EPTStorm Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 20 2012 10:11 Palmar wrote: Signups are now complete. Some people have asked me about the activity requirements. It's quite simple, there are none because there shouldn't have to be any. If people aren't playing to their win condition, their faction will lose the game very quickly. The issue with this is that you have rules for things that are less game ruining and it's not even clear you can force replace or warn people for inactivity without a rule in place. If you don't want a specific activity requirement, the rule should say that you reserve the right to ban/replace people who clearly aren't putting in enough time and effort. The issue with this is, however, that you have to apply the same standard to mafia aligned players. e: morning | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 20 2012 18:32 Palmar wrote: I would not expect anyone to sign up for my game if they expect to be busy. You know how I feel about claiming busy in games, I consider it cheating and never do it myself. I don't think TL Mafia is ready for me to enforce that opinion on my games. And not to mention, it's not like the normal activity rules actually solve this issue either. It makes no sense to sign up for a game if you won't have time to participate. I have made it very clear, perhaps more than any other host, that I expect you to play to your win condition. You know, just as well as I do, that there is no indication that the activity requirements actually help at all with inactivity in games. This time I'm experimenting with a new method, which is basically making the game unforgiving and then repeatedly hammering the idea that players need to actively participate to actually stand a chance. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe this won't lead to a more active game. But there is a problem, and this is my attempt at fixing it. Making the game unforgiving just punishes everyone else more, rather than encourages these players to participate. It is reasonable to assume most of these low contribution and activity players do not care about winning as much as players who are the opposite. As such, losing the game isn't much of a punishment and it doesn't even make sense considering it's not targeted at just the players who are the problem. One solution that doesn't involve harsh activity requirements and bans is just to have longer days. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 20 2012 21:18 Mattchew wrote: This game is mostly invite, and has a ton of experienced TL mafia players. I could see your case for an open format or newbie game, but for people that know what they are doing this should be no issue. If you don't post and let yourself get lynched as town or mafia without reason, you should be modkilled and banned. Invite games are actually often worse as players feel they are obligated to accept the invitation despite not having sufficient time to participate. Also I think there are experienced TL mafia players who do not always put enough effort into games. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
We aren't going to policy lynch, "information lynch" or doing any other lynches which sole intention isn't to lynch scum. As you should know, the setup is supposedly quite difficult and I know the initial setup had the possibility of town losing after a single mislynch, though it has been tweaked since then. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. In L, as town, he spent much of day 1 discussing topics that were not related to scum hunting at all and he should know that these topics get brought up every single time early on. He also does not single out anyone and despite disapproving the lack of focus on finding mafia, he doesn't really attempt to steer the conversation towards that. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 21 2012 17:15 VisceraEyes wrote: Syllo what do you think about the back and forth between chaoser and WBG? It seems genuine, so I doubt it's scum v scum - I can't decide if I think one of them is scum or if they're both town  Looks fine to me, but I'm not going to post my town reads unless I've a specific reason for it and regardless just the interaction isn't enough to determine both alignments. Also I'm curious about the initial flood of Tyrran votes. Were they all based on my pre-game comment about not being satisfied with his performance in another game or did you all really happen to share that opinion? Pressuring is fine, it just seems a bit strange and artificial. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Besides that strange behaviour I don't think your play has otherwise looked suspicious, as you were very active and relatively fearless. Obviously the fact that you immediately got a bunch of votes from people who are unlikely to all be town also speaks in your favor. Back to BC, I also find this comment a bit strange its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. This reads like coming from someone who doesn't care about (or want to) finding mafia and isn't internally consistent. Why would you like to believe that redff isn't mafia and just bad? On one hand he says redff is experienced (as in good) so he may be playing like this on purpose as mafia or something like that and then he goes on to say that he thinks redff is bad. Which is it BC? Do you respect redff's scum play or not? | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
And Tyrran? I'm fine with with the content of your few posts, but you aren't off to a good start activity wise. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 03:03 Tyrran wrote: I'm still at work rigth now, but to make it quick : I dont have any scum read yet. I'm leaning town on several people. I'm wondering about syllo rigth now. He claims to know something we dont about the setup, but doenst share it. I'm not sure if this indicate town or scum. Uh, I already shared it; it was merely the fact that the setup originally had the possibility of town outright losing after 2 mislynches, but it was tweaked since then. You can still draw conclusions based on that, for instance it makes the existence of a serial killer much less likely as typical it would make the game last a bit longer than that. Did you think this through or did you genuinely think that I mentioned knowing something about the setup and then refused to share it as a brilliant scum move? Oh I guess you weren't sure what it means, that's probably worse. