EPTalso I might try to finagle my roommate who's never played forum mafia before into this one, just for fun.
TL Mafia LIV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
also I might try to finagle my roommate who's never played forum mafia before into this one, just for fun. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
| ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
I'm not going to be voting for grush today unless something crazy happens before the deadline. Tossing aside his random bandwagon vote I don't think he responded to the pressure unreasonably. I mean, I'd be pretty upset as well if I was being pressured to put out analysis posts when the rest of town's strategy was jump-down-people's-throats-at-the-drop-of-a-hat-and-see-what-sticks. Either way, he's said some things and eyes will be on him now in the future. If he disappears or slips up, we'll notice. I'm going to spoiler this next bit because I managed to start writing it and then realized I was probably wrong about halfway through and my position changed from 'this guy's scum' to 'eh'. + Show Spoiler + Between this: On May 03 2012 10:15 papapanda wrote: It is reasonable to vote for blubb if no one else comes out with major slip-ups, and the town has to lynch someone. Otherwise I would sit back and wait for N1 or D2 when more information might be available. Which people have already called him out on, and this: On May 03 2012 22:31 papapanda wrote: A 1.2 line defense? Only a little better than grush. Some of us are obviously more seasoned than others. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't I play with you before in my first game? The way I see it is when we have two suspicious guys, I would lynch the more experienced person because there is less possibility that his mistakes are due to the fact that he was careless or ignorant. In which he brushes off david's requested explanation for his actions (because apparently length is everything). But then I went back and looked at the context again and realized that he was just putting more pressure on because david was crazy-overreacting to being called out for the minor blue-hunting he was doing right off the bat, which is pretty reasonable. So, nevermind. Panda seems pretty cool. I'll have to vote tomorrow-- I've got an hour I can use to find someone. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 04 2012 21:59 Zealos wrote: That is my opinion! Panda doesn't seem scummy to me. I used to have a scumread, and then I looked into it and changed my mind!So what opinion do you actually have. You got any scumreads? On May 04 2012 23:40 slOosh wrote: I believe sinani did this in one of the games I've played with him, though I might be confusing 201 with 206. Either way, please post useful things 206. You've been known to not do so in the past, and now's the perfect time to turn that around!Why, as a townie, do you show absolutely no interest in proving your innocence in the form of contributions? Anyway, I'm going to be voting for mentos. He's already been called out on a few of his posts, but this really caught my eye: On May 04 2012 22:58 Mementoss wrote: Of course it was hard to get votes onto him, it was practically day one hour one and there was hardly even a case against him. Combine that questionable interpretation of events with a non-committal push that he's scum because people are defending him in a non-committal way without providing any evidence that that's even the case, and then wrapping it up by concluding there's a 'good chance' he's scum? I really, really don't like what this post is trying to do.Grushes case is a strange one for sure. It's one of the only cases made in this game so far, and he just crumbled and gave in and played the pity me card. This could be a town or mafia trait, the only interesting thing to me is how hard it has been to get votes onto him, 4 in about a day, and the fact that a lot of people are just dropping one liners defending him without proper reason and jumping onto the next person. Still think there is a good chance he could be scum. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 06 2012 00:38 slOosh wrote: Eiii I want you to post more now if you can please. Hi there! I don't really like posting or having big discussions at night, but it seems like the rest of town doesn't feel the same way. Well, this gets my one-post-per-cycle requirement out of the way, at least. See you in a few hours! | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 06 2012 03:33 slOosh wrote: Eiii, provide your reasoning why posting / discussion is bad at night. Discussion about players at night is what I don't like. It feels like it's a time where the ball is in scum's court, and giving them more information with which to decide who's best to kill from town. I'd rather we be the ones to choose who dies after a day of discussion instead of letting scum have that chance. Not to mention it can be helpful for blue hunting-- if someone isn't too active during the day and then becomes a good deal more interested in discussing players and trying to root out scum during the night or whatever, then maaaaybe they have a power role of some sort? I just don't think it's a good idea, so I try to avoid doing it. