(I will not be modkilled.)
Emergency Mini Mafia!
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
(I will not be modkilled.) | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 05 2012 07:33 furerkip wrote: Wait, are you serious? You just claimed Miller and said that DT shouldn't check on you because you are Miller... Judging from your ending, you said you've played this game before. To me, that strikes me as a really odd way to just spout out "I'm miller, and you'll get a guilty on me if you check me, so don't check me, OH and by the way, I'd like to make sure you guys realize that my opinion is more important than anyone else's because I'm officially a clear because I just claimed so. And also, I'm not claiming BLUE, just as reminder, I'm a Miller so investigating me will always turn up as a negative result for you." If you were really a Miller and had game experience, why wouldn't you just make yourself seem more of a townie? If anything, with gameplay experience, you should be able to have seen games were Millers play correctly and don't scream "I'm a Miller." I would have called this a dumbtell, since I sincerely doubt Mafia would just do this. But fact is, your whole post is made to seem like you are a Miller, and a simple "I claim Miller" would have sufficed. But you went above and beyond that: you wanted to have town not even try to examine you unless, as you said, "I expect you to keep a very close eye on me and lynch the FUCK out of me if it looks like I'm pushing Mafia objectives…", which can be translated to "not at all" because Mafia will never try to make it obvious that they are Mafia. ##Vote VisceraEyes My concern with the first part is that it doesn't fit at all with my interpretation of VE's post. He's not saying that his opinion is more important than everyone else's, and he sure as hell isn't saying that he's clear. Regarding the second part, your translation of VE's statement that "I expect you to keep a very close eye on me and lynch the FUCK out of me if it looks like I'm pushing Mafia objectives..." is just faulty. He IS urging people to examine it, even if you think his criteria for lynching is bad. Secondly, if we're not to lynch people who push mafia objectives, who'd you suggest we lynch? According to your subsequent posts, you think that we should lynch people based on scum slips or retarded play. I think that lynching people based on scum slips is weak, and that it is way better to analyze the player's performance as a whole to determine his alignment. (Scum slips might factor, but they are rarely the main argument for someone being scum, unless it's a horrendous slip.) Lynching people who are playing retardedly can be good or bad, depending on if they seem to be scum or not, but lynching someone for just bad play is not wise. I am also a little bit curious as to why you twisted his words. Can you explain? | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
I have played in Mr. Wiggles Mini Mafia I (VT), BC's Arkham Asylum (VT) and in TL Mafia XLII (Mafia goon). After reading this post by Navillus I've grown quite suspicious of him. Let me go through it: I don't really see the ghost case, it seems to start with artanis pointing out that VE probably doesn't expect to die in the first 72 hours of a given game so ghost's wrong in deciding VE is likely miller because of this. (and just based on how people treated vets in MTG I honestly wouldn't be surprised if VE does expect that, on TL people act like killing enemy vets is more important than the rest of the team combined...) While I don't agree with ghost I also don't see this as particularly scummy. After that a big thing is that he said he would point out some scummy posts of furer and he didn't. This is worse and makes me suspicious but is still something where as town or scum he probably wouldn't say this without actually planning to follow up and he would mean to follow up as both so this isn't a particularly strong indicator of alignment. All you're saying is that he could be scum, but he could also be town. Notice the back-and-forth: "This makes me suspicious, but I don't think it is it a strong indicator of alignment". It's a very cautiously expressed opinion. Now looking at the votes on him I get suspicious, VE's vote which is now moved was very fast and didn't go on much, he basically read a couple of posts where artanis points this stuff out and says his meta is different and jumps on. This is suspicious but even more FOS: Mr.Zentor he has a couple posts about VE that don't indicate much then his first post where he says something solid is him jumping on ghost for 1. admitting that he is bad at reading VE which makes no sense and 2. for not following up on furer which I've mentioned. It just looks like Zentor isn't trying to talk about reads or cases, he just wanted to jump in and vote someone people were already suspicious of. The above part of the post is mostly fine, but what's strange is how fast he moves on to place his vote on Hyaach: Finally, Hyaach is just ringing all the wrong bells in my head, he has a few posts all talking about VE, they're confusing and most of them are him explaining this post - which says nothing, it says that he doesn't want to lynch VE immediately which no one was suggesting then he says that the claim could be fake... or not! and that we should analyze VE, something he himself told us to do. This post isn't in itself that bad but it says nothing strong and he manages to post a fair amount after this without clarifying much or taking any kind of stance, so until a point where he does ##Vote: Hyaach You base your vote on one post that "isn't bad in itself", him not taking a stance (he is basically saying the same thing about VE that you are saying about ghost; that the action [VE's claim/ghost's promise to find scummy posts] is not very indicative of alignment), and lack of clarification. (Lack of clarification on what? He did try to clarify the post you quoted when questioned by zelblade. Whether or not you find his explanation satisfactory or not is another story.) This just seems like a cheap attempt to throw your vote away. All you provide is flimsy, abstract reasoning. If he is "ringing all the wrong bells", surely you would be able to better pinpoint exactly what it is about his posting that is so alarming? Lastly, I'm curious about why you prefer to put your vote on Hyaach until he takes a stance, rather than voting for MrZentor, who you said looked suspicious. Care to enlighten me? | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 06 2012 07:49 VisceraEyes wrote: Yeah I'd like that - after all you just said you think he's possible scum and he's aiming for the same guy you are for lynch. It would really be helpful for everyone if you looked into MrZentor fully and answered my question as completely as possible. After reading through his filter, my verdict is still "possible scum". The first time I read BH's case I missed the difference in MrZ's and ghost's statements. I agree with MrZ in that they are not essentially the same. He (MrZ) openly states that he has a hard time reading BH, while ghost says something and provides some reasoning on why it could be true, just to discredit himself in the next sentence. Like MrZ said, his post looks more like an attempt to contribute without actually saying anything. It is a bit concerning that MrZ votes for ghost without providing much thought, but I find Navillus more suspicious than MrZ at this point in time. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 06 2012 01:30 Pandain wrote: There is too much talk on VE and Furer. To start out, claiming miller was indeed a good move if town. It gives information to us and suggests that as blues we not check him, allowing us to use our powers on other people. + Show Spoiler [Rest of the post] + VE is almost certainly town. There's a small chance he's a badass serial killer, but for him to have claimed(vulnerable to counterclaims) requires an element of risk which I do not think the SK would use. There is almost certainily not 2 millers in this setup, as having two "false" townies, as well as all the other Alignment-Confusing roles would just decimate the cop's role. Since the risk of being counterclaimed would be so damning, I do not think that VE would have claimed miller if he was mafia/SK. Especially so soon as the day started. Furer is just playing poorly, but his play does not reek of scum. He voted rashly against VE, the very first(and only) vote so far. I do not think mafia would risk bringing so much attention to themselves. He's not only single handedly try to lynch VE, but he's done it with a reckless aura that excludes mafia. I think Mr. Zentor is very suspicious, and should be looked at instead. He's offered very weak arguments, suggesting he