|
On May 29 2012 05:05 EchelonTee wrote:
RE: Sinensis
I highly disagree with a Sinensis lynch at this time. Sinensis is a player who has much improved since his first few games, but people who have played with him should remember that he can be very stubborn and set in his reads. In SoaF, convinced that BH was scum, he voted BH before the Day Post had come, where BH promptly flipped town doctor. In surprisingly normal VII, he wanted to lynch prplhz, a claimed vig who had shot scum. Sinensis is someone who can have a read and will stick to it until he dies.
Ugh. I remember NMMI now.
It doesn't excuse his lack of other interest in the game though. He suspected prplhz all game in NMMI but that didn't stop him contributing other reads, voting for other players or generally participating in the game. Does he think that having a mayoral campaign excuses him from other participation?
The evidence of irrational town play does reduce the chance of him flipping scum so I'll look for better targets.
|
On May 29 2012 05:22 EchelonTee wrote:
Something to note; almost all people have said "I would be down with killing Sinensis!". Some have said the same about SnB, but many have said "I am sort of suspicious, but want more info first".
Some players who haven't said "I would be down with killing Sinensis!". Probably not a complete list:
papapanda: Ignored the issue, despite mentioning BH, Grush and Sinensis and having played LIV.
austinmcc: Very hedgy post on Grush vs Sinensis.
Supersoft: Ignored the issue.
Hyaach: Doesn't want policy lynch, but ignored Sinensis question otherwise.
Toad: Thinks Sinensis's play is too bold for a mafia.
Plus all the lurkers who have said nothing about anything.
|
Where the hell is Wiggles anyway? I don't want to vote ET now because I think SnB is town (thx for lecture, MZ).
Do I take it that anyone who's currently voting ET is fine with a SnB lynch?
@Sinensis: You're not going to post any reads at all? Your campaign is long-dead and none of the contenders are interested in your policy lynch, so what the hell are you doing? Are you going to keep pushing Grush for the rest of the game?
@SToFu: Who do you think is scum?
|
@Wiggles: You're allowed to vote for yourself. Greymist confirmed earlier.
I'd also like to register my disapproval of Mattchew's play, or lack of it. I don't think a lurker lynch is a bad choice here, partly because I have no idea what Sinensis is thinking.
According to the day post there's 35 minutes left.
|
IIRC Kita didn't bother running for election in L either, and in the games I've seen he's been quiet early on. Was he more outgoing back in the old days?
|
Hmm. I thought Zealos's play was significantly different from his scum play, but his early MTG filter is quite similar. He even does that little coaching thing where he tells the guy to post more.
Might not be a bad lynch.
|
On May 29 2012 08:42 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 08:37 jaj22 wrote:
Hmm. I thought Zealos's play was significantly different from his scum play, but his early MTG filter is quite similar. He even does that little coaching thing where he tells the guy to post more.
Might not be a bad lynch.
I don´t understand what you are saying here, does he look like when he played in another game where he was town, or scum? I don´t know anything about zealos meta.
His play is quite different from SNMMX (scum), where he deliberately played aggressive (but kinda missed and ended up obnoxious). However, his play is quite similar to his play in MTG (scum), where he hedges a lot.
I recall reading his town play in GoT and it was pretty decent. Jumped straight into cases, didn't hedge.
|
MidnightGladius has a pre-game absence excuse so he should show up soon at least.
|
On May 29 2012 11:17 Manason wrote:
Perhaps we should be focusing on people that aren't posting a lot? Or at least taking a closer look. The scum reads I've seen so far are only for people that have been actively posting and while more posts does help you when figuring out someones alignment, the smaller posts can be more telling.
Been staring at those, failed to find anything worth mentioning except papapanda's abdictation of responsibility on the Grush/Sinensis thing, which is probably in character for him. Honestly I'd be happy to kill anyone with fewer than five posts, because they're killing town. It's a long list.
On May 29 2012 11:17 Manason wrote:
I'd also like to see a bit more sureness in your lynch possiblities Wiggles. While I understand you just lynched a townie and might be hesitant to be so quick to pounce on someone, I'd be curious to hear who's on your radar.
Why? He's just a guy with two votes. Who's on your radar?
|
Picking some fights with lurkers:
On May 29 2012 08:37 sToFu wrote:I would be more inclined to believe, at this point, that toad is lyncher. As far as scum goes, sinesis has acted incredibly suspiciously and ss just rubs me in the wrong way. I'm on my phone, so I'll write a more detailed response when I get home.
Broken promise notification.
On May 28 2012 08:19 phagga wrote:
Not through the complete thread yet, will catch up later.
I'm against a policy lynch, as I think everyone should get the chance to improve. I don't like how Toadesstern claimed, and feel against voting him therefore. He is either throwing away his blue role or fakeclaiming to get the major. Both is bad.
I like Mr. Wiggles reasoning, he looks like a good candidate. The other interesting option is ET, but I will have to read through his filter again to feel more sure.
Mr. Wiggles and ET, do you already have some candidates for your lynch?
