I hated seeing the last newbie game get shit up because people went inactive, got replaced, then the replacements went inactive -_-
Newbie Mini Mafia III
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I hated seeing the last newbie game get shit up because people went inactive, got replaced, then the replacements went inactive -_- | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
As is regular with newbie games, someone went inactive and now you're stuck with me =) Ill catch up the thread over the next 24 hours. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 03:03 zarepath wrote: The third person I really want to hear from right now is Adam. I think it's unlikely that he inherited a Mafia spot... but that's pure speculation, and we need to hear something. I'm curious what your analysis is of the first day, and who you find most suspicious. You are correct in that I inherited a townie spot, but you can only take me at my word on that =) I read the entire thread last night. I will be posting my case closer to the deadline. SlOosh, in regards to your questions: I will answer them once day 2 stars. I’d rather not paint a target on my back if I am heading in the right direction. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
SacredSystem On January 25 2012 14:55 SacredSystem wrote: Zarepath's decision to lynch someone at random does sound like the calculated mind of a mobster. However, despite several conclusions that we all wish to draw, we need to wait, the mafia will all expose themselves at some point in time. on a side note Fakepromise agreed with him at 30% odds -_- SacredSystems first post. He implies that zarepath has “the calculated mind of a mobster”, but then says that in spite of this, we should wait for ‘the mafia to expose themselves’. The first part is a very underhanded way of implying that zarepath is scum, rather than being direct and labelling him as scum, he states zarepath has ‘scum-like’ features. The second line is encouraging passive play, or stalling until a wagon begins on zarepath and he can jump on guilt-free. On January 26 2012 07:01 SacredSystem wrote: you and fakepromise you for coming up with random killing and fakepromise for agreeing with you SacredSystems second post. Another attack on zarepath and FakePromise. On January 26 2012 08:27 SacredSystem wrote: ## vote: FakePromise SacredSystems third post. Looks like that guilt-free wagon arrived, better jump on it, he drops his vote onto FakePromise. CosmosXAM rightly points out how SacredSystem leaps from ‘we need to wait, the mafia will expose themselves’ to ‘zarepath and FakePromise are scum and im voting FakePromise’. This is very inconsistent, as all that occurred inbetween his first post and his third post was a few posts from other people saying ‘FakePromise looks suspicious’. On January 26 2012 10:34 SacredSystem wrote: i was saying that we shouldnt make wild assumuptions based on inconclusive logic traps, which many of you were doing also if you arnt saying anything, then dont say it now fakepromise made a decision which doenst make much sense from the townes perspective, now im not assuming anything in sayin that, which is why im voting for fakepromise as mafia sorry i forgot about the voting thread SacredSystems fourth post. After being called inconsistent by CosmosXAM, SacredSystem becomes overly defensive for being questioned: ‘also if you arnt saying anything, then don’t say it’. Now that the FakePromise wagon has started to build some momentum, notice how he stops mentioning zarepath? His post is entirely focused on FakePromise, when zarepath was the one who came up with the random lynch idea. The last sentence doesn’t even make sense, simplified it looks like this: “fakepromise made a statement which isn’t good for town, I’m not going to assume anything from it, therefore I’m voting for him as mafia.”. This is a statement that contains a conclusion that does not match the two premises. Posts five, six and seven are SacredSystem responding to some light probing from various people and hammering home that FakePromise agreeing with a 30% success rate is conclusive enough to hang him for. On January 27 2012 10:40 SacredSystem wrote: fakepromise, is a mafia with good mafia intentions also why do you keep defending him when its impossible to defend him with conclusive reasoning, prove it so because you keep defending someone that no townie would defend, im torn between fakepromise who betrayed the town by agreeing to a lynching which goes against the towns odds, or the person defending the traitor SacredSystems eighth post. He attacks zarepath for defending FakePromise. He even goes as far as calling FakePromise a traitor! This is blowing something out of proportion if I have ever seen it, and misrepresentation is a basic tool of scum. He begins teeing up tomorrows mislynch of zarepath. Hard defending FakePromise like zarepath is does not make him scum. SacredSystems ninth post is calling out FakePromise for voting for ‘thefearedbeing’ is just useless filler. FakePromise even stated right HERE that he was unsure and placed his vote on the inactive because he wasn’t prepared to take a side. That is his total filter. Lets bullet-point recap: -Calls out zarepath and FakePromise with shaky reasoning -Once the wagon picks up on FakePromise, he forgets about zarepath -He is overly defensive when questioned -He uses inconsistent