|
On March 19 2012 12:52 gonzaw wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2012 12:36 Grackaroni wrote:
Now back to serious thoughts, Transparency for the black market is not always a good thing. The OP itself explicitly mentioned the fact that there could be roles capable of stealing items. I can only imagine those being scum roles if they exist so you could end up gifting a powerful item to scum rather than the townie player the item was originally made for. Fuck, forgot about that. Yeah, maybe it's a bad idea. @Sbrubbles: It's odd seeing you here all of a sudden. This is the first time you've posted since the lynch, right? What thoughts do you have about it? Or thoughts about anything else?
Sorry, haven't had the time to put full effort here. I was reading through the thread and saw a quick point to make, so I went and posted.
For Drazerk I felt like he could have *tried* to play the game, but chose to suicide instead. Not a bad lynch. There also Kenpachi who gave him a useful item out of randomness, which I didn't understand at all. Sure, Kenpachi might already have an action, and per Drazer's description, the portal gun prevents you from doing any other actions when you use it, but he could have kept it on himself or gave it to a townie without an action and brought some usefulness out of it instead of giving it to the claimed useless 3rd party who was close to being lynched.
On another note:
On March 19 2012 11:49 Velinath wrote:
I know which alias buys and sells stuff, but I don't know who those people are in the thread
I believe revealing how the market is conducted would merit a modkill. At the very least it's a grey area that I don't want to talk about unless I got direct confirmation that I could.
@Veli, can you tell us what items are for sale? There's reason to suspect there are 5 (well, now 4) portal guns around, which (if we believe Drazerk) show what items a person has. If someone is found to have one item from this list, it would be a good lead for town.
|
Is Kenpachi's wincondition killing Glados and then Wheatley taking over? Is that why he teamed up with wheatley candidate blzinghand?
And the only way to see if Foolishness is rhyming voluntarily is making him post something without rhymes. He could have got the points for something else then his rhymes.
|
Honestly im not really sure why you guys are jumping to the conclusion that its a posting restriction. That feels to me like the least likely case really, considering how rare and difficult it is to post according to it (and talking in riddles is pretty darn difficult). When I first saw it it seemed more like he was trolling or something.
Also its going to be difficult to "force" him to post something that doesnt rhyme since we cant really do that without taking drastic measures (talk or day vig!) I dont think thats a good idea though. Besides, his rhymes arent really clogging up anything as of yet besides the current (needeless imo) discussion that we are having now on it, and he still seems to be providing a fair amount of opinions despite posting in rhyme. I really feel that we should just leave him alone for now, and stop discussing this "posting restriction" of his. Its just distracting us at this point. Of course if he doesnt produce much quality in the coming days we can take another look.
@sbrubbles
I think he posted what was on sale a few pages ago and it was something like one-shot vig, one-shot DT and stuff like that. Im too lazy to find the post now but you could just look through veli's filter to find it. I dont think that it was too detailed though, wouldnt be bad to get more details on what this black market is selling.
Another thing is that we shouldnt just assume that there are 5 portal guns. Fair assumption, yes. But it was based off a day post in a previous game and could easily have been put in to troll us and such.
|
On March 19 2012 19:46 phagga wrote:The following paragraph bothers me greatly: Show nested quote +On March 19 2012 09:15 willz22912 wrote:
Regarding you Gonzaw, do you not fear for your life by being the most active poster? If you keep asking everyone questions and you are personally keeping track of everyone, why wouldn't you be the first one killed this night? Do you think scum have already found out blue roles, I don't think so. If you are town, you should back off and not present yourself as a target with your activity. If you are scum, you would just keep posting because you know you won't be a target. Do you have any response to this logic?
This does not make any sense. You imply that he is an asset to town, then say he should stop contributing because if he keeps contributing that makes him mafia? Wasn't it supposed to be the other way round? Also, Is it not in the interest of town that greenies present themself as possible night targets to avoid that the blues get hit? Are you rolefishing?
What do you find wrong with the implied line of questioning? It was pretty much a noob(me) asking a more experienced person why they're doing what they're doing. I really didn't see the point of being one of the most active posters and trying to keep track of everything yourself and then risking getting killed before you can release that information to the rest of the town making your efforts pointless.
He answered that it's better not to play sub-optimally in fear of your mortality when you could put forth the maximum effort to help the town. This answered my question and made me try and follow that advice, so I'm trying to be more active as well with posting my thoughts.
|
On March 19 2012 21:54 Dirk Hardpec wrote:
Yes but it's also meant to be a fun game. Being forced to post in a certain way takes away from creativity while adding items, roles, factions increases the depth of the game (but maybe not it's competitiveness).
Anyway, it's a pointless discussion, either people buy the restriction or they don't. I don't.
You don't buy it because the game must be fun and a posting restriction isn't according to you?
Looks like Foolishness is happy rhyming away.
|
Okay, answering to gonzaw's question
On the posts you quoted, I was asking for opinions on my Idea, I was trying to start discussion.
