EPTLiar Game Mini Mafia - Page 20
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
One vote gives you results of where people landed via min/maj and one is hidden tallies. You should always pressure people if you can but blatantly lying in posts to do said pressure is retarded. | ||
|
Cephiro
Finland1934 Posts
On May 01 2012 11:09 gonzaw wrote: Meta is a very effective tool. Most people use it very badly and just say things like "Oh, he was active in that game when he was town, he's inactive right now so he's scum". You have to analyze behaviour and motivation when you use meta. Here is your filter from DF2: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324050&user=183812 You can instantly find differences. For instance, you are calm and analytical. In this game you are overcome by "emotion", you are very aggressive and you don't have a focus on things, you just cling on to something (arguing with me for instance) and stay with it for the rest of the game. When people accuse you (syllogism for instance) and start shitting on you you keep your cool. Now someone FoSes you for the first time and you go on a rampage. In that game you obviously care about the game. You post your thoughts every once in a while to keep up with discussion, and you do it in a straight manner without misdirecting or anything. Here you don't care about discussion either. You started shitting on people for pointing out plans. Then when people want your reads you tell them you won't post shit. Then when someone takes notice of this and FoSes you you flip your shit and tunnel the hell out of him, without even caring about other things from the game. For instance, you don't care about the most important part: finding scum. "Oh, he was analytical and calm in that game when he was town, he's being more "aggressive" now, so he's scum." Do you see what you are doing here? You do realize it doesn't even take a skilled person in psychology to fake that, or act in another way on purpose? As for your final question, my final answer: I will give my reads when I have enough content to back it up. If you think I am scummy for not going around pointing fingers when I am unsure myself... well, I'll let everyone make their conclusions of that. As I said before, I find making one proper case more useful rather than make 3 jabs at different people without anything to back it up. That is all. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
"Votes will be made public after each phase. Thus at the start of round B the results of the Minority voting phase will be published, and after the lynch the " Where it just cuts off. Are the voting results of Round B revealed in public? I'd guess so after the initial wording, but if you can fix the sentence to make it explicit if that's the case, that would be nice. | ||
|
Protactinium
Canada550 Posts
On May 01 2012 11:48 Mr. Wiggles wrote: I notice in the OP, there is an incomplete sentence. Specifically: "Votes will be made public after each phase. Thus at the start of round B the results of the Minority voting phase will be published, and after the lynch the " Where it just cuts off. Are the voting results of Round B revealed in public? I'd guess so after the initial wording, but if you can fix the sentence to make it explicit if that's the case, that would be nice. Apologies. Fixed. Results will be posted like they are in the OP publicly after someone is lynched. | ||
|
Protactinium
Canada550 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Q8GmY.png) Day 1: Round B Round A has concluded. The tally is as follows: Yes: (10) Prplhz Cephiro Sandroba Viscera Eyes Mr Wiggles Meapak_Ziphh Radfield Echelon Tee Liquid`Sheth Chaoser No: (8) Ace Palmar Foolishnesss Syllogism Bloodyc0bbler wherebugsgo Katina Gonzaw Players who voted No are in the minority. They are immune to lynch this round. This means that the eligible candidates for Round B are: Prplhz Cephiro Sandroba Viscera Eyes Mr Wiggles Meapak_Ziphh Radfield Echelon Tee Liquid`Sheth Chaoser Round B (Downsizing Round) ends in 24 hours at 8PM PDT (23:00 EDT (-04:00) your time). Please PM me with 5 names of players you wish to continue into Day 2 before then. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