logical arguments -A couple of filler posts, asking about things that have already been explained. -Once the FakePromise lynch hits the point of no return, he switches back to attacking zarepath I don’t see any genuine attempts to scumhunt when I look through his filter. He is entirely focused on FakePromise and zarepath throughout the whole day period. No analysis, none. He seems to be very much flying under the radar as few people have even mentioned him, only posting to further his scummy agenda. Now that FakePromise has flipped Town, take a good hard look at who was trying to drive the wagon, without sticking his head up too high to get noticed. This is a scum. Town kills scum. Do what needs to be done: ##Vote SacredSystems P.S If you intend on quoting this case, please spoiler it, keep the thread clean. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
MidnightGladius' pressure vote that stuck is far more suspicious to me. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 13:00 SacredSystem wrote: still no one has explained this to me yet im mafia for accusing fakepromise after he agreed to 30% odds and for saying that it was a bad idea from a townes perspective to hold a random lynch Doing these things is not inherently scummy, its how you did them. You advocated patience and then jumped onto FakePromise a couple posts later. You stated that 'it was conclusive!', yet your reasoning was poor and bandwagony. I dont dare to assume the inner workings of zarepaths head, but I doubt he was ever going to follow through with the random lynch plan. It was a discussion starter... and guess what, it worked. Your actions since my first case was written aren't flattering either: -More discrediting of zarepath -a giant OMGUS at Chocolate -You state 'im most suspicious of zelblade', then in your next post THREE MINUTES LATER, you state hes probably noobie town. -And the out-of-nowhere question 'Are the mafia told who the other mafia members are at the start of the first day, or only at night?' just stinks of 'oh look guys, i really don't understand how the mafia team works, I couldn't possibly be mafia'. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Declare your votes in the thread when you make them, and actually have them backed up with some reason. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 13:34 balt11t wrote: Did I not back my position against FakePromise explicitly beforehand? Why should I repeat myself, when he was (in my opinion) the only true candidate for lynching? As I mentioned earlier, for a random lynch, 30% success is not very good odds, and I was prominent in advocating my dislike for his plans, which seemed rather scummy. OK, but why not vote for him when you made those statements? rather then voting 8 hours later after hes nigh-on-dead already. And again, make sure you say it in the thread. Otherwise it looks as though you're trying to sneak a vote through when no one is looking. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Everything you just asked I went through in my case or the follow up post on this page, go read that, I'm not repeating it again. If Chocolate is suspicious for being on the back of the bandwagon, why isn't Simberto? why isnt balt11t? If you claim to not know if mafia knew each other or not, why were you claiming zarepath was suspicious for defending FakePromise? More inconsistencies | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Your evasiveness is obvious. But indulge me, who are the 4 mafia in this game? | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 29 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote: Here's an observation of day 1, with a focus on slOosh(me), DoYouHas and Zarepath. I will ignore other stuff. Analysing night actions is an exercise in WIFOM. The only thing that can be taken from them is that they attempted to shoot at someone who was probably town. In this scenario we don’t even know for sure that that is the case, as no one died. I sincerely doubt both SacredSystem and zarepath are mafia. I find SacredSystem almost surely to be mafia, whereas I see things in zarepaths filter that I wouldn't expect from a scum player. I feel we should lynch the guy who has been evasive, non-contributal and overly defensive (ie SacredSystem). | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 14:10 Adam4167 wrote: You advocated patience then did a complete 180 later when nothing changed in between. Everything you just asked I went through in my case or the follow up post on this page, go read that, I'm not repeating it again. If Chocolate is suspicious for being on the back of the bandwagon, why isn't Simberto? why isnt balt11t? If you claim to not know if mafia knew each other or not, why were you claiming zarepath was suspicious for defending FakePromise? More inconsistencies On January 28 2012 14:42 Adam4167 wrote: You weren't sure if mafia knew who each other were, so how could you use one player defending another as evidence that both of them are scum? Your evasiveness is obvious. But indulge me, who are the 4 mafia in this game? Underlined for your convenience, since they were apparently missed the first time. Your ‘contributions’ consist of 1 liners and jumping on whoever has votes on them already. Your defences to me have amounted to you saying ‘you have no case’ over and over, even when I’m presenting one. You’ve had close to 96 hours since the game started to actually go scum-hunt and find someone who you consider to be scum. Instead you seem content to just sit around, and attack anyone who mentions you in their posts and stalling on giving up any substantial reads. