EPTAlso, interesting flip. I don't think Mafia wanted to kill him. Going to have to look back and see who tried to make VE look bad after his claim. Furer comes to mind but I'll have to take a look if there are others, though not tonight.
Emergency Mini Mafia! - Page 3
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
Also, interesting flip. I don't think Mafia wanted to kill him. Going to have to look back and see who tried to make VE look bad after his claim. Furer comes to mind but I'll have to take a look if there are others, though not tonight. | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
I hate voting based on setup speculation given our 'success' with it so far. If you're speaking the truth, I urge the RBer to come forward. I've had a change of heart regarding not revealing my blue read as I feel there's a strong possibility he's red. I present to you: Snarfs. On June 05 2012 15:54 Snarfs wrote: @VE, In one sentence you claim that: Yet you follow it up with this: Care to explain? Is Katina really that unhelpful as town? It was pretty clear to me that this was pressure on lurkers to make them post more rather than actually trying to get her lynched. For the rest he also posted a bunch of questions yet didn't really chime in much until figuring out where people stood. Joined the BH bandwagon until BH started posting seriously, and suddenly went full on against Hyaach, whose case he had against him was very weak. On June 07 2012 11:32 Snarfs wrote: I've reread the thread and I still believe that Hyaach is the best lynch tomorrow. Look at what he's done: a) He hasn't contributed to any scumhunting. He hasn't asked questions and he hasn't used his vote to pressure people. b) His vote on Pandain seemed very forced, as Navillus and I have both mentioned. c) He blames his lack of content on the time zone difference. There were a ton of things he could have talked about when he was online. Not being online at the same time as others is not an excuse for not commenting on things that have happened in the game. a) That's not a mafia trait, that's a lazy player trait. b) A townie being pressured also does strange things. His vote looked a bit sheepish but not that strange. c) He never blamed his lack of content on the time zone difference. He he looked sheepish with his vote on Pandain because he woke up when the case already took off, which is a legitimate argument. On June 08 2012 15:22 Snarfs wrote: So just gave the thread a reread/skim through certain parts. Sticking with my plan of not wasting an entire day cycle, assuming furer doesn't even come back, I'd like to hear some opinions on ghost_403. Then fails to name any examples of why Ghost is scummy or anything with his own opinion, despite claiming he just read the thread again. How come you didn't provide any reasoning here yourself? His defense on BH is absolutely damning with only ONE clause out. That being that he's the town RBer. On June 11 2012 06:15 Snarfs wrote: First thing, I agree that we need to resolve the blazinghand situation and the furerkip/Palmar situation. Here is how I see it (I've already stated this multiple times): If blazing is the SK, then claiming vig is really dumb because he's gonna be shot by mafia later in the game. Almost guaranteed. If blazing is scum, again I think it's really dumb to claim vig. However, multiple people have pointed out that he could be playing on our belief that mafia wouldn't do that, blah blah wifom. That being said, something I don't understand is why he would be banking on a town RB to claim if he's not town. Like, if you're scum or SK why aren't you trying to control your own destiny? He's basically relying on another town member to save him or he knows he's going to be lynched. Conclusion: Probably vigilante. This defense makes absolutely no sense. He's basically saying it's dumb for Blazing to claim vig unless he's town because anything else is wifom. Given the amount of roleblock roles available in the rolelist, it's not a stretch that he could claim being roleblocked, especially since vigis only get one shot and don't get their shots refunded even if they get roleblocked makes it very easy for him to claim it as scum. Calling someone like Blazinghand who loves to do funky stuff town simply because he claimed vigi is incredibly shortsighted. I also don't see how him claiming vig is going to get him shot if he's sk. He said he fired his only shot so mafia would think he's just a VT now, which would be great if he's SK. Given the amount of suspicion town still has it'd make sense for mafia not to shoot him. If he's SK he could've still been roleblocked too, and he could've expected that his kill on furer would go through. The claims on this last post show me you're incredibly convinced BH is town, meaning you know things I don't. Given your play so far I'd expect you to be smarter than this. Therefore you are scum or you're a RBer, in which case now is the time to claim. ##Vote: Snarfs | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
