day 1 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13026989 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13007788 + most of the day 2 stuff is meta. Regarding Tyrran's case: He asserts that you showed no interest in the Lynch He asserts that all you really did was tunnel him He points out a contradiction you make He calls your reaction to the nightpost strange and picks one of your posts in which you speculate about how you would play as an angel (which you do a lot and when you consider your 1st post Lets not discuss scum strategies is amusing) and he outlines how what you say is bullshit Bolded: You summarise the case against you as you were tunneling tyrran, so tyrran called you scum and then you spew some crap about meta. You then say You also conveniently snipped out the part of that post where I talk about other people and pretty well prove I have been extensively reading the thread/filters instead of just tunneling. so you point is what? You are reading the thread? Every player should be reading the thread. Why would you feel the need to point this out?? You then say you were confused about night actions even though you thought you had figured them out earlier here (clicky) You then make a statement that i have criticised before (clicky) You then make some more speculation about scum. You don't really address the case at all... You then post a bit a RoL and BH but nothing of worth. You then (poorly) argue with my criticism of your speculation On January 13 2012 08:53 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: I posted my top four (if I am recalling the number correctly) scum reads in the thread, I commented on both the RoL and the Risk.Nuke cases, I voted to lynch Erandorr, I voted to lynch Tyrran, I have stated I believe Syllo to most likely be town, I don't know if I directly stated it but I believe Blazinghand to be town as well. I have limited time, and people keep asking me about that shit so I answer them. I should probably just ignore them though. Spaackle and Grackaroni replied. Cwave is the only one that ignored me, but that's fine for now. In this post you respond to my accusation taht you haven't taken a stance and yet you respond by saying you posted your top 4 scum read vote Erandorr and voted tyrran and Call syllo and BH town. If this is not already clear to someone reading this those actions were not taking strong stances and they do not make him town. At all. He then says he has limited time and he is just answering shit that people ask. This is more or less an admission that he hasn't done anything. He posts this http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13124188 (Isn't useful in any way but serves to make people focus on Tyrran, again. On January 14 2012 07:13 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: @Tyrran You consider that claiming to be angel, and then you assert that they will go after demons/corrupted town instead, as well as assigning 0% probability to them targeting syllo night one. So I make an assertion about their decisions, it is me claiming angel, but when you do it then it is totally fine? I said don't need to, as in it is possible for them to win without it, not should. Don't twist my words. I just found it amusing that after being specifically told to not make more 'contributions' using arguments that have already been made, you then do just that. That wasn't my ultimate argument, my argument was my long response post, obviously. This is just dumb. Also, I am beginning to think all of Tyrran's ridiculous statements such as saying there is no way Syllo would be targeted night one, or that every night kill is bad for demons are more likely to be just poor reasoning than a charade as scum. I just don't see how scum could be making all these bizarre assertions. He bashes the case against him with a pile of shit in the hope that some of it will stick.. On January 14 2012 07:26 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Grackaroni is also less likely scum than I previously thought, I reread his filter and looked through his filters from his previous games and overall he seems ok. Don't have time to explain more now, but wanted to at least say that before I had to leave for like 5 hours or so. note the time and date 6 hours later: On January 14 2012 13:25 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Oh hai bandwagon. I am the sage. Night 1 I was banished so my investigation failed, but I tried to investigate Tyrran. Night 2 I investigated Grackaroni and got not-demon. Carry on. HoD could have died. Perhaps he should have died (because he is scum) He points out that he bread crumbed sage during day 2 a few hours before the lynch. He posted his Grackaroni "not demon crumb" before this post when he was leading on votes It has been pointed out that he Angels can safely make this role claim. He cannot verify it. The letters also seem cherry-picked http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=13134627 + he said at the very start that the sage should not claim without 2 "demon" results On January 14 2012 13:33 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Oh, and I was going to investigate Cwave last night, but with not too long left I decided the demon hunter was probably going to stab him and