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On January 28 2012 13:50 SacredSystem wrote: as for someone who is bandwagon, look at the votes for that day http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=306091¤tpage=2#23 chocolate actually looks like a bandwagon You were the one who brought up the days vote count as evidence of why chocolate is scummy. I asked you to clarify why specifically chocolate was scummy above others around him for being on that vote and you reply with: ’theres more to suspicion then just a vote, 7 people voted for fakepromise, obviously not all of them could be mafia’ So… you didn’t answer my question at all. I am not contradicting myself anywhere. If you are not mafia… prove it. You seem to suspect chocolate… so go through his entire filter and highlight everything that is scummy – that is scum motivated. Your last line is just pointless fluff, honestly. You think doing the same analysis as someone else and coming to the same answer proves your town? On the contrary, heavily implies that you are not. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
This can only mean one thing. There are mafia voting for him. Since I know I'm town, at least one of the mafia team (if not more) are on this vote. There's always the possibility that his team has abandoned him, but I am really doubting it at this point. There's been almost no opposition to this lynch other then myself, and no other real case has appeared on day 2 other then mine on SacredSystem. Lynches that go too easy are almost universally mislynches. I concede that no other lynch is going through considering we are ~5 hours to crunch-time and everyone seems pretty sold on this one. Ill shift my vote closer to the deadline to prevent some kind of mass-unvote shenanigans if he is indeed mafia. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
This is one time id be happy for my read to be wrong. I have to take my PC offline for a couple of hours to re-install windows. I should be back before the lynch, but in case i am not, ill move my vote now. ##Unvote SacredSystem ##Vote zarepath | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I approve of that vig shot. I wouldn't have announced it in thread though, as they may have been hiding their role-blocker, as in the last newbie game. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Featuring both heads of our hydra, Jitsu and Probulous. The mafia withheld the roleblock on nights 1 and 2. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
After going through Bromances' filter, I find it odd that Jitsu never followed this up: On January 28 2012 09:11 Bromancipate wrote: RE: MG Beyond that, I think you're just upset that I called you out and put you in the spotlight. ~J If you thought he was uncomfortable being in the spotlight, wouldn't you push him further to get a better read on him? Just leaving this alone feels like you didn't want to step on toes.. the Jitsu ive seen isn't afraid to step on toes. At this point I think Zelblade looks pretty bad for being the only person to jump on my SacredSystem case on day 2 and then abandon it when it looked hopeless for Zarepath. Balt11t also looks pretty bad, first a ninja-bandwagon vote on day 1, then a stealth vote within an hour of the deadline on day 2. If hes town, hes not doing a very good job of showing it. And for the 3rd scum, id be looking at Chocolate or Bromancipate. Simberto has gone a little quiet in the last 48 hours compared to day 1, which is odd. Zarepath attacking CosmosXAM on day 1 and trying to push him as an alternative lynch gives him some credibility (yes yes i know, not proven townie or anything) I think SlOosh has done enough to quell any initial paranoia I had towards him. DoYouHas sponging last nights shot has him off my radar for now. SacredSystem... well i have mixed feelings here. It doesn't fit the puzzle for him to be scum, he didn't react as I expected a mafia might to my tunneling, hence why I took my foot off the pedal. From here, I say we flip Zelblade, followed by Balt11t if he doesn't have a run-in with the vigilante-fairy tonight. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
| ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
This opens up the possibility of a mass claim for blues barring the medic. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
That said, where are you Zelblade? What are your reads like? Who should we hang today? I find it concerning that people disappear from the thread as soon as the heat on them lessens. (aimed largely at Zelblade and SacredSystem). Chocolate, you asked why I put you in a 'probable mafia' list, I tell you its for lurking and your response is... to not post anymore? Are you mocking me or what.. give us some leads. Ill go take a good hard look at Simberto's filter. I found his inactivity on day 2 suspicious, time to check if there's anything to it. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On February 01 2012 06:08 Simberto wrote: Now, this might also sound like picking an easy target given my situation, but of those, I think that Chocolate is almost definitively scum. He did not contribute anything, at all. This can easily checked by reading his filter, which has about the same proportions as that of balt11t now. I won't bother to quote these posts. There are simply almost no posts, and he only posts when he is absolutely forced to. Also, his posts do not contain anything at all. Note that even Adam who started one day and was not active for a long time, too, has more posts then Chocolate, and easily far more content. Adam is a bit strange due to lack of information, but certainly not someone one should lynch today. Hang on, whaaaat. I have 'far more content' then chocolate, but I'm still considered strange due to a lack of information? Isn't that contradicting yourself in the same post? I think you better take a hard-line opinion on me, or risk being labelled as wishy-washy or vague on top of the mounting case against you. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Seriously though, I feel like of those 5 names I am mentioning, the last 2 scum are in there. Chocolate looks bad. He spends all of day 1 soft defending zarepath, jumps on the zarepath vote quite late on day 2 (hes vote number 7 with 5 required to lynch), hes nigh on inactive and when he shows up he doesn't push any cases or reads. Zelblade is an interesting case. I know people hate it when this gets said, but flipping him would provide a wealth of info. He was also fairly late on the Zarepath vote on day 2, after trying to push my case on SacredSystem. Jury is still out here, Id probably keep him alive another day while we lynch someone else and gather more information. SacredSystem I eased up on a while ago. Hes another one who can stay around while we hang someone else. Bromancipate: All I really said for you was that your post-count was lacking, but you're busy, so I get that. That and jitsu never followed up on something he said. He did however cast suspicion onto balt11t at the end of night 1 when not many people were really focused on him, so ill look elsewhere for mafia for now. Simberto I've never called scum. I just said his postcount dropping off compared to day 1 was odd. Ill put some thoughts together on him soon. At this point, I'm interested in a Chocolate lynch, and ill make my mind up on Simberto sometime in the next few hours after i finish reading. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On January 30 2012 02:11 dreamflower wrote: Voting Count Update SacredSystem - 2 Adam4167 zarepath zelblade - 1 Simberto zarepath - 6 DoYouHas CosmosXAM slOosh SacredSystem MidnightGladius zelblade Non-Voters - 3 Bromancipate Chocolate balt11t Voting ends at 03:00 GMT (+00:00) today. Currently, the number of votes needed to lynch is: 5 out of 9. And since you asked: On January 26 2012 04:53 Chocolate wrote: Still looking at zellblade & zarepath but we've seen them post and zare is pretty active, zellblade may just be making nooby mistakes but he has still posted oddly. and On January 27 2012 11:07 Chocolate wrote: Zare has a moderately strong case against him but I think lynching an active player who seems a little suspicious is worse than lynching one who is more suspicious and posts less Good to know you're still reading the thread though. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
And yes, those posts did come from day 1, mainly because you've contributed very little so i have very little to work with. This post here is the only real substantial thing you've given us since day 1, and it came in as I was typing my post so I haven't read it until just now. I appreciate that its something, but your one mafia suspect is Simberto, who is already under heavy suspicion and you don't really offer anything new as to why hes scum, just that 'other people have pointed out his inconsistencies'. Comb through his filter, find something new, alleviate my suspicion that you are not interested in helping this town move forward. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Zarepath pushing CosmosXAM as a lynch candidate on day 1 stemmed partly from CosmosXAM pointing the finger a Chocolate for being 'suspicious'. This is a textbook example of what is known as a 'Chainsaw Defense', which is when one mafia gets attacked by a townie, another mafia attacks the accuser to deflect suspicion back on the townie. Its right Here at the bottom of that horrible WIFOM'ey defense of FakePromise. Add on top of this, both times I've called him mafia, hes come out of lurker mode. I'm seeing too much in favor of voting for Chocolate, and not enough redeeming him. ##Vote Chocolate One thing that sticks out to me in Simberto's filter is the continual redirects onto balt11t. And There Are Lots And Lots Of Them So I guess I am posed with the question of was he doing this to pick up the 'town cred' after we inevitably killed balt? (because lets face it, that was going to happen, sooner rather than later) | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Right. I'm resorting to paint here (oh gawd) to try and get a clearer picture of what everyone is saying. After taking in everyone's reads, I find these are the two most likely scum teams: Chocoloate/Zelblade or Simberto/SacredSystem As we begin to flip more of these names, this picture will solve itself. I am content with flipping anyone in the above diagram, with a special preference for Chocolate for the previously mentioned reasons. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I guess I cant discount the policy of a Simberto/Chocolate mafia team, even with Simberto attacking Chocolate. If both mafia are indeed in that list of 4 names I put in the diagram, then they're desperate and nothing is impossible. Either way, tomorrows lynch will be very illuminating. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I'd still rather lynch chocolate, he's played the neutral lurker for 2 full days and nights and after he's thrust into the spotlight, his activity and content spikes? I don't like that. I'll check back in closer to the deadline to see if I need to move my vote. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