On June 11 2012 14:08 Blazinghand wrote: It can't be snarfs, can it? I don't see why not. He's the only one that's been "certain" of you being innocent, therefore he's either your scumbuddy or the roleblocker you're desperately looking for. On June 11 2012 21:26 ghost_403 wrote: @Artanis: I'm happy to discuss lynching Snarfs, but I really think that we have to take care of blazinghand first. Are you just more certain that Snarfs is scum, or do you think that blazinghand might be town? I'm more certain Snarfs is scum. We've lynched based on blue claims twice and we missed twice. I think it's time for a lynch on behaviour for once, and Snarfs is looking damn bad to me. I also don't like how everyone's ignoring my case on him, which further gives me the idea I might be on to something here, especially how Shraft said himself that the discussion on BH has been beaten to death, yet doesn't comment on the case I just made and points at someone else without building a real case on him instead. But I don't want to spread my accusations too thin, let's discuss Snarfs first. The way I see it, there is no way Snarfs is green. He is too certain of BH's innocence, which means he either has information proving that he is (DT/roleblocker), or he simply knows because he's scum. If there's a roleblocker out there (whether their name is Snarfs or not) they should really come out right now with whom they've blocked. We need that information and we need it ASAP. I've also contemplated the thought that there might be a mafia team with 2 roleblockers. A 3 player mafia team with two power roles could be seen as a good way to balance things and mess with the minds of town. This is why I'm worried about a setup based lynch too; we don't know how WBG balances his game. Host, can you tell us how many Mafia are in the mafia team, or is that information hidden? | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
On June 12 2012 01:47 Snarfs wrote: Just trying to get 2 things here: 1) More information about Katina 2) Some sort of reaction from VE, even if it was just in the form of more information on Katina. Obviously, I was provided neither. I can see that as a viable town reason, though the viable scum reason also remains intact. It was the combination of the three things that made me think he was scum. His vote on Pandain encouraged me to look back through his filter and when I didn't see anything that indicated to me he was trying to find mafia, he jumped to the top of my scum list. The fact that he kept stalling in providing analysis on players was enough for me to keep my vote on him and remain convinced that he was scum. His vote on Pandain was one of many. Did you feel it was neccesary to look back at all of them? It seems weird to me that it just so happens that Hyaach is the one to make you look back at it. As an experienced Mafia player, you should be well aware by now that people not scumhunting doesn't equal being scum, especially newbie townies. It's hard to provide analysis when your English isn't that good as his clearly wasn't. I find your reasons for calling him scum meek at best. And yes, I'm aware I did vote for him at the end too. However, that's a lot later and based on different things. I try to get people to place their thoughts on players I find suspicious down in the thread. Ghost was a null read for me at the time (still is and I think there are higher scum targets for us to be going after) and by gauging other players' thoughts I work my opinion of both the player I'm interested in and the players who respond. Often town players respond well to such statements as it gives them an opportunity to try and find scum and I can usually cross people off my scum list. If I lead with my own thoughts then I just give the other players on opportunity to say, "Hmm yea, I agree with you, he is looking suspicious" which is often a null tell, as opposed to someone actually coming forward and being willing to offer thoughts on a player. Wait, first you find Ghost suspicious, then you find him a null read? You can't cut the pie and eat it, too. By only posing questions and not giving your own opinions you make it very hard for other people to read your intentions, something that's good for mafia. Scum doesn't know who people think other people think are town and would love to know so they can kill that person. By not sharing your own opinion first you give yourself an opening to which you can adapt your opinion before you've ever given it. Townies usually aren't that cautious. Townies will give their own opinions, and people that sheep your opinion should be treated with extreme caution and can be a scumtell on its own. Sorry to say I'm not the roleblocker. TL towns lynch people for dumb reasons all the time and I've been on those wagons a few times in the recent past. See MrZentor in Wheel of Fortune for a good example of what I'm talking about. See Pandain this game for another example. That's not to say they might not be mafia, but people need to stop assuming that just because someone does something stupid/suspicious that they must be mafia. In fact, often doing something stupid/blatantly suspicious is a town tell. I'm trying to be better than the average TL mafia player. My reads have actually been half decent the last few games I've played. From now on, if I think we're going to mislynch then I'm going to tell you that I think it's a mislynch. Especially if I'm in a game where we haven't nailed scum once yet. I'm also going to provide who I think is a good lynch instead (in