EPTEmergency Mini Mafia! - Page 3
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 10 2012 08:44 VisceraEyes wrote: Since Furerkip is modkill immune, I'm going to go ahead and take that as mod-confirmation that he's scum. Anyone opposed? No? Vigs, kill him. I'd like to have a clean slate for BH tomorrow. Is this how it usually works? If this is not something that always works like this in WBG's games, I don't think we should attach too much to this. Losing a member can be game breaking for both sides (town/mafia) now, so I don't really think this is a strong indicator that furer is mafia. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
1. BH is scum and lying about being roleblocked or 2. Mafia have two roleblockers. Option one is the most plausible one explanation. Even if BH comes off as a bit towny to me, I think that the probability of my read being wrong is higher than the probability of mafia having two roleblockers. Sorry BH. ##Vote Blazinghand I also think that the discussion needs to move on. The BH situation has been overhashed a couple of times and arguing more about the possibilities of different explanations with different power roles will net us nothing. I think that it's likely that MrZ is scum. There's not much content to analyze as he posts mainly one-liners. His only lenghty post is the one where he is defending himself (and even that post is only long because he quotes a lot). Granted, this is more of a feeling + non-contribution read, but I don't think there's much else to go by, and I think we really need to shift attention towards the guys who are barely posting. In the games where I've played before, mafia have always had 1-2 lurkers just skating by without posting anything. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
My initial read on Snarfs was that he was a townie. This was due to him having sound viewpoints and him delivering valid criticisms on other's cases. See for example this post: + Show Spoiler + On June 06 2012 11:47 Snarfs wrote: I'm quite happy with where my vote is right now. blazing's case on MrZentor is weak and contains what is certainly an appeal to our emotions: Seriously? Says "I can't wait" as though that's analysis? I agree that it's a null tell for someone to claim to make a case, then not follow through with it. Town and scum both do that for different reasons. But I don't believe that MrZentor seriously thought that "I can't wait" was a good case, nor do I see how you could think that either. Also, as others have pointed out, there was a clear difference between MrZentor claiming not to know blazing's alignment, and ghost's claiming to believe VE's claim but also not trust his reads of VE. RE: Ghost: I had a look through his filter and I'm not impressed. The one good post he's had was an analysis of blazing's behaviour. Unfortunately, he followed it up later with a pretty lame interpretation of blazing's case on MrZentor: I don't think blazing's case on MrZentor was aggressive at all. Several people had already expressed their suspicions of MrZentor and I'd say he was a pretty easy target to go after. RE: Navillus: He both says a lot without saying a lot (i.e. I get the impression that he is summarizing facts) and he focuses on calling out inactives. Both this post and his more recent post seem much too wordy for the points they are attempting to get across. Also, he both claims that pressure voting is ineffective when the person knows it's just a pressure vote AND he leaves his vote on hyaa as a pressure vote. Care to explain this contradiction? I actually read your case twice, and it prompted me to reread Snarfs' filter. I'm not that sure that Snarfs is town anymore, but I also don't think that your case is damning. It only uses 4 of his posts, and I don't think that the first quote has anything to do with him being town/mafia. It's basically just a null tell. What I do find troubling about Snarfs is this post: + Show Spoiler + 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. Now there are still over 48 hours for things to happen in the thread, but if I had to decide a lynch at this exact moment, it'd be Hyaach. As far as zelblade goes, I think the questions he's asking are leading questions and are effective at putting pressure on his targets. He's not just asking people questions that are easy to answer, he seems to be implying a certain answer and this is very similar to my own method of scumhunting. I'd much prefer to lynch Hyaach. He puts his vote on Hyaach, and then he does not comment any more on Hyaach. It's almost as if he doesn't care more about the lynch after he's placed his vote. Here are his posts from between the post above until the flip: + Show Spoiler + On June 08 2012 14:06 Snarfs wrote: Notes on Katina: - Noticed the same thing I did about blazinghand's 'off' play. Now that I think about this more, it lines up with his vig claim - being a well known player, it makes sense to try and survive until he could get his shot off. - Puts thoughts down in the thread in a clear, concise manner. Offers thoughts on multiple players without needing to be urged to do so. - Isn't afraid to push the stronger players when they're not under pressure (blazinghand, VE) I don't agree with everything Katina's saying, especially since the case on VE essentially boils down to "VE is being VE so he's scum". But I don't see anything particularly scummy in her posting and I do see some things which I don't think scum would be doing (i.e. pushing VE and blazinghand). On June 08 2012 14:14 Snarfs wrote: Also, I'll be here for a little while going over the thread so if you have any questions feel free to ask. 