On May 01 2012 11:35 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Dude? Round A is the clearly easier way to make people accountable for their votes and finding any form of pattern. Unless you force a system of mentioned earlier of how people vote (ie forcing only one person to die each cycle to the lynch) then the only accountable voting scheme is round A. One vote gives you results of where people landed via min/maj and one is hidden tallies. You should always pressure people if you can but blatantly lying in posts to do said pressure is retarded. What the? What are you talking about? I meant that I can't "pressure" wbg, or chaoser by "voting" them like you would normally do in a game. As in, players have 0 fear in Round A, they can't get lynched or anything, and without a plan they can randomly be in the majority or minority. And the "vote" you are speaking of is revealed at the end of Round A, so I don't get what you mean. You too BC, you seem active right now, so can you tell us what you think of Cephiro, chaoser, wbg, Ace, etc? Here are my thoughts on those players you were mentioning: About prplz: I don't see anything scummy with him for now. He keeps talking about "not being sure" about things, and discuss too much what happens with the "Palmogisfield-plan". He posts a lot, but doesn't scumhunt with them at all. I'm waiting for his thoughts on these last events. About Katina: I find it weird that she spoke with "reassurance" like you said, but other than that I can't make much out of her. She does seem very confident in her posts though, Can you guys add Meapak's other account in the filters list? Here it is http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=333034&user=263446 To Ceph: On May 01 2012 11:43 Cephiro wrote: + Show Spoiler + On May 01 2012 11:09 gonzaw wrote: Meta is a very effective tool. Most people use it very badly and just say things like "Oh, he was active in that game when he was town, he's inactive right now so he's scum". You have to analyze behaviour and motivation when you use meta. Here is your filter from DF2: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324050&user=183812 You can instantly find differences. For instance, you are calm and analytical. In this game you are overcome by "emotion", you are very aggressive and you don't have a focus on things, you just cling on to something (arguing with me for instance) and stay with it for the rest of the game. When people accuse you (syllogism for instance) and start shitting on you you keep your cool. Now someone FoSes you for the first time and you go on a rampage. In that game you obviously care about the game. You post your thoughts every once in a while to keep up with discussion, and you do it in a straight manner without misdirecting or anything. Here you don't care about discussion either. You started shitting on people for pointing out plans. Then when people want your reads you tell them you won't post shit. Then when someone takes notice of this and FoSes you you flip your shit and tunnel the hell out of him, without even caring about other things from the game. For instance, you don't care about the most important part: finding scum. "Oh, he was analytical and calm in that game when he was town, he's being more "aggressive" now, so he's scum." Even though both sentences have the same structure, they are not the same. Being "analytical and calm, taking pressure calmly, caring about the game and posting thoughts in the thread constantly and driving discussion" is not the same as just being "inactive". Do you see what you are doing here? You do realize it doesn't even take a skilled person in psychology to fake that, or act in another way on purpose? As for your final question, my final answer: I will give my reads when I have enough content to back it up. If you think I am scummy for not going around pointing fingers when I am unsure myself... well, I'll let everyone make their conclusions of that. As I said before, I find making one proper case more useful rather than make 3 jabs at different people without anything to back it up. That is all. Argh. I already said you don't need to point fingers or make cases. Post your thoughts! Also, you are not Incognito or those guys that lurk all D1/N1 and then spout 10 gigantic cases in 1 post. You take part of discussion and post thoughts, just like in Death Factory, so I don't believe you saying "Oh I don't like posting reads/thoughts in the thread until I have a gigantic awesome case to make". | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
Tthat was kind of unexpected, I thought more people would have said NO. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On May 01 2012 12:02 gonzaw wrote: What the? What are you talking about? I meant that I can't "pressure" wbg, or chaoser by "voting" them like you would normally do in a game. As in, players have 0 fear in Round A, they can't get lynched or anything, and without a plan they can randomly be in the majority or minority. And the "vote" you are speaking of is revealed at the end of Round A, so I don't get what you mean. You too BC, you seem active right now, so can you tell us what you think of Cephiro, chaoser, wbg, Ace, etc? Here are my thoughts on those players you were mentioning: About prplz: I don't see anything scummy with him for now. He keeps talking about "not being sure" about things, and discuss too much what happens with the "Palmogisfield-plan". He posts a lot, but doesn't scumhunt with them at all. I'm waiting for his thoughts on these last events. About Katina: I find it weird that she spoke with "reassurance" like you said, but other