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 06 2012 04:00 slOosh wrote: Eiii, how are we the ones choosing who dies? Ultimately scum shoot who they want to shoot - while it is true that they can make more informed decisions of shots, the same can be said of the daytime too. I meant that I prefer discussing during the day to during the night-- during the day, at least we get to end things with a lynch. At night, we talk about who looks scummy and then mafia kills someone. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 06 2012 23:43 SomethingAwesome wrote: Eiii: What do you think about I10f's few posts? That he havent said anything original at all? Do you think he have said anything original? (and whats your read on Mementoss now?) Everyone: Who is the best lynch between Blubbdavid or papapanda? omg questions someone cares! l10f just jumps on the layabout train and posts a bunch of stuff that're basically exact copies of cases others have made before him (specifically Sinensis). Memetoss hasn't really changed much in my book-- it's worth noting that he copies sinensis' layabout case as well, though that seems less like a pretending-to-contribute thing and more like a jumping-on-the-bandwagon thing since his posts otherwise seem significant enough. For now, I don't want to lynch him anymore because yesterday's flips made some people look really bad (aka layabout). On david vs panda: I dunno. Both have been pretty inconsequential this game from my perspective, so they'd be better to shoot if anything. So anyway, I'm going to vote for layabout. All the other accusations are good, but one thing most people are missing is that if we had lynched BM and the modkills hadn't happened, we'd be completely lost right now. Lynching a lurker who had done almost literally nothing because he 'might hurt town' gives us zero information. We'd all still be running around in the chaos of day one on day two if kat/206 hadn't fucked up. Between that and the kat defense, I'm throwing my vote on him. If lay flips red then marvel is worth looking at just because of being so associated with both layabout and kat day one. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 07 2012 04:10 PaqMan wrote: Eiii was complaining N1 about not having discussions at night, but he has yet to post today. good timing. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 07 2012 04:40 layabout wrote: Eiii, are you saying that we shouldn't lynch players that lurk because we gain very little information? You are aware of the fact that in the last 24 hours there have been about 100 posts from the 18 players still alive? And that half of the thread are lurking? And that both of the scum players that flipped were lurkers? zzzzz We should *kill* the lurkers by some means. We have ways of killing that isn't a lynch! Ideally we'd shoot all the lurkers and lynch people who took scummy positions. Maximum information (which is a good thing, no matter how you spin it)! That's not always possible, though-- but to lynch a lurker day one when we had a handful of lynch candidates actually puts the town behind. Really, ask yourself. If BM had been the only death day one, where would we be right now? On May 07 2012 04:40 layabout wrote: You are reiterating a weak point ("kat defence") and saying that you should lynch me for the sake of "information". The link between myself and marvellosity that you are trying to create is weak. You fail to say what to do when i flip town. I cannot think of a worse reason to vote for me. What? No, I don't think you should be lynched for information at all. You should be lynched for pushing BM day one, which accomplished nothing, together with your questionable defense of kat when it wasn't clear that he'd be modkilled, like several other people have pointed out before me. The part about marvel isn't an accusation, just an observation that'll come into play if you flip red. Since you're so interested in what my plan is if you flip green: I'll probably say 'darn' and apologize for voting for the wrong person. And you'll be dead. I'm willing to take that chance, though! | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 07 2012 05:41 layabout wrote: You are full of crap [1]ways like what exactly? relying on the calimed vig in the hopes that we have an engineer and they picked refill ammo and life over doctor? relying on having a blu demoman that has placed bombs on the players we want, and then manages to get themselves killed? relying on red not having a medic that can counteract these night hits? The lynch is the most reliable way to kill players if we decide to. There are so many lurkers that we cannot grant them immunity from the lynch on the grounds that "our blues will deal with them" as you are doing. Would you have us ignore scummy players that are lurking and lynch elsewhere? Hey remember that time I prefaced a statement with 'ideally' and then you freaked the fuck out and took it as an actual defense of lurkers even when I explicitly said right beforehand that we should definitely be killing them? That was great. You're