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. Specifically from Artanis, zelblade and Hyaach. What are your guys' stances on him? Hyaach, I'm still waiting for some of your other thoughts, if you wouldn't mind adding this to the list. Please note though that I am not suggesting ghost as a lynch candidate for today. The last thing I want to do is provide too many candidates for scum to choose from on where to put their vote and kill our vote analysis. On June 09 2012 11:24 Snarfs wrote: So, VE, you're saying that you don't think that this logic makes sense? And you don't think that the fact that he was "AVOIDING DOING SCUMMY THINGS" could be attributed to a vigilante trying to survive until the night? On June 10 2012 06:30 Snarfs wrote: In order to believe that bh would fake-claim vig night 1 as either mafia or SK, we have to believe that he: either) If mafia, thinks he can argue his way out of there being only a single night kill or) If SK, thinks he can go the rest of the game without shooting someone else or being a likely target by mafia because otherwise he'd be under a ton of suspicion I really don't see either of these being legit, mainly because I know that I myself would have been all over his ass if either of them occured. In order to believe that Hyaach would fake-claim JK as either mafia or SK, we have to believe that he: As either mafia or SK is worried that he's about to be lynched and wants to buy himself at least one more day to argue out of the situation. I'm going to take a gamble here on the fact that our town is good enough to lynch the shit out of blazinghand for dumb vigilante claims should they end up not matching up with our expectations of the game. I believe blazinghand thinks this too and wouldn't try to pull off something this risky. On June 10 2012 06:37 Snarfs wrote: Playing by connections before anyone has flipped scum has only ever ended poorly in my TL mafia experience. It's all WIFOM and until we see some red on the board, I'd highly recommend against it. On June 10 2012 06:40 Snarfs wrote: Maybe I just don't remember playing in a game where scum made such a bold move on night 1. I've had a scum read on Hyaach since day 1, but do you think they could both be town? On June 10 2012 06:51 Snarfs wrote: There are 6 on Hyaach and 5 on blazing. On June 10 2012 06:57 Snarfs wrote: I could totally see that happening, with a "That's how we play over at epicmafia, I'm totally not scum". The only post in which he speaks of the lynch is the one that I bolded, and that post does not even contain much thought. It's basically just some rationale for his vote based on setup speculation and BH not being a dumb player (at this point the different scenarios had already been argued to death). | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
##Unvote | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 12 2012 08:22 ghost_403 wrote: @shraft: Which one would you rather lynch and why? I'm not sure, but I'm quite fine with any of them. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
##Vote zelblade | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 12 2012 21:20 ghost_403 wrote: @Shraft: Give me a good reason to lynch zelblade. Here are two good reasons: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=341663¤tpage=40#793 and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=341663&user=240873. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 12 2012 21:56 Palmar wrote: you're only strengthening my resolve to kill BH. Weren't you they guy who said that wanting to kill third party roles was a scum tell in BC's Arkham Asylum? | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
It was this post that made my suspicion toward Navillus resurface: On June 12 2012 05:49 Navillus wrote: I mostly believe BH's claim, that said I don't have a target that I would rather switch to, I don't like the lesser but still existing possibility that he's using this as mafia as a last ditch attempt to avoid the lynch, and frankly I don't really care. He's likely SK and no matter how much he sounds like he's trying to play pro-town his wincon is still just as much against us as it is against mafia, he will attempt to screw us in the end and he's a good player, I don't want to give him that chance. I am not going to be the stupid townie that thought we could control or contain him. He clearly will have a plan to win himself and I'm not gonna wait until we have to choose between letting him get the win or mafia. His argumentation here is akin to that of the mafia in Arkham Asylum. (A game where I belive youngminii was found out as scum because he focused a lot on killing the third party SK