than that I can't make much out of her. She does seem very confident in her posts though, Can you guys add Meapak's other account in the filters list? Here it is http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=333034&user=263446 To Ceph: Even though both sentences have the same structure, they are not the same. Being "analytical and calm, taking pressure calmly, caring about the game and posting thoughts in the thread constantly and driving discussion" is not the same as just being "inactive". Argh. I already said you don't need to point fingers or make cases. Post your thoughts! Also, you are not Incognito or those guys that lurk all D1/N1 and then spout 10 gigantic cases in 1 post. You take part of discussion and post thoughts, just like in Death Factory, so I don't believe you saying "Oh I don't like posting reads/thoughts in the thread until I have a gigantic awesome case to make". Ace is ace Cephiro is annoyed at being prodded bugs is bugs Katina is scum etc.... Its day 1. I have already made observations on players that for the most part people have thus far ignored. Posting a ton of reads on people who are either doing jack shit or playing the game purely in pm's is pointless until they post more. There are also a ton of people who have generic day 1 play regardless of alignment that make reading them near impossible for it. | ||
|
Cephiro
Finland1934 Posts
On May 01 2012 12:02 gonzaw wrote: "Oh, he was analytical and calm in that game when he was town, he's being more "aggressive" now, so he's scum." Even though both sentences have the same structure, they are not the same. Being "analytical and calm, taking pressure calmly, caring about the game and posting thoughts in the thread constantly and driving discussion" is not the same as just being "inactive". Argh. I already said you don't need to point fingers or make cases. Post your thoughts! Also, you are not Incognito or those guys that lurk all D1/N1 and then spout 10 gigantic cases in 1 post. You take part of discussion and post thoughts, just like in Death Factory, so I don't believe you saying "Oh I don't like posting reads/thoughts in the thread until I have a gigantic awesome case to make". [/QUOTE] My main point in the sentence above, is that you are simply thinking that I am of the opposite alignment as before, because I do not work exactly in the same way as I did in DF2. Now, wouldn't mafia games be quite boring if it was that easy, such as people would always be the same when town and when scum? To the last paragraph, don't think you know me... all you know about me is how I decided to play in 3 games of mafia in TL + some irc chatter, you won't even get to my momentarily thoughts with that.  Although I like where your reasoning is going slowly. I'll post my thoughts when I get back, away for now. Also, 10:8.... funny isn't it? | ||
|
Cephiro
Finland1934 Posts
On May 01 2012 12:02 gonzaw wrote: Even though both sentences have the same structure, they are not the same. Being "analytical and calm, taking pressure calmly, caring about the game and posting thoughts in the thread constantly and driving discussion" is not the same as just being "inactive". Argh. I already said you don't need to point fingers or make cases. Post your thoughts! Also, you are not Incognito or those guys that lurk all D1/N1 and then spout 10 gigantic cases in 1 post. You take part of discussion and post thoughts, just like in Death Factory, so I don't believe you saying "Oh I don't like posting reads/thoughts in the thread until I have a gigantic awesome case to make". My main point in the sentence above, is that you are simply thinking that I am of the opposite alignment as before, because I do not work exactly in the same way as I did in DF2. Now, wouldn't mafia games be quite boring if it was that easy, such as people would always be the same when town and when scum? To the last paragraph, don't think you know me... all you know about me is how I decided to play in 3 games of mafia in TL + some irc chatter, you won't even get to my momentarily thoughts with that. Although I like where your reasoning is going slowly. I'll post my thoughts when I get back, away for now. Also, 10:8.... funny isn't it? EBWOP: Structure fixed. See you soon. | ||
|
gonzaw
Uruguay4911 Posts
I'll take a break, eat go to sleep and think about it tomorrow. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