On my meta, Lists!?!!!!?!?! Fine, since you sorta asked for it im gonna make a list
I was scum in my first game(Student Mafia) I replaced into that game though
Sinani's posts.... are interesting, he justs posts random fluff, and contributes little to the discussion.)
|
On March 19 2012 17:57 phagga wrote:
What you don't seem to understand is that not everyone has the same amount of time available to participate in this game. I have a family with 2 kids which limits my time drastically, especially on weekends. In a game like this where the thread fills up so fast it is already hard enough for me to keep up. So when I'm gonna analyse someone or something, I do it in my order on the people that I want to, and I'm not gonna make any errand runs for other players until I have the feeling it really helps us all.
Also, I don't give out town reads unless absolutely necessary.
The point is that if you DO post, I want you to check the filters of players not taken into consideration as well, and give your opinion on them.
If you don't have enough time, you can do this whenever you can. Time's not the issue here, the issue is what you do with that time.
Also I do get that about not having enough time.
In fact, I may not be as active these next few days, since it's week-day and I have uni.
Also again, I don't want all your town reads >_>
I just want thoughts on players.
If you find something fishy about them, state so. If you want something you'd want them to do, state so and pressure that player as well, etc etc etc.
Seriously, for you being so active in the thread you clearly misread this hard. It was very obvious that this was a joke.
I've seen a share of ridiculous fake-claims that were passed as true (read AC).
I knew it was fishy and seemed like one of those.
Also, apparently Drazerk could be unkillable at night, and won only when 1 3rd party died, whether he was alive or not.
That's insanely "powerful", so I don't believe any other similar claim can be that far-fetched.
I think claminig items is not a good move at this point. As Drazerk's role showed there are 3rd parties and perhaps even scum out there that are dayvigs, it will be easy for them to get certain items if they need them. So I'd rather if people hold back with their item claims for now.
Here:
However, your ancient magicks corrupt any items you recieve, rendering them permanently inoperable.
Any item Drazerk got is PERMANENTLY INOPERABLE. So if you claim that item, scum/3rd party can do whatever they want to get them, but it will be useless to them (these items may only work to increase the "Item count" of a player, nothing else)
|
a) foolishness post restriction is 93.9% fake. He got point, and it's insane to restrict a player to create poems.
b) draz had no anger core. I don't even believe he had a portal gun. Why would you orient your actions on a player who messed with town. He lied all the time.
c) the black market stuff won't get us further either.
this night nothing was discussed then freaking setup. let's stop and focus.
Dirk's post may be looking like OMGUS. But I feel like he has a point. Foolishness in L was more than scary for scum. This game he has just pushed a (weak, because only based on one post) read on dirk and did push no one else. He has yet to perform like he usually does. The poems distract from that fact. I think kita posted that one should never trust a player who claims to have a post restriction. It's the easy way out.
also interesting:
On March 17 2012 10:05 Adam4167 wrote:
I am also interested in running for the Wheatley position.
Y'all know who I am, most of you have played with me before. Anyone that read the final days of BC's Arkham City would know that I am willing to put in 12+ hours a day to get a win in a game of mafia. Unfortunately, despite my best efforts, I didn't get a win in that game (-_-), but this time I am ready to be the hero that you deserve.
So vote to Elect Adam4167!
##ElectAdam4167
Not exactly. I know that you normally post more.
Blazinghand also disappeared after being one of the most active players at the beginning.
|
@JayJay
I agree that the post restriction is bullshit, and also that draz had no anger core (probably a lie to scare us). Even if he did his ability would make it useless, making it a non-exsistent threat. If you think his portal gun claim was fake, what do you think of kenpachi supposedly giving it to him? He claimed that he did. Kenpachi seems to be a pretty crazy player though I dont think he was lying about this. You seem to believe that he lied? What motivation do you think he would have for that action?
Blazinghand's dissapearance also worries me, considering how hard he tried to get the wheatly postion. Could be that hes feeling a little demotivated considering he missed it by one vote. I dont think im going to read too much into this now, unless he continues lurking of course.
|
On March 20 2012 01:09 zelblade wrote:
@JayJay
I agree that the post restriction is bullshit, and also that draz had no anger core (probably a lie to scare us). Even if he did his ability would make it useless, making it a non-exsistent threat. If you think his portal gun claim was fake, what do you think of kenpachi supposedly giving it to him? He claimed that he did. Kenpachi seems to be a pretty crazy player though I dont think he was lying about this. You seem to believe that he lied? What motivation do you think he would have for that action?
Blazinghand's dissapearance also worries me, considering how hard he tried to get the wheatly postion. Could be that hes feeling a little demotivated considering he missed it by one vote. I dont think im going to read too much into this now, unless he continues lurking of course.