switched my investigation to Grackaroni. seriously what the fuck is this? at the last minute he figured out what the demon hunter would do and so investigated someone else? He is taking the piss because he cannot believe we didn't kill him. On January 14 2012 13:37 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: And layabout, I like how you managed to find a replacement for doing any actual analysis or scum-hunting, it's cute. Here he attacks my credibility. which is strange because whilst i had pressured him i also seem to remember stopping him being hammered, so we could make a decision that everyone was aware of understood and had the chance to object to. On January 15 2012 03:39 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Read the OP. The acolyte can't kill me. Investigation result: (Although I did reread his filter as well) And yes, clearly I breadcrumbed sage before killing wiggles with no way of knowing what his role would be, and then just so happened to get super lucky and killed the sage and that is why there is no counter-claim. Makes perfect sense. And it also makes perfect sense that you found scum with 2 teammates alive and yet you were nearly able to lynch me in a mere 6 hours with the help of people like Zephirrd, who, 6 hours prior to voting for me, said this: Yeah, that's not suspicious at all. @Syllo I put barely any effort into my defense because I had about 45 minutes during which time I also had to get shit ready to head back out. I mostly work by process of elimination. And the list of people I cast suspicion on included much of the same reads as the list you made shortly after. Clearly I came up with largely the same reads by doing no scum-hunting whatsoever. Tyrran finally bothered to defend himself, Cwave died and flipped green, and Grackaroni I investigated and got not-demon. So yeah, that obviously changed some shit. Feel free to count all the people I list as scum up through the end of day 3 in election mafia btw. But, since it seems like you really want it, 5 scum remain, I will post my bottom 6: Zephirdd xsksc replaced by Spaackle layabout Bluelightz Jackal58 RebirthOfLeGenD he says he didn't put effort into his defence - what a town-like thing to do He posts what i think are townreads? Which is odd because he has called Spack and BL scum RoL is getting lynched instead of him, he hasn't commented on jackal other than (he was right about Palmar) and he then starts to attack me. On January 15 2012 03:43 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: As you wish *tips hat* Do you want me to vote now, or wait? Syllogism pretty much forces him to promise to vote RoL which he does, later On January 15 2012 04:00 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Look, Thursday of last week I went to a Bruin's game, my work won a new contract on Friday of last week and my girlfriend's birthday was on Tuesday of this week. We went out Tuesday, and attended dinner parties last night and on Sunday, her birthday party was Saturday, and I met up with a friend for dinner on Thursday, so yes, I have been a bit absent. I honestly don't give a fuck if you think that makes me scum. That being said, I only have about an hour before I have to head out to do grocery shopping and such. I'll do what I can and then vote RoL for you before I leave. Posts a ton of excuses for inactivity. Hey HoD would it interest you to know that i spent 35+ hours doing revision last week and that i have exams coming up? Or that i do tutoring on Tuesdays? No-one cares. No-one expects you to spend most of your day doing mafia but your are expected to make an effort, and to find a bit of time to contribute. You have also had plenty of time to re-read every post more that once and keep up with the thread, and you have taken time to point that out. On January 15 2012 04:33 HarbingerOfDoom wrote: Anyway, Zephirrd: HoD is not scum No wait, scum. Because I've been 'invisible'?: J/K, not scum: Time elapsed: 10 hours Uh huh... Passing some responsibility. Hey guys, don't blame me if I am wrong, I'm always wrong! He is clearly avoiding blame for any of the lynches, and he went from stating I am not scum to voting for me as soon as my lynch started gaining some traction. Then, immediately unvotes with my claim and again implies he thinks it is likely I am not the angel of death. Nothing very town-like about that. You then post very little to called Zephird, one of your bottom 6 un-town-like You then try to dismiss syllo's "But Wiggles actually looked more like the sage" posts. You then focus on My Bullshit law. then you seculate about night-actions. Is that enough scumhunting for you? | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
when he made his first post he said that we should not dscuss angel/demon strategies unless we had a strategy to counter them When he said just that the sage should not claim without two "demon" results? If he was the sage it would make sense to add, "if they are going to be lynched then the sage should claim" because that is what he claims he is doing now. According to day1 HoD the sage should not have claimed in day 3 HoD's position. Day3 HoD had zero demons identified. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
I just don't see how spaackle is scummy. | ||
| ||