Please hold your votes for a few hours at the very least. also: cool, since sandro is in the majority, I propose we kill him. Points of concern: 1. This is a PM game, and bar Palmar/syllo, everyone I have asked "have you talked to sandro?" has answered no. The players who have told me they have not talked to sandro include Radfield, chaoser, Foolishness, and BC. In addition, he's ignored two PMs I've sent him as well. Why would a town sandro only talk to Palmar/syllo in a PM game? In SS mafia sandro was active in PMs with everyone as town. In PYP:I he had token activity in PMs as scum and chose to ignore me for a while as well. 2. From the logs I got from Palmar between himself and sandro, it's apparent that sandro is indifferent to the game, and what syllo/Palmar said about their impressions look to be true. Sandro chose to ignore Palmar's question about what he thought about chaoser (he instead chose to simply 3. He's mostly had no involvement in the thread either, and has not been concerned at all with anything that would really help town. I recall he suggested this: On May 01 2012 01:46 sandroba wrote: Yes, anyone saying Palmar can't control everything is not actually thinking about this. If someone doesn't have the last word it is impossible to control round A. That someone does not always have to be the same person. We can adapt and change it up on following rounds if need be. I'm already thinking about round B and I think the optimal way is to claim all votes and spread them across your top 5 town reads from the pool of 10 players left. That way is the hardest for scum to save their dude and provides the most information. That's because scum can provide at max 2 votes on their teamates to make them avoid being lynched and scummy dudes will end up being lynched on average. which on even one read is clearly antitown. If everyone votes their top 5 town in the pool of 10 players that we have, chances are incredibly strong that there will be at least 2-4 people who will receive next to no votes. These people will likely be town, because scum can always find reasons to vote their buddies. It will be the less popular townies who will die, not the actual scum. In addition he comes back and says this later: On May 01 2012 03:26 sandroba wrote: @foolishness There will never be a consensus on whom to kill especially if said person is mafia. It's reasonable to assume even a few townies will have a wrong read on and will end up defending scum. Also afaik only the vote tally will be available, not who voted whom. How exactly is that going to work in practice? Only way I can think of is that we get compliance from everyone beforehand, that they will agree to follow the voting scheme if they get out-voted (we do the traditional voting to see who will be lynched). Then we propose a unique voting scheme so we can identify who didn't follow it (each player votes for a unique combination of players). If some townies will defend scum then of course some townies will end up putting scum in their top 5 town lists! By his own logic sandro shouldn't be following the plan he proposed, yet in PMs with Palmar he claims it's a good plan and is curious as to why Palmar doesn't agree with it. If anyone finds sandroba to be town please speak up and outline your reasoning. Otherwise, I believe that we should be killing him today. | ||
|
chaoser
United States5541 Posts
I was hoping to push a katina lynch today but I'm willing to settle on a sandro lynch. Townie sandro makes plans. He loves plans, especially trying to make semi-game breaking ones. I figured out of all people, he would be most excited about how to most effectively use the two round mechanic to help town. On to the cycle: Prplhz Cephiro Sandroba Viscera Eyes Mr Wiggles Meapak_Ziphh Radfield Echelon Tee Liquid`Sheth Chaoser I'm going to give 4 of my votes to Prplhz. I hope the rest of you join the cycle as well. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
bugs, chaoser just tell me where to place my votes. | ||
Liquid`Sheth
United States2095 Posts
| ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
Don't place votes yet; we want four votes on one person and one somewhere else. This ensures that only sandro will die and no one else. | ||
|
Liquid`Sheth
United States2095 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
I'm preparing a post on who of the available lynches I do not wish to continue playing with and why. I hope everyone, regardless of how they intend to spend their votes, will do the same. Time is short, and I want to be informed. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
On May 01 2012 13:41 VisceraEyes wrote: Wait, I want to be walked through why "we're" doing a circle-jerk here. I need to know why people think that it's a good idea, and I need to know what they hope to accomplish with it. I've been reading the thread, so please don't ask me to go read it again. I can assure you, I'm reading it as you read this. I'm preparing a post on who of the available lynches I do not wish to continue playing with and why. I hope everyone, regardless of how they intend to spend their votes, will do the same. Time is short, and I want to be informed. because it's pretty much the only effective way to ensure that only one person dies, and at the same time hold people accountable to who they believe is town and why. In addition out of the available lynch choices I am confident that sandro is the most likely to flip scum. | ||
| ||
