Newbie Mini Mafia VIII
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
| ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
Also, lol @ anyone who thinks Kharad's vote is random. He picked me because he wants to compare the response from last game to this game. And this entire conversation about how and when to pressure vote is pointless, considering it's already been done in this game. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
LaL seems to be a standard play. I'm all for lynching liars above all else. It sets a good tone that we won't allow scum to get away with it either. What do you mean by this? You say that lynching lying townies scares scum? I don't follow. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
| ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
| ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 12 2012 15:57 Xatalos wrote: + Show Spoiler + The person I want to lynch the most right now is: ArcticFox. Here is what I got from his filter so far: On April 12 2012 08:34 ArcticFox wrote: Let's not waste Day 1. Too many times I've seen people say it's not important. We can find out plenty as long as everyone posts. Please be active so we don't waste our first lynch on a bored townie. The sooner everyone posts, the sooner we can get to the real scumhunting. On the surface this looks like friendly advice to fellow townies, but this is EXACTLY the kind of posting I did on A Game of Thrones Mafia as a Mafia Framer. His attitude seems like he wants to appear useful, but he doesn't really say anything useful - the opposite of actual townies who want to be useful, but don't care as much about their appearance. The overall feel I get from this post is "please don't lynch me, I'm being useful!" On April 12 2012 08:58 ArcticFox wrote: I hope our blues this game are as clever as you were that game, KB. Discussion is good. Idle chat is not. As you newer people confirm, please post shortly after with your thoughts on these policies as well. First of all: why discuss about blue roles at all? This is the same mistake I did in A Game of Thrones Mafia - we kept talking about blue roles in the Mafia chat, so subconsciously I mentioned possibilities about the blue roles even in the normal thread. And what do you mean with "idle chat is not good"? So far this "idle chat" has been very useful (certainly much more useful than silence or the trolling/flaming we had in A Game of Thrones Mafia...). Also, you keep mentioning policies, which is something Mafia loves to do - you can appear somewhat useful without actually contributing anything. On April 12 2012 09:21 ArcticFox wrote: Verrrrry WIFOM reasoning. Be careful of that. It sounds logical, but discussing motive rarely leads anywhere. What if scum decides to bus? What if someone jumps up to defend because they think RNG is silly, or they have a blue read on him? This line of reasoning leads nowhere fast, and it's best to ignore it. You're tripping my scum-o-meter pretty hard right now. Got any better suggestions? There he goes again, talking about blue roles. It's too bad it probably ends now after I mention this, but I would have wanted to see how many times he can talk about blue roles / blue reads during the game, since this is the second time already in only 7 hours... And if you think Dittert is Mafia, why not vote for him or even put any real pressure on him? It looks like you just want to fake pressure an obvious target (a suspiciously acting townie) or put some distance between yourself and a fellow Mafia (if he gets lynched, you can claim you "pushed for his lynch" all along). On April 12 2012 10:28 ArcticFox wrote: I would prefer not to have to policy lynch at all, but liars and lurkers is a good place to start if we don't have any solid scumreads by the end of Day 1. So in short -- more people should post so we have more information to go on and can avoid a policy lynch. You look like you want to make a policy lynch, since you keep talking about policies, but still try to appear as if you "want" to lynch a Mafia player (if something too obvious comes along and you have to bus your teammate). I got a pretty solid Mafia read already in just a matter of hours, so this discussion is definitely not "useless"... ##Vote: ArcticFox I don't like this case at all. You start off by saying ArticFox's posting reminds you of your own posting as mafia in AGOT - this has no relevance at all; ArticFox isn't you - meta from another game with someone else playing is an awful reason to think someone is mafia. And policy discussion that early on with very few people online is perfectly normal. I'm also calling it now: likely either yomi or Dittert is Mafia. I have a hard time figuring out the 3 Mafia from this back-and-forth action, but if we manage to find even one today, it should make it easy to figure out the rest tomorrow. Why the sudden shift in tone? A few posts ago, you were 70 or 80 percent sure that ArticFox is mafia, in this same post you say that either yomi or Dittert is mafia, and yet at the same time you have a hard time figuring out who mafia is? You sound like a mafia member getting a bandwagon rolling and then jumping off before it crashes. ##Vote: Xatalos | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 01:30 yomi wrote: note arctic coming to the defense of dittert aka the most highly suspected player defending the second most highly suspected player. first big slip? not sure what to make of hiro accusing xatalos. I think the guy is kind of ridiculous but I think he (xatalos) is town. arctic/ditt/hiropro mafia 1/2/3 ? Answer the question. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 05:01 Acrofales wrote: Please tell me who you think is scummy and why? Read better. On April 13 2012 06:39 BroodKingEXE wrote: Hiro has offered nothing substantial as well, bandwagoning on the suspicions of Xatalos. Please explain to me how I am bandwagoning onto Xatalos when I am the only person that is voting for him and the first person to outright say that he is scum (Kharad gave a very wishy-washy response where he said that Xatalos is slightly suspicious). On April 13 2012 06:47 BroodKingEXE wrote: Mafia look at the scum lists and figure out who has the best sense of who they are. They then kill them This is beyond dumb. Why would mafia kill people who appear scummy. That does not hurt town in any way. If anything it helps town, by narrowing down possible people to lynch. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
| ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
| ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 06:49 Acrofales wrote: I think all our scum lists are quite similar at the moment. I have dittert as a scumspect and am not as suspicious of trumpetarm: I find dittert's few posts more suspect than trumpetarm's, who seems to at least be trying to contribute. Why do you say that trumpetarm's post contribute more than dittert's? All he's said was that the pressure votes were useless and that Xatalos may be town or sneaky mafia. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 06:53 Acrofales wrote: All I got from your contributions to this game is a really incoherent summary of Xatalos' scummy behaviour and a vote. If that is your only suspect I am unimpressed. What do you think of BroodkingExe? He's a confident poster but I don't agree with his reads on Dittert or his views on sharing reads. Townlike posting - gives a read, backs it up with logic (even though I don't agree with it) and doesn't waffle around. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 07:01 Xatalos wrote: Just my luck... Right as I post, HiroPro decides to suddenly post. Well, what do you think about my latest post, HiroPro? Am I still your only Mafia read? I like the case against vonKlaust a hell of a lot better than the one you made against ArticFox. The whole "i'm confused thing in the beginning is slightly scummy, but the bigger thing against vonKlaust for me is that he that he says that Xatalos has "several potential scumslips", is his prime suspect, but then doesn't vote for him. Someone who doesn't back up their scum reads with a vote is looking around for support too much to be town. ##Unvote: Xatalos ##Vote: vonKlaust | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 07:08 BroodKingEXE wrote: This is what I am talking about. A Mafia could put their votes anywhere and change the tide of the vote. Dittert and trumpetarm please start to contribute to the discussion. Hiro I want to hear more about your vote against Xatalos Why does it matter if the votes can be shifted right now when the deadline is more than a day away? Votes will naturally consolidate as we get closer. My inital vote against Xatalos was because he made a bad case and appeared very contradictory with his posting. But I think his case against vonKlaust is strong and deserves attention. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 07:32 vonKlaust wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 13 2012 06:54 Xatalos wrote: Right now I'm leaning the most towards vonKlaust. Here are the parts of his posts I'm most suspicious about: + Show Spoiler + On April 12 2012 21:36 vonKlaust wrote: Ok, I must disappointedly admit that I feel pretty lost. So far I think most cases have felt a bit rushed, but I guess that could be because I'm simply not used to this kind of speculative reasoning. I do however think that Xatalos case on ArticFox seems to carry some truth. If I would have to vote right now, I would probably go with this. Both the blue-talk and the policy lynching-talk seems a bit odd. I guess you could agrue that ArticFox could be blue himself, but it doesn't strike me as very natural behaviour to talk so much about blues if you are one yourself since you would desperately want to stay hidden. I'm not quite as confident about this as Xatalos seems to be, but to me this seems to be the best analysis so far. This post is just... Very indecisive and unproductive. He tries to ride on his own newbieness/confusion without providing anything other than vague or pointless remarks. What is that part about ArcticFox's possible blue role even supposed to mean? Could it be that same Mafia slip I thought I already saw in ArcticFox's posts? On April 12 2012 23:24 vonKlaust wrote: Well, I AM confused. And I can agree that I come across as somebody who doesn't take solid stances. I don't know alot about this game, and I try to be humble to that fact. I say what I think, but you're likely not gonna see me write something like "I am perfectly comfident this is how we should play this game" or "I know for a fact that X is scum". That's just not how my brain works. Again he is trying to hide behind his confusion/newbieness. I find it suspicious how he keeps repeating how confused he is. Even if you are truly confused, why spend your energy explaining to others that you are a useless and confused townie? On April 13 2012 05:43 vonKlaust wrote: I still have a feeling that Dittert