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 03:44 layabout wrote: I honestly cannot beleive that we are a good 20 hours into the game and you have not even found 3+ scum. These excuses are beyond weak, and are far from what i have come to expect from Dirkzor the townie. In other news if anyone has any more shit to fling i would ask that you hold it like a man, or fling it quick so that we can clean ourselves up and catch scum. I am curious about Jackals apparent attempt to "start a bandwagon" by calling toad scum and not elaborating. For me the the town motivation for doing that would be to provoke reactions from players that he could analyse and perhaps find scum. For instance if somebody were to sheep him for no real reason, they would be more likely to be scum (since a townie shouldn't do that but getting away with a sheep vote would be good for mafia). I think that such an action is unnecessary as town but beneficial as Mafia. My problem with this play is that + Show Spoiler + I hate calling people scum for no reason, since it can convince players that people are mafia despite the complete absence of evidence. It is comparable to publicly announcing your town reads on day1, giving mafia additional reasons to shoot at players that you think are town or exploit your read(s) to manipulate you He could have been trying to get Toad lynched based off of nothing, by attempting to create a dumb bandwagon when the game had barely begun. This is all jackal has done (although we are not far in and he has a tendency to lurk) other than add to the childish bickering/insult hurling so far. I certainly have not found "3+ scum", have you? Give me your top 3 scum reads then. Of course, perhaps it's something you expect from dirkzor, but I'm not sure if that is grounded in reality either. Any thoughts on BC layabout? | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
##vote BloodyC0bbler | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 05:18 Dirkzor wrote: Oh right... you asked about that... I just didn't answer because it was a stupid question. The first 3 posts was bad. And i said they were. That was the critisism. Nothing more. I was trying to be sarcastic but i clearly failed. Is this addressed to me? My post was not about you and I have not asked any stupid questions and certainly not from you; the only post addressed to you was about your lack of activity, despite being active elsewhere. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Only post from BC in which he votes for redff and doesn't even call him scum, just someone who isn't creating "a pro town environment". I don't personally think that is redff's speciality as town, so it's basically a meaningless point. Given BC's activity and posting hours it doesn't look like he'll be convincing me that he is town before the deadline. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Also, I think that if there is a scum tracker, there is likely a town tracker as well and thus if there is another tracker out there, it might be worthwhile to counter claim redff at some point today. Tracker is a useful role, but not essential and certainly worth outing if it almost guarantees a scum lynch on day 1. Since I believe redff really is a tracker rather than just scum fake claiming, no counter claim would be relatively strong evidence of him being a town aligned tracker. Tracker is also a role that isn't easy to use, so it makes sense to be present in this setup, considering that this is supposedly a challenging one. Redff while your outburst feels genuine, you should keep posting today. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 16:40 VisceraEyes wrote: Wait, so you think that if redFF is scum, you still believe his claim? Why would scum volunteer information to town like that? No, I'm saying that I believe redff is a tracker. I also believe that if there is a scum tracker, there is also a town tracker. Thus, if redff is scum, there is a town tracker out there who can counterclaim. If there is no counter claim, I believe redff is town purely based on that fact. It's not rock solid, but it is reasonable. Aside that, I personally think redff is town based on other evidence, but in case I'm wrong my suggestion helps. Further, if there is no counter claim and others find my logic reasonable, this would prevent us from lynching our tracker. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 16:42 VisceraEyes wrote: That was dangerously close to role-fishing syllo - the existance of one town-tracker doesn't preclude a second town-tracker. Am I missing something? You are right, that is the possible weak point in the plan. I do not think that it is likely that there are two town aligned trackers, however. It's a setup with only 18 players and knowing palmar/sandroba, I don't think they would have opted to include two identical and relatively uninteresting blue roles. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 16:46 Dirkzor wrote: I find it highly unlikely that RedFF is scum. When reading through the thread I had the feeling that the wagon was forming way to fast (just before VE/BH mentioned it in the thread). At the same time we can't just keep RedFF around because he claimed a blue role. Might be an idea to keep alive until day 2 so people with nightactions can do whatever they think with him (vig or dt maybe?) WBG apparently wants to de-friend everyone in the game and is doing a good job so far. Blazinghand is being to quite this game and his post are much shorter then they usually are. I know he have wanted to post less then he did his first games but his post usually don't lack this much substance. I would say BH is a good lynch candidate. I haven't read his filter in detail but I will later. Also he haven't used thw word "hustle" at all this game - maybe he is the one doing the hustling? And yes I still think chaoser is a bit scummy, Jitsu. (Should have been clear when I said he was my lynch target) You are not helping yourself here by stating that you think it's highly unlikely that redff is scum and then propose vigging a blue role. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 16:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: My issue is you never tackled the complexity that the claim itself brings into the game. He is just going to sit there and be confusing. He hasn't really done anything productive and has in fact looked scummy which multiple people have seen. I explained it a bit in an earlier post, this helps scum unilaterally if RedFF continues to live and dismissing him as being unlikely to do the claim himself ignores the fact that players can learn and that he also has 3 other team mates. Either A. RedFF is a tracker. Scum RB's him, we can never prove his alignment or that a RB actually exists (Even if most set ups do have RBers.) B. RedFF is scum and faked tracker. RedFF can claim RB while the mafia either does not have a RB, or does a RB + hit strategy to hide that RedFF is lying while still strategically using a roleblock. Me and GM employed this strategy in closed casket but for a different purpose, its fairly common. RedFF can claim to watch someone and see them do nothing, the only way to prove him lying is to have that player counterclaim that they indeed performed an action, thus outing a blue. Either way we have no way to prove RedFF's claim and he won't die until WE kill him because scum isn't going to do it for us when hes a walking pile of wifom. While he has posted some suspicious things, overall I do not think his play is indicative of him being mafia. Hence leaving him alive is fine regardless of his blue claim. We do not have to "prove" his alignment based on role information. Thus if scum choose to leave him alive and RB him, this is fine to me. I do not think he has been "confusing" and someone appearing "confusing" is ultimately a fault of the person observing him rather the person being observed. Someone being confusing isn't a good reason for a lynch. Also, I noticed that redff says something about getting a list of people who his target visited, which further reinforces the point that he is a tracker as the way he says it sounds genuine. For the reasons stated earlier, in the absence of a counter claim it is much more likely that he is a town aligned tracker. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 20:00 Tyrran wrote: Okay so here is my final point of view on the redFF case: I wanst sold on his lynch until his claim. But this claim is so bad that it got me thinking that he really is scum. As I stated, before, and as multiple people stated several time in the thread, town gains nothing from this claim. You've got to wonder : What does redFF gain by claiming day 1 if he is town ? Maybe he'll avoid the lynch. But then how is he going to avoid mafia KP/Roleblock ? How does he expect to be useful later on ? As town, it doesnt really make sense to claim. He then spends 3 post explaining that it would be a bad idea to lynch him now that he has claimed : All this seems weird to me. His defence seems to be focused around "Dont Lynch Me plzplzplz " instead of " I can still be usefull" and aroud " look I'm not scum" instead of "look I'm town". This makes me think he is scum. I'll be here until deadline, so my wote can still change if he somehow manage to convince me that he is not scum. But ragequitting makes me think that wont be the case. ##Vote redFF Is this the amount of effort you intend to put into this game as well or did you actually roll scuml? Just going to sheep bad wagons and not evaluate all the evidence? Have you read my thoughts on redff? Don't you find it weird that there is almost no resistance at all to the wagon? Your point about him claiming early isn't very good as redff gave a reasonable explanation for the claim and if he was scum, he could have fake claimed a better role anyway. It was likely that he was going to be forced to claim anyway at some point and claiming a bit earlier gives us time to discuss what we think about it. As his relatively early claim makes sense from point scum and town perspective and it's not really possible to determine which is more likely, it's a null tell. He can still be useful by being alive, tying roleblocker or even by taking a bullet. A tracker is not a DT in terms of usefulness. I may be wrong about redff and that's always the possibility in mafia, but the evidence suggests otherwise and as such you should be voting for someone else, preferably BC. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 23:34 Jackal58 wrote: What if there are 2 separate scum factions Syllo? Palmar states that multiple factions are a possibility in the OP. I am not convinced red is town. A townie redFF would never call me a good scum hunter. He has made a point of telling me and others how much I suck at this game in the past. I can't reconcile this-- with a townie redFF. OP says there are 4 mafia, so that's not a possibility | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 22 2012 22:22 Toadesstern wrote: ok I'm back here for half an hour. Still reading everything and I'm going to vote redFF for now. I'm not sure yet we really should lynch him simply because I doubt that mafia would be so vocal so early on. He was basicly BEGGING to get heat for that policy lynch. But then again I do the same as mafia and like to take heat because I think I can take it. All I've read from redFF so far indicates that he thinks very highly about himself so it's a possibility although it's totally wifom (in both directions). I think chaosers answeres to my case were decent and he's no longer my scumread #1 because of that. I am not going to lynch BC based on that because I got a different conclusion and I don't want to lynch into vets on d1. D1 is the hardest lynch because we have so little information and yet you want to straight away lynch BC? So it's really only redFF I'm left with right now or a rnd-lurker, but most people here are actually talking. Will be back in something like 3 hours I hope. Depending on my train and the shity internet my parents got... And I'll read this all on train. I'm not liking you so far in this game. This post doesn't read like what I would expect from you and I'm not sure how exactly you determine whether someone is a "vet" or not and as such "untouchable" on d1. Why were you fine with lynching Chaoser but not fine with lynching BC? You seem unsure about redff but still want to lynch him over everyone else. Is this correct? What do you think about his tracker claim and what I've said about it? | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Kitaman don't you care who gets lynched? Why is your focus on the game with an actual deadline? | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Okay I don't think that redFF is scum because he's been pretty out there. The scummiest