##Unvote Chocolate ##Vote Simberto | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Chocolate, why are you trying to out our DT? Is it because you realize youre dead tomorrow and you want to give your last teammate a half a chance to win? If they are getting 'guilty' checks back and then building a case from that, it is in your best interest to NOT say anything so he can continue doing his work. Now that your only mafia suspect has flipped town, where do you suggest we go next? My vote will be heading your way as soon as the sun comes up. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On February 02 2012 21:39 Chocolate wrote: If I were mafia I wouldnt post in the thread to tell a teammate, I would just tell him. A typical response and WIFOM. I say you were looking to rattle the DT into making himself more obvious, so you had confirmation of your shot. I ask you again, what possible motive could a townie have for even bringing it up? How does SS flipping red implicate me as mafia? Sloosh, what has changed your mind about chocolate between this post and this post? The analysis on Chocolate shows exactly why he is mafia. He has not been doing any work to further this town and he gives one line explanations as to why people are mafia and this is only after he is prodded. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Grats on the zealot dreamflower =) I had DoYouHas figured out as the cop very early on, but I knew he didnt check Simberto on night 2, since he posted his reads at 11:59, before a cop check would have come back. Hence why I took such offence to Chocolate pointing it out (albeit with flawed reasoning) Well, we cant count out the possibility of a GF, one of your innocent checks may infact be him. They have no roleblocker, so 4 goons vs a Cop, Medic and 1-shot vig sounds a bit unfair, giving heavy weight to a GF being present. Sloosh, did you protect n2? i thought for sure if we had a medic, he would have protted MG after claiming vig. Either way, boss saves bro. Whos taking the first swing today? | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On February 03 2012 13:07 CosmosXAM wrote: if there was a GF I dont see how he could get two mafia goons, unless one is a miller which I doubt we have but no one can know that for 100% I dont quite follow what you are trying to say here... DoYouHas has 3 green checks, one of which may be faulty... what does any of that have to do with millers? | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
So I joined the game, tunneled a townie and defended a mafia. Oh well, atleast I established my innocence I sent a PM to incognito near the end of day 2 saying "im getting the feeling like im tunneling a newish-townie... how can I get off this and save face". No hard feelings Sacred, I knew you were town pretty soon after I posted my case. GG guys | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
and most of the mafia wanted to shoot me for sinking my teeth into chocolate and not letting go. Yep, gunna make a tonne of friends around here | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I had Chocolate already locked down at that point, I wasnt sure if it was zelblade or Bromance as the 4th mafia, so i just left him out. I was hoping i could sway people away from both Sacred and Simberto with that, but alas, it just ended up making everyone dogpile on him >.> I was dreading day 4, I was going to have to defend SacredSystem, and boy wouldnt that have been interesting, considering my day 2 play. The whole game I had this nagging thought in the back of my mind that you were scum Bromance, and the only thing I could highlight in a case is that I KNEW FakePromise was going to flip green, before i even subbed in, and if i knew it, both you and Jitsu knew it as well... yet you piled on him anyway. Hence why i was continually jabbing away at both of you, with the comments about not following up MG, or 'lists are scummy bro'. I cant believe i didnt get more support with lynching chocolate though. He admitted to soft defending zarepath, he was chainsaw defended by zarepath, never posted more then a single line per read. I was facepalming pretty bad on day 3 after simberto was hanged lol, then everyone went back to zelblade, i almost wanted to cry! Still, thorougly enjoyable game, Im glad i got to sub in, it was an interesting experience, i felt like a bit of an outsider on N1, and I didnt help my case by being stubborn towards sloosh and refusing to post my reads. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Make sure you reread the entire thread after each person is flipped each day and night, factoring in their now-revealed alignment. . Always question what someones motive is, why are they doing something. Same advice that was passed to me after my first game, get more aggressive, youll get what your looking for a lot faster. Either youll figure out theyre town, like i did with SS, or youll figure out theyre mafia, like with Chocolate. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