is just a confused townie. I think the whole RNG-thing have been blown out of proportions and I think his weak case against Willz might have been rushed since he felt pressured to contribute to the scumhunt. I'm unsure about Xatalos. While he have done a couple of potential scumslips he feels a tad to vocal for a mafia member. And those slips can just have been the result of bad reasoning, even though I doubt it. HiroPro also comes across as a bit suspiscious. The way he has just popped in a couple of times. Both of the times short after someone called him out as lurking. It makes me feel he is actively lurking. I would like HiroPro to write more, but for now I think I'll go with Xatalos as my prime suspect. That comment about Dittert being a "confused townie" adds fuel to the fire that you attempting to make "being confused" a state where everything is forgiven - there should never be free passes for being confused/newb, not for you, not for Dittert. I also have to wonder how I am now your "prime suspect", although earlier you jumped eagerly on my case against ArcticFox. You also mentioned ONLY me as your suspect, for some reason. I want to hear some reasonable excuse for this. Am I truly the biggest/only Mafia read you have so far for making a slightly faulty case to get things going? ##Unvote ##Vote: vonKlaust I just made a post about me acting indecisive and unproductive in the beginning of the game. While I'm sure it won't give you much comfort, since I basically agree that was the case, but that is the plain truth. You can find it here: + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=14321898 This post is just... Very indecisive and unproductive. He tries to ride on his own newbieness/confusion without providing anything other than vague or pointless remarks. What is that part about ArcticFox's possible blue role even supposed to mean? Could it be that same Mafia slip I thought I already saw in ArcticFox's posts? You're really for jumping to conclussions aren't you? What I meant was exactly what i said: I guess you could agrue that ArticFox could be blue himself, but it doesn't strike me as very natural behaviour to talk so much about blues if you are one yourself since you would desperately want to stay hidden. To me, it seems more likely for a newbie mafia to write about blue roles than for a newbie blue. I wrote this to combat a possible argument against him being scum. How is this indecisive with what at the time were my suspicions? I basically agreed with what you were saying. Wouldn't that make you more of a scumslipper than me? That comment about Dittert being a "confused townie" adds fuel to the fire that you attempting to make "being confused" a state where everything is forgiven - there should never be free passes for being confused/newb, not for you, not for Dittert. I also have to wonder how I am now your "prime suspect", although earlier you jumped eagerly on my case against ArcticFox. You also mentioned ONLY me as your suspect, for some reason. I want to hear some reasonable excuse for this. Am I truly the biggest/only Mafia read you have so far for making a slightly faulty case to get things going? The fact that I called Dittert out as a confused townie don't have anything to do with that I felt very confused in the beginning of the game, except for the fact that I can understand how he would feel as a confused townie. Ofc I can have you as my prime suspect even though I(probably wrongly) supported your case against ArticFox. I can't see how you think that is wierd. At the time I didn't have anything on you, and I thought your claims were reasonable. Now, I have something on you, and I no longer think your claims were reasonable. See? And as I wrote in my post about you being my prime suspect: No, you're not my only suspect. I also pointed out HiroPro as someone I think is playing in a way which is very negative for town, which makes me suspect him. And also, as you would see if you would actually read my posts, my suspicions against you have nothing to do with your actual case against ArticFox. It was the fact that you tried to justify your case on other grounds than it being a good case. Also, I think that I have actually started to be much more productive than earlier. I'm getting more used to this, and now there is more to go on. I am the first to agree with that I wasn't very productive before. This is so contradictory. Why on earth would you support the case of the person who you most believe to be mafia??? | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
What actually happened: 1. Xatalos made a case. 2. I supported the case. 3. I no longer supported the case. 4. I started to susspect Xatalos. Alright, I see this. But if Xatalos is your main suspect, I'm still wondering why you never voted for him. And by the way: First you voted Xatalos. Later you wrote: Please explain to me how I am bandwagoning onto Xatalos when I am the only person that is voting for him and the first person to outright say that he is scum (Kharad gave a very wishy-washy response where he said that Xatalos is slightly suspicious). Then, without ever writing anything about that you're starting to doubt your suspicions or anything along those lines: ##Unvote: Xatalos ##Vote: vonKlaust Isn't this exactly what you're accusing me of? 1. Xatalos makes bad case. 2. I vote for Xatalos. 3. Broodking asks why I'm "bandwagoning Xatalos" (lololol) 4. I respond 5. Xatalos makes good case. 6. I trust Xatalos more and see similar suspicious behavior as Xatalos does in vonKaust. I vote for vonKlaust. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