this case, Katina), and reasons why (as I gave at the night post). Show me a game where someone has actually been dumb enough to claim vig night 1 and has then survived and gone on to win the game in a situation where the killing power of mafia was messed up on the night he claimed vig. I don't think people are that stupid. I mean, look at this game, people are already ready and willing to lynch him. Do you not think that he would have thought, if he was mafia, about the fact that people would probably want to lynch him? And I can point to you plenty of games where scum do stupid stuff too. See TL Mafia LI where VE claims DT with a scum check on Toad who claims Veteran. Both were scum. See BH this game, claiming SK. My problem with your defense of BH is that you seem so sure of him being 'probably vigilante' that I feel you have to have information that we don't. This means to me that you're either scum or a roleblocker (with a slight chance of irrational townie). Since you just claimed you're not the roleblocker, that leaves scum. I don't need to show you a game where vig claims Night 1 and wins. People like to claim, that doesn't mean that they're successful with them. And he didn't know the KP was going to be messed up before he claimed, so that didn't affect his claim at all. I don't think BH thought that much about his claim, just thought "hey let's claim vig since I have a KP role, yeah that sounds cool let's do it and see what happens!". Also, I'd like to hear your case on Katina, rather than have you ask other people what their opinion is again. If it's a really good case I might reconsider my vote. @Blazinghand if you're serious about helping town start putting together some cases. @Palmar then stop being lazy and read the damn case. @Shraft I used the posts that I found relevant to the case. The first post was relevant to me because it put him on the map as a questioning player mostly. He waits to find out where other people stand so he can make a safe choice. That post on its own is a null read, but it provides to the rest of the case. @Ghost_403 You said you're happy to discuss the lynch, yet you haven't discussed anything about it yet. What do you think about the case? @Zelblade, Katina, MrZentor, Navillus: Contribute. You're not saying anything (very useful). Also want to hear your opinions on Snarfs. | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
On June 12 2012 04:25 MrZentor wrote: Artanis, BH is scum. On June 12 2012 03:54 Artanis[Xp] wrote: @Zelblade, Katina, MrZentor, Navillus: Contribute. You're not saying anything (very useful). Also want to hear your opinions on Snarfs. | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
##Unvote ##Vote Blazinghand | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
On June 12 2012 09:59 Blazinghand wrote: I'm here to talk about Zelblade. He's scum. My argument against him is mostly going to be analysis, but I'll talk about his meta as well. The two sources I'm using for his meta are LI, in which he was scum (link) and MTG Mini, in which he was town (link) to get a better understanding of how he plays. 1) Zelblade played D1 start to his scum meta. To get an idea of how Zelblade starts his scum games off, in LI he opened up with a bunch of questions and soft-defenses of town players (link)(link 2). This basically lets him make some minor contributions until he can find a safe wagon to hop on (link) but only after someone else, a townie, has made a case against that guy (link). He's not afraid to break ground with his vote, but he doesn't make any new cases. I'm not gonna talk about his D2 play from LI, because of the notorious 2-way bus that game-- our D2 was the opposite situation, where two players that weren't in his Scum QT where attacking each other. In his town play, Zelblade is different. As he goes into MTG, Zelblade is lurking but comes out swinging with a case against VE AND a case against NT (link). Also, as an aside, he seems utterly unafraid to lurk. He's apologetic about it, but he goes long periods of times, sometimes days, posting like once or twice in a 24 hour span with meh posts. He's admittedly a low-post-count player, but he doesn't put a lot of effort into "appearing" town when he's town. He'll disappear 20 hours, make a one-line post (link), then disappear for another 20 hours without contributing. When he comes back, he comes back with a read and a vote (link). I would hardly call that a case. It's two paragraphs. What you've posted right now is a case, what he posted in that post were some mild accusations. He's also asked a bunch of questions in MTG mafia. Three questions in a row: On May 22 2012 17:49 zelblade wrote: By the way is there a voting thread. Because I dont see one and the OP states that there is one. On May 22 2012 17:56 zelblade wrote: Hey marv who are you suspicious of at this point besides mattchew? Can you also clearly state why you think nova is town based off meta alone? Because I cant see it being similar. On May 22 2012 18:05 zelblade wrote: Acid so what do you think of nova now? Why is marvellosity buddying with nova a scummy thing to do? And he had many more questions. The lurking behavior is a sketchy claim at best; he's been inactive as both scum and town, though I will give you that he does