Kenpachi is being Kenpachi. He actually puts more effort in this game than he usually does. So he might be town. He still trolls the shit out of everyone whenever he plays. I can't see him giving an item to draz who was already third party at the time.
|
I actually have a pretty strong town read on BH at the moment.
|
I know that I am a lurker too, but:
I am for lynching lurkers (as long as it is not me), so that we don't make the same fault like in Kaller, where town ripped eachother apart and the majority of scum lurked. Is it common that in large scale games many of the mafia are lurking?
|
On March 20 2012 01:14 Dirk Hardpec wrote:
I actually have a pretty strong town read on BH at the moment.
and why is that?
I mean I had a townish read before, but his disappearance makes me a little suspicious. Also note, how he asks two times specifically for the abilities for Wheatley into vanishing. Felt odd.
|
On March 19 2012 23:54 Bluelightz wrote:
Okay, answering to gonzaw's question
On the posts you quoted, I was asking for opinions on my Idea, I was trying to start discussion.
On my meta, Lists!?!!!!?!?! Fine, since you sorta asked for it im gonna make a list
I was scum in my first game(Student Mafia) I replaced into that game though
Sinani's posts.... are interesting, he justs posts random fluff, and contributes little to the discussion.)
Yeah, but why the odd behaviour?
At least that's how I see it.
I reread Purgatory Mafia, and shit your play left much to be desired there on D1-N1-etc >_>
Filter: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603&user=235418¤tpage=2
However, even if you posted very little there, and mostly one-liners, it seemed like you posted more bluntly, and with a little more confidence
You never posted things like:
I think that he should claim the powers if its anti-town but im open to other opinions :D.
Anyone have a thoughts on who we should lynch?
Its tempting to believe this because Kenpachi does this every game :O, any thoughts?
Hassy, IF Drazerk is third party, should we lynch him? I'm thinking we should because that its the best bet we have for a day 1 lynch.
I agree with you JJ, picking a person to be Wheatley is mind boggling =_=, Its tempting to say that its ability will help town but the possiblity of Wheatley turning bad x[, Or we could just have a vig shoot Wheatley if Wheatley will turn bad, Any opinions on my idea?
You posted things like:
Right now, since we have no real option I would like to lynch a lurker.
If I was in that situation then no. Because I lack sufficient information to make a correct move.
I think RoL is more scum because he didnt post anything before now and risk.nuke "promised"more content but, if he didnt fullfill the promise I would consider that he is scum also.
Okay i'll adress this post then go to sleep so, we have 2 days and 9 hrs from when I post this.
Hopefully when I wake up I can make a more accurate analysis.
It's hard to put a finger on that difference in behaviour, but that initial behaviour of posting smileys, posting irrelevant things, appearing sort of "joyful", but not have that translated in a higher post count or higher post content from you, etc seemed very odd to me.
Your odd vote on sinani didn't help.
I wanted an explanation for THAT behaviour, but I guess if you are indeed town it may be hard to explain it, unless you are a psychologist >_>
PRE-EDIT: Damn, I forgot that Adam was playing this game as well.
I'll add him to the kita+C_C list of people that almost didn't contribute anything at all by now; and should step up their game.
On March 20 2012 01:20 blubbdavid wrote:
I know that I am a lurker too, but:
I am for lynching lurkers (as long as it is not me), so that we don't make the same fault like in Kaller, where town ripped eachother apart and the majority of scum lurked. Is it common that in large scale games many of the mafia are lurking?
Here, I'll make you a list of all the players lurking:
Currently lurking:
-Mr Wiggles
-Kitaman27
-Ghost_403
-Blazinghand
-sinani
-Lanaia
-Paperscraps
-Nisani201
-Adam4167
-Cwave
-Cyber_Cheese
-RayzorFlash (when he wasn't responding to my case)
-MidnightGladius
-Maverick32x
Players that lurked until few moments ago:
-Zephird
-zelblade
-blubdavid
-Bluelightz
-Dirk Hardpec
So yeah, I'd say I'm 99% sure many scum are lurking.
|
|
|
On March 20 2012 01:27 gonzaw wrote:
So yeah, I'd say I'm 99% sure many scum are lurking.
That assumption is dangerous.
Nisani: Yes, it's a smurf (indicated by the foolishness-acusation post)
|
On March 20 2012 01:32 Jayjay54 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:27 gonzaw wrote:
So yeah, I'd say I'm 99% sure many scum are lurking. That assumption is dangerous.Nisani: Yes, it's a smurf (indicated by the foolishness-acusation post)
EBWOP. misread sorry.
|
|
|
The best way to deal with people not posting or attempting to skirt by is to shoot them when there are so many of them. The difference between people who don't post much is very little, and it's almost a given that mafia can push the lynch off their lurker onto another one. A vigilante shot is much less... emotional and involved.
Ready your guns gentlemen.
|
With that last post I was opposing the idea of defaulting to lynching a lurker tomorrow, we have 53 pages of information to deal work with, and more to come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