Obviously if he posts an actual good case, he doesn't appear as mafia to me. And the case against you has merit. I would also still like to know why you never voted for Xatalos if he was your strongest mafia read. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
| ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
@HiroPro vonKlaust has a point, you were the only one of us to initially suspect Xatalos and voted so, but because you agree with his case towards vonKlaus now, you're willing to switch your vote and agree with the person you originally suspected? Also making a decision about lynching someone because he didn't or did vote his target is so arbitrarily illogical. Xatalos voted ArcticFox, now he's changing his vote, I voted for Xatalos because the case he made was bad. The case he made after that was good and showed me that he was reading and thinking things through. He also responded to my post against him and argued very clearly: On April 13 2012 02:35 Xatalos wrote: + Show Spoiler + I'm not really sure what to think of your case against me, HiroPro. Earlier KharadBanar made a weak case against me, which he admitted was weak, yet you make another weak case against me and then vote based on it... I can't see a sensible motivation for this no matter your alignment. Do you really think I'm the most suspicious player around or are you just trying to create chaos or something? Because no matter how I look at it, I have been the most contributive and aggressive Mafia-hunter so far. Let's see how your logic fails: On April 13 2012 01:16 HiroPro wrote: I don't like this case at all. You start off by saying ArticFox's posting reminds you of your own posting as mafia in AGOT - this has no relevance at all; ArticFox isn't you - meta from another game with someone else playing is an awful reason to think someone is mafia. And policy discussion that early on with very few people online is perfectly normal. You discredit my case just by saying that a metagame argument is bad. That's definitely false, since metagame is an important part of this game - but metagame is simply a part of my case, not even the most important part of it. I understand that a townie MIGHT play like I would play as Mafia, but it's much more likely that Mafia would play like I would play as Mafia. Understand this point? And more importantly: the several potential Mafia slips from ArcticFox are not condemning seperately, but when combined, they definitely don't paint a good picture of him. On April 13 2012 01:16 HiroPro wrote: Why the sudden shift in tone? A few posts ago, you were 70 or 80 percent sure that ArticFox is mafia, in this same post you say that either yomi or Dittert is mafia, and yet at the same time you have a hard time figuring out who mafia is? You sound like a mafia member getting a bandwagon rolling and then jumping off before it crashes. ##Vote: Xatalos I never said I have a hard time figuring out the Mafia. I only said I have a hard time figuring out the COMPLETE Mafia team, since many of my Mafia suspects are pushing (or at least fake pushing) for each others' lynching. When was I trying to "jump off a bandwagon"? It would be foolish to say ArcticFox is 100% Mafia, since there's no way to know that. I'm just saying he is my best Mafia read at the moment, followed by yomi and Dittert. I'm searching for material to make a second strong case from, but at the moment I'm not ready to push strongly for someone else than ArcticFox. Right now I want to hear more from you (HiroPro), willz22912 and Acrofales to improve my reads. You three have been at least semi-lurking so far... (I also want to correct one misconception about my wording. When I say someone is 50% suspicious, I think it's 50/50 (even) if he is town or Mafia. When I say someone is 70-80% suspicious, I think he is pretty likely to be Mafia. When I say someone is 95% suspicious, I think he's almost quaranteed to be Mafia.) I have never even voted someone even though I had plenty of cause to (dittert, xatalos for the same reasons you originally stated) It's better to be consistent with your vote, changing votes constantly is scummy behavior because it shows that you are just looking for the easy lynch. It's always better to put down your vote if your strongest mafia read changes. It shows that you're not afraid to have a record be kept of you reads and thoughts. Otherwise mafia can just switch around what they say without it ever being clear. | ||
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On April 13 2012 08:09 BroodKingEXE wrote: The problem I have with your case against Xatalos was that Xatalos never had the bandwagon to begin with. People saw it as pretty useless information after they reread it, and it was pretty much dead from there. I viewed it as pure misguided case, I am wondering what made it different for you? What makes you think that Xatalos is more scummy than Dittert per say? Obviously I don't still view Xatalos as a mafia read. The reason why I first thought that Xatalos was more scummy in comparison to people like Dittert, was that Xatalos was an experienced player; it seemed unlikely that he would make a bad case like that. This is Dittert's first game; I would expect him to say something silly early on (RNG voting). Since then he hasn't yet posted much; so I can't really give much of a view on Dittert. | ||
| ||