appear to put in more effort when he's scum. I also don't feel he's put a lot of effort in "appearing" town in this game. Can you pinpoint out the exact posts this game where you feel he tried to "appear town"? So how does Zelblade play here? Well, he starts off asking weird questions (link) and making a soft defense based on setup that was inherently reasonable (link). Typical Scum Zelblade. And as soon as the heat picks up on Pandain, he hops right on board. To really contextualize his Pandain vote, let's check out how he responds to claims. I just showed how Zelblade asked questions in MTG mafia too, which means it complies with both his town and scum meta. He also hopped on the VE bandwagon in MTG mafia, and the Mouldy Jeb mafia earlier as well. You seem to find things that correspond with how he played scum and then completely negate to search for if he did these things as town too, which he has. 2. Zelblade voted Pandain like he does in scum meta. As town he distrusts weird claims: (link), especially ones without check crumbs (link) to back them up, and immediately calls out Zealos for a bad claim. Sounds like that informed his Pandain reaction, but when we see HOW he went about it, it's a lot more like his scum play than his town play. His reactions to Pandain's claim and Pandain's play D1 match his D1 scum play in LI almost perfectly. He calls out Pandain for diverting the discussion WHILE hiding behind other player's arguments (link): JUST as he did in LI with his case and vote against Tunkeg AFTER ET made the initial case against Tunkeg (link) This is how Zelblade operates as scum: he finds a townie who's already been pushed, usually for saying something irrelevant, but also talks about the D1 candidate "wasting town's time" or "diverting discussion" in addition to reciting main components of the case the others have. What I'm seeing in these two different threads (one as mafia, one as town), the main difference I see is how much Zelblade tries to put in effort when he's scum to look town. Zelblade has jumped on bandwagons both as town and as scum though, so bandwagoning Pandain is not something that points to Zelblade being scum. The second part holds more water, but isn't enough for me to consider him mafia. Contrast his town play in MTG when he votes to lynch MJ (link), in which he shoots down other cases and notably does not need to justify his case with talk about sidetracking the town, even though MJ WAS full of weird statements about consolidating evidence, jumping to conclusions, and odd vote justifications and non-justifications. He voted who he wanted lynched without fear and without worrying about repercussions. He talks about other players being scummy, but says this target is the most scummy. He does not waffle and waver. He doesn't justify his vote or ameliorate the hard edges his case with lip-flapping. His D1 vote on Pandain looks JUST LIKE his D1 LI vote, and nothing like his voting and case-making when he's scum. This is Zelblade trying to deflect attention and make up easy reasons to vote easy targets, just like when he was scum in LI. Wait, isn't he just talking about his case in both the previous two posts? It seems he pays more attention to making cases when he's scum rather than when he's town, where he talked more about the other suspects in the quoted posts. Section 3: Zelblades Reaction to Hyaach v BH is scummy regardless of Meta Zalblade's D2 vote on me (link) and his D1 vote on Pandain, coupled with the accompanying cases, look exactly like his scum voting, and nothing like his town voting. In fact, he spent so much time talking about how much he was "bugged" that scum would make my roleclaim and how Hyaach, who had to be town if I was scum, gave him "scummy vibes" that I thought he was voting to lynch Hyaach, not me. Hey look, we have an actual argument. I like this point. I just searched zelblade's history on MTG mafia and saw him post nothing of the sort. Look a tthis post and this vote. This isn't what a town player would do. If you were unsure, you would cast a vote for BH and say "yeah he looks scummier" and yeah, if you're gonna be afk for the rest of the day, you lay out your thoughts. But read this post and ask yourself-- is this how a town player writes a case, or how a scum player tries to duck responsibility and come out looking townie at the same time? In fact, this is not how Zelblade ends any of his vote posts as town-- he never feels the need to justify himself or fill himself full of doubts like this. He probably anticipated me not flipping Mafia and didn't want to look too bad on the wagon. Typical scum play. This doesn't look at all like MtG Zelblade. This looks like LI Zelblade. This looks like scum. Let's vote him, and not waste a lynch on the SK who wants to help town. I don't like how his vote looks either. Yet I have seen many vote like this and still flip up town. However, this point coupled with him talking more about scummy vibes this game than his town game do give me the impression that Zelblade is red, where the first two points were more null. I might change my vote, I'm not sure yet. Giving some examples in this game where he tries to "appear" green would be helpful. | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
##Vote: Zelblade | ||
| ||