That's 28 hours ago. Unacceptable.
|
On May 29 2012 13:25 Manason wrote:
I voted for Mr. Wiggles because I trusted that he would make a good lynch, so I'm curious as to who he would want to lynch because to be honest I don't have the time nor will power to sit here and analyze everyone. I'd rather someone who I know is better than me to be suspicious and then I can form my own opinion on the matter. The people on my radar I would rather not say because I have zero evidence to back up my claims other than pure intuition, which could be wrong. So no use making enemies when no one will believe me anyway.
That's not how the game works. Until you start throwing opinions out there, we can't read you, and once we run out of other lurkers, that makes you a lynch/vig target. We don't expect your reads to be any good, but we expect honesty and effort. Intuition is fine, and you can't worry about making enemies. People expect to be accused when they play the game.
Also, people "better than you" do have a few suspicions, so what do you think about Zealos, Kitaman and Wiggles?
|
On May 30 2012 00:04 supersoft wrote:
hey i really appreciate your effort,
but why are you guys always trying so hard. Finding scum is a lot easier than you might think. Don't think around 3 corners. Try to catch the little things. Like that Zealos defends toad at a point when it was really useless to defend him. Neither was he in danger of getting lynched, nor is reducing the pressure that is currently put on a player helping the town.
I considered defending Toad at that point. Why? Because when Toad's defending himself, it tends to absolutely dominate the thread, and I didn't think the evidence against him was worth that.
However, Zealos never gave that explanation, and his overnight performance is a couple of one-liners with an attempt at provoking BH. Not following his Mr Helpful angle from day 1, and he had cases to answer which he ignored. I support him as a vig target.
On May 30 2012 00:04 supersoft wrote:
Every other case so far except my toadcase (who is currently on ice until he's confirmed mason) was uncovered and not well thought out. Especially our lynch yesterday. That case was terrible. There was really nothing about it. I could write a lot about why this player was a bad lynch. From an overall gamepolicy point of view because we got no information - maybe some about wiggles - and an individual point of view, because he obviously was town.
I can't get my head around the idea of someone signing up for a game with a premeditated plan to tunnel the crap out of one player and ignore the actual game. He never even said anything in the postgame of LIV. I'll just have to file him under "strange things that townies do".
|
On May 30 2012 01:06 supersoft wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 01:00 supersoft wrote:On May 30 2012 00:45 jaj22 wrote:On May 30 2012 00:04 supersoft wrote:
hey i really appreciate your effort,
but why are you guys always trying so hard. Finding scum is a lot easier than you might think. Don't think around 3 corners. Try to catch the little things. Like that Zealos defends toad at a point when it was really useless to defend him. Neither was he in danger of getting lynched, nor is reducing the pressure that is currently put on a player helping the town.
I considered defending Toad at that point. Why? Because I am bad fixd no wait i filtered you. You're really bad. I first wanted to make a little joke, now i saw it's true. Any defense? Admitting you're scum could help it.
Anything in particular or just my excessive tendency to defend people? I try to control that.
Honestly I'm struggling this game. I have town reads (some only mild, but still) on the few players with a significant post count so I'm concentrating on trying to get everyone else posting.
|
On May 30 2012 01:57 supersoft wrote:
okay let's play a game: i give you a name and we both write down what we think about his posts and we'll trade it in like 20min (got to eat meanwhile):
meapak_ziph
Ok, I'll play.
Slightly scummy stuff:
- Not running for election despite relatively strong standing.
- Possible buddying/overpraising of ET, Wiggles and Kita.
- Dismisses Toad's case against ET without addressing the points.
- Seems to be ok with policy-lynching Sinensis.
- Story clearly pictures Kita as depressed town. Soft defence?
- Switches Kita to a scum read without explanation.
- Avoids giving read on SnB. Excuse that he hasn't read him.
- No mention at all of Zealos.
On the plus side he's been active and he's contributed on most of the major issues without looking hesitant or indecisive. The lack of reads on SnB and Zealos is by far the worst part.
|
On May 30 2012 05:17 Toadesstern wrote:
noone has answered my question about wether or not I need to call my "target" before the deadline
I think you should call it. It'd make it a lot tougher for you if you're 3rd party.
|
Ok, consider if Toad is third party. Assuming that he has no real mason powers, he'll want an excuse not to mason someone. If he doesn't call his target before the deadline, he'll just claim that he masoned one of the dead guys.
If he does call his target before the deadline, his target may survive the night and he'll be left with a lot of explaining to do.
|
I suppose the risk is that scum know that you're going to call and may be F5ing and waiting with a PM ready to send. Logically the ideal time to post would be between the deadline and the nightpost, but that might be a bit abusive. Check with the host.
Otherwise you could use some kind of cipher, I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
On May 30 2012 07:46 papapanda wrote:
As Toad already picked his buddy, I just want to say that I will be worried if you are the one who claims mason for him.
They talk in German. It's quite fun reading the logs in Google Translate.
Anyway, I've been trying to find MZ scum meta and largely failing. He managed two posts in Sleeper Cell II before getting himself banned from TL. Other than that there's just PYP:I (3-faction) where he makes a lurky run for mayor and then spends most of the game defending himself. His play here looks very much like his town play, although there's not a lot of scum play to compare against.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