From there i figured pretty quickly that you were indeed mafia, and even further that you were worried that anything you posted was going to be heavily scrutenized. Next time just come out firing, tunnel the crap out of someone. Take a look at EchelonTee in Wiggles Mini Mafia, he was correctly identified as scum on day 2, in response he chose a target (GiygaS), and just dug right into him. The town convinced themselves that no scum would be so brazen to just hammer into someone like that, that they cleared him and went on to myslynch GiygaS and lose the game. Still dont see what all of you saw in zarepath to be 100% sure he was scum O.o, I mean he did some scummy things sure, but some of the stuff he was doing flew right in the face of conventional scum play. None of the cases really highlighted why he was so scummy that he needed to die day 2. Hats off to you zarepath, you might have been the first scum dead, but you had me fooled =) | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
If I see you on obvious mislyches like FakePromise, i start to worry. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Id echo Blazinghands comments as well, just do what you normally as town, when youre scum. Id like to think my scum play looks quite similar to my town play, (as evidence by ET and half the obs thread wanting to hang me ). Thats probably the best way to tackle it. Having a large contrast between your town and scum play just makes you succeptable to meta cases which leads to stupid mislynches. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
We think very very similarly. In Newbie Mafia II, we both identified (incorrectly) the exact same scum team, for the same reasons. Our brains must just be wired the same , so when I see you on what was a painfully obvious (to me at least) mislynch, I was instantly suspicious. However, every time I put a case together, it basically boiled down to "I really have nothing much else... BUT JUST TRUST ME GUYZ". Something told me that wasn't going to work, so I set out to catch your teammate, drag this game as close to LyLo as I could, and then id only have to influence 1-2 people with my crappy meta case, instead of 5-6. Now that I've played in 5 games, I qualify to apply for co-hosting, and eventually get my hosting wings. I'm really interested in getting some newbie games rolling, I find them far more interesting (far less ego -__-) and growing this community can only be a good thing. Hopefully that can happen before all of you no longer qualify to play in them! | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I don't think anyone is going to come out bragging about this one, we got exceptionally lucky with our blues. My self-analysis: My early play was pretty average. I joined the game late, stubbornly defied the most town people, tunneled a townie for 24 hours, refused to vote for a scum. Somehow, through all of that, I managed to get myself confirmed as a townie. Probably my biggest regret was not opposing the Simberto lynch louder, but my confidence was pretty down after defending Zarepath and tunneling Sacred, so I really wasn't sure of any of my reads, at that point. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
| ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
It really doesn't take much more then 12 hours for one of the games here to leave the random vote stage, and progress into actual behavioral analysis. The real analysis comes out on N1 or D2, since you also have D1's vote to work with, and possibly some night kills. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Now, the blue meta is to look as pro-town as possible, draw medic protection, and the scum will be forced to leave you alone, else they run into a medic prot. Being loud and aggressive is a great way to display how 'fearless' you are, and obviously you're only this fearless because you've got nothing to lose (ie green), when really you're blue. Take this game for example. The Scum avoided Sloosh like he had the plague, for fear of having another shot blocked. If they'd just blown him away N1, as they'd discussed in the QT, this game would have gone down a VERY different path. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Id have dawdled on that information for probably a good 12-24 hours, milled around like I was confused a bit, then launched into an all out attack on sheth. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
You can have 1 good thing on your resume (surviving a night hit), but if everything else says scum and/or useless, you're probably dead anyway. I wasn't 100% sold on DoYouHas' innocence until Zarepath flipped, then the idea of blocking a shot, to lead a wagon against a teammate became so convoluted... it had to be false. The opportunity cost of getting one of your members 'town cred' vs removing a possible blue + a loud townie and by default, giving you more voting power (4/12 instead of 4/13) in this game, is just too good to pass up. Its just really not worth it unless you're trying to get real fancy. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
| ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Day 1 is almost universally a mislynch. That means you can be sure that 50-75% of the scum team are on the vote. I am perfectly fine with trading that townie (who obviously did something... not smart) to heavily narrow down the scum suspects. Id probably never try and force a no-lynch as a townie. It did cross my mind with Simberto, but what would that lead to? The next day, you'd all just want to kill him again, regardless of what he said with his additional 72 hours of life, and you'd also be less likely to listen to me, now that I've stalled the game for 72 hours and cost the town a townie. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On February 10 2012 14:53 DoYouHas wrote: No lynch is a perfectly fine move if you get to the end of the day and are not confident in any of your reads, and the whole town feels similarly. I've never been in a situation where people aren't so polarized that they wanted at least one person dead on day one. Heck, I wanted like 3 people in this game dead the second i stepped into it. Bromancipate, Balt11t and SacredSystem were all people I would have thrown my vote on without a second thought. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I like to group people. I think I made that obvious with my paint skills. Ill see 8 people on a lynch. Generally I can instantly knock out 2 or 3 because one of them is me, 2 of them are posting so pro-town that they just wouldn't be mafia. From there I have 5 names, with the assumption that either 2-3 of them are scum. Then I look at how those 5 interact with each other. Who's ignoring each other too much? new mafia especially are very hesitant to even quote one of their partners writing, even if there's nothing scummy about it. Take Zarepath for example. Hes quoted every single person in the entire game... except 4 people. One of them is me, since I joined late, and the other 3? yep... red. This really should have tipped me off earlier, but I was so focused on sacred. Balt really doesn't have much of a filter to go through at all. Chocolate - again same as zarepath. Not a single quote of the other scum, just everyone else. Finally Bromancipate - quotes everyone in the entire game multiple times... except 3 people. Do a quick scroll-through of their filters yourself. Its disgustingly accurate. We could have nailed the entire scum team on D2. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On February 10 2012 15:24 slOosh wrote: I think that there is why he didn't do it. I was confirmation biased in following you since I knew you were town, SS and zelblade were tunneling each other which only leaves Cosmos who didn't have much presence. The best way to quell the suspicion was to let him flip town, allowing us to look at other suspects instead of being distracted and distrustful. I know approaching the night I just wanted him to get lynched as I was so curious to know, regardless of if he was town or not because by then the thread was a huge convoluted mess and I wanted the easy way out (kill the source). Bingo. You got it. There was no cavalry coming to stop that mess. It would have been D2 all over again. The entire town wants someone dead, me standing there saying "Really?" and getting ignored haha The fastest option was to let him die (sorry!), and get everyone refocused. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
| ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
Adam Balt11t Chocolate Bromancipate Then you overlay that on say my filter, and it doesn't work. So you do it to the next loudest person - Bromancipate: Balt11t Chocolate Zarepath You'll narrow it down pretty quickly to 4-5 names and 4 scum in there. Game is solved, maybe one townie has to die for the cause. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
I thought for sure chocolate was a deadman after sloosh posted that great analysis and then BAM, his vote goes on simberto. O_o doesn't do justice to the look I had on my face at that point. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
| ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
On February 10 2012 15:57 Probulous wrote: I purposely avoided getting involved in that. I was trying my best to keep chocolate alive just a little longer. I also knew if I said anything about Simberto the comparison would be way too obvious. It is really hard playing as mafia, I don't know how you did it so well in your last game. Maybe I need a coach next time I role scum. Scum is fun for me, I'd say mafia goon would be my favorite role. I had an amazing team in that game, we were on IRC 12 hours a day, plotting, planning, checking posts. Plus the town never drew me into the conversation and forced me to take a stance on anything. By the end of day 3, no one had a clue what my reads were, except that id written analysis on 3 dead townies. That's why I kept dragging you back in where I could. | ||
Adam4167
Australia1426 Posts
The game is only 89% win rate if there is zero discussion and everything occurs at random. Mafia is anything but random, you add in psychology and suddenly that number swings back the other way. The focus was entirely on players and analysis, not sitting about hoping a blue might rescue them and solve the whole puzzle. The town still had the standard 3 mislynches available to them and still required 3 correct lynches to win. What it came down to was a lesser experienced town ran into a heavily co-ordinated mafia team. | ||
| ||