he has done in my opinion is his claim which was oddly timed. Right now he's a terribly easy lynch, because we'll have to lynch him at some point. I'd like to see wherebugsgo explain how everything redFF has done can be explained by scum motivation and can not be explained by town motivation. The worst thing about this whole redFF thing is that the lynch is so easy that everybody can just pile onto him and then the day is kinda ruined, we aren't going to find anybody else. I don't think that redFF is scum because he's just been putting himself too much in the line of fire. A lot of things are suspicious about this post, but just to name one he asserts that redff is an easy lynch and thus we "aren't going to find anybody else". That is complete nonsense and just seems filler. Him randomly assigning blame on wbg seems off too. He thinks redff is not scum, but hasn't even tried to find anyone else. The only thing he has going for him is his attack on bc, but considering he is just sheeping me and not pushing at all, that doesn't mean much. He hasn't bothered to post today and he has definitely been around but doesn't seem to care. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 23 2012 03:29 prplhz wrote: Because I didn't want to post as long as I wasn't in danger of getting lynched and as long as I wasn't fully up date with my notes and with reading filters. That sounds almost too bad to be scum. You say you are trying your best, try to be active when "i need you (????)" and you've been making tons of notes. Yet despite all this, you have made no effort at all to stop a lynch of someone you consider town from happening. You never really even said who you would like to be lynched instead. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
##vote bloodycobbler | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Anyway, I'll be on for another 30 minutes and as I'm relatively certain that redff is our tracker, I will be voting BC over him. The lynch is in less than two hours. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Kita I know you have been around and yet do not care enough to even post. This is the second game in a row you have been completely worthless in thread and at least in arkham you were town. Is this your new standard of play? | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 23 2012 06:52 kitaman27 wrote: No need to call people worthless in games you haven't played. It isn't the first time you've done it and it isn't constructive. I haven't been completely absent in this game, I've had classes for the last 7 hours. If you are busy, you are busy. If you are posting in other threads and chatting on irc without even bothering to check deadlines and skimming this thread, I've a reason to be angry | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 23 2012 15:07 VisceraEyes wrote: What do you make of the no flip Syllo? That whoever is mafia is really stupid for wasting a power on someone who no one is going to believe was actually mafia | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
RoL on the other hand has done no scum hunting at all and basically voted for redff because he claimed tracker. Dr.H's case here makes a lot of sense. He also seemed fine with BC lynch which is ok, but he didn't add any reasons of his own other than just stating "I'd rather get him out of my head". What? I'm also not letting him get away with inactivity day after day as happened in Purgatory. That case better be amazing RoL and I don't want opinions just on one player ##vote Rebirthoflegend risk.nuke any thoughts on anyone at all? You still aren't playing the game despite getting called out. The few posts you have have basically no content. I've only very vague and weak reasons for believing that you might be town, but if you don't start posting content soon, that will change. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On February 25 2012 00:30 layabout wrote: I am paying attention to what you are saying. In fact i have constructed numerous posts that i did not feel were relevant enough that i have subsequently no posted to respond to you. Last time i followed you was purgatory, (lay scum syllo town) and it lead to me posting a huge case on risk nuke(partially based on meta), me following you onto Erandorr (totally based on meta) in a last minute switch to kill town. Then the next day going back to risk who flipped town. Whilst i was trying to play like town, following your lead and killing Erandorr was very costly for town as day2 was a early mislynch and an extended night devoid of discussion. In that case i felt there were more compelling reasons to follow your reads, and it did not turn out well. If i wish to improve then whilst i will definitely consider what more experienced or more skilled players say the only town i know will be me*, and i will have to make my own decisions, In this case it was to lynch redFF. The case on redFF was stronger than you are presenting it but it would be best not to dwell on that, unless you suddenly become certain of his alignment and we can better analyse the votes. *with obvious role-based exceptions I'm obviously wrong all the time and in this game have already likely been wrong and reassessed. Even now it's still possible that I'm wrong about redff, but I'm not adding caveats when the probability is very low, especially with the data we have since the lynch. Look at the final lynch vote spread and the lack of people attempting to move votes one way or another. Does it still look likely that scum was lynched day 1? Redff didn't even vote to save himself and he was not replaced after his "ragequit" (if that's the case and he wasn't just busy). It is very likely that his team would have known that he won't be posting anymore and requested to get him replaced before the deadline. Anyway, my town reads are much more reliable than my scum reads, so when I argue against a lynch it's probably worth paying more attention. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
I forgot this because I normally always assume mafia sends a specific player to do the killing If there is a tracker in a game that is pretty much always the case anyway | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
I doubt there is a SK as we had a no kill night, 2 kp makes most sense for mafia in this setup and 3 hits being blocked/failing is very improbable | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
| ||