deliberately misinterpreting what I said there. I never came anywhere close to saying we should grant lurkers immunity from being lynched, just that they're always the best option when they can easily be killed off in other ways and we can get more out of our lynch. Plus, lynches aren't the most reliable way to kill people by a long shot. With lynches, we have to deal with mafia influence in arguments and votes. With a vig? He just shoots whoever he wants and that person dies. Seems pretty reliable to me! On May 07 2012 05:41 layabout wrote: If BM had been the only death 1 we would be in a similar position to most towns that ever were having mislynched a townie day 1.! I refuse to believe you actually think this. Mislynching an active town-- or at least one that tries to defend himself-- has a completely different outcome than lynching a lurker who everyone just kind of agrees is *probably* going to be bad for town so whatever let's kill him. Here's how I see things: Day one is always a chaotic waste of time that usually results in a mislynch or something else equally retarded (e.g. BM lynch). Day two is then mostly driven by analyzing who did what day one and, with the information gained from the day/night deaths, how those actions look. And hey, what do you know, that's almost exactly how this game is going! A good chunk of the talk today has been about Kat/206 and how people connect to them or how they connect to others-- but no one has said a thing about the BM lynch. Because it was useless. On May 07 2012 04:40 layabout wrote: [3]??? Let's pretend that you didn't post this: which describes the information gained from lynching me, after you emphasized the value of information. Let's pretend that you *actually* read and understood that and aren't just trying to attack me for whatever reason. Lynching you for information isn't even remotely close to lynching you because you're scum, and then looking into the connections that start popping up once you flip red. On May 07 2012 04:40 layabout wrote: You want to kill me because i pushed a lynch that didn't give us much information. Boo fucking Hoo. That is not the point of a lynch. You lynch to kill scum. When you are desperate you might lynch a lurker (who has a chance of flipping scum) over player that are active or that you have town reads on. I want to kill you because you've done scummy things. You started a scummy lynch bandwagon day one and you defended another scum, which is suspicious in ways that have been brought up again and again. So I agree-- let's lynch scum! If only you had that same mantra day one, when you decided that you didn't like where the lynch was going so you just threw a lurker (or 'inactive', whatever) onto the fire, who you had no reason to believe was red. What happened to 'let's lynch scum' then? When you're desperate for a lynch you find the scummiest player and you lynch them, you don't just redirect the lynch onto whoever's convenient. On May 07 2012 04:40 layabout wrote: [5]"questionable defense?" i think ghost summed it up here: *ghost tragically forgot this later on when other people suggested killing me. 'Player X is scummy and the best candidate we have for a lynch today-- but let's not lynch them! They're smart! Let's at least wait until later.' ...that's a perfectly reasonable, valid defense to you? ok. On May 07 2012 04:40 layabout wrote: [6]You will weep tears and become the laughing stock of the entire forum!  | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
| ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
| ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
| ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 08 2012 08:28 l10f wrote: At least I voted for scum. Sorry I missed the deadline to vote, but neither N_T or blubb looked scummier than Eiii to me, so I wouldn't have known which of the two to vote for even if I was here. Especially with that last second switch that makes no sense... It accomplished preventing a potential last-minute switch onto another candidate. Blubb had a decent case against him and I generally consider that kind of behavior after getting a lot of votes to be something scum are more likely to do than town. It ended up not working out for the best, of course, but I'm not psychic so  | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
Having replacements that people can take in non-emergency conditions in general is just dumb -_- I guess there's nothing stopping people from just pretending they've had an emergency, but it really fucks with the game when a whole new person comes in and takes over someone's role. also nightpost plz | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On May 10 2012 01:13 l10f wrote: Good catch, I didn't mention layabout because I already said I had doubts about his being mafia on day 2. I guess I should have clarified that my view on him didn't change. Now do you have anything else to day except nitpicking at my post? But you voted for me on day 2 | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
| ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
| ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
| ||
| ||