roles.) What's more concerning is that it doesn't seem to make any difference to him whether BH is mafia or SK, whereas to me, as town, whether he's SK or mafia means a huge deal. If he's mafia, it could be detrimental to us to not have him lynched today, but if he's an SK, I think that keeping him alive would increase our chances at winning, as even if he's roleblocked every night (which increases the chance of our potential RB/other power roles power not getting blocked) he'll still function just as any townie until we've caught a few scum (at which point we can probably just have him lynched anyway). I'd be fine with his post if he tried to argue that the risk of BH being mafia is too high (which I don't agree with) and that he'd rather just kill him than risk BH being mafia. What makes me suspicious is that he says that he doesn't care. The last part of his post also contains an appeal to emotion, which isn't always a scum tell, but it is certainly a bad argument on why we should lynch BH. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 14 2012 04:24 Navillus wrote: Shraft I'd like to know why you think I'm scum for disagreeing on the usefulness of keeping an sk but not on our reads on him. Both are disagreements about the game state that lead to the same argument from my side, I just disagree with you about the results of keeping an sk alive, especially because we didn't have any strong counter candidates so would likely lynch green instead of black. Also as a side note my finalday of school is ending so I should have more time here on. You said you didn't care about BH's alignment, which is something that mafia would say. If you believe his SK claim, there is no way to justify killing him from a town perspective. As long as we are in a bad position, he would've acted just like a regular townie. There is no reason for town to lynch him instead of trying to lynch mafia. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 14 2012 06:52 Navillus wrote: Shraft he would have acted just like a regular townie that in endgame wants to kill us and has a night shot that will likely hit town the fact is he had to die at some point, maybe maybe it would have been better to kill him later and mafia sooner, but that's assuming that the option was as simple as him or mafia, not him or maybe mafia maybe town we're not really sure. It's not as simple as I don't care about his alignment, it's he can be 1 of 2 things, both anti-town, and the alternative is not very good at all. It's true that the choice is not between him and mafia (if it was, there would be no need to argue this), but the chances of hitting scum is very high. Before we lynched BH, there was 10 players alive, which results in a 30 % chance of hitting scum if we lynched someone other than BH by just randomly voting for another player. (If we had some one who most people had a town read on randomly choose a target, the chance of hitting scum would be 37.5 % assuming the "town-read"-person is town.) Factor in analysis, and the chance of us hitting scum goes even higher. Besides, even if we accidentally lynch a townie, the difference between lynching a townie and BH would not be that significant. I'd choose the option of lynching someone other than BH any day of the week. (Say for example we lynch furerkips/Palmar and he turns out to be town, we'd have one less player with little content to analyze to worry about.) On June 14 2012 07:13 Snarfs wrote: Navillus, ghost, Palmar and MrZentor all need to get in here and give their thoughts on zelblade. Hell, Shraft, you didn't even give your thoughts on him, you just said we should lynch the hell out of him then linked his filter and BH's case. So you agree 100% with BH's case and that's it? My initial suspicion of zelblade is outlined in this post. After that he made the post that BH pointed out where he makes his subtle attempt at getting town credibility, along with a couple of other short posts. Then he makes this post where he first explains why BH's claim makes no sense from a scum perspective, then says that Hyaach has given him scum vibes since the start of the game and that his claim makes sense as scum and that it is "definitely possible" that his claim is fake, yet he still proceeds to vote for BH because Hyaach's recent posts had a "fearless aura". It seems weird to me that he'd believe a claim that he thinks makes sense as scum, especially when it comes from a player that has given him scum vibes since the start of the game, just because of the fearless aura in Hyaach's recent posts. Scum often have more trouble than townies with explaining their reasoning, and often end up making strange posts when explaining their vote. BH's meta-case on zelblade, along with his follow-up strengthened my belief that zelblade was scum, and I think that he is our best chance of lynching scum today. ##Vote zelblade | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
What do you guys think about Navillus? I think that his vote post makes little sense. Artanis already pointed this out. He also had this other strange vote post that I analyzed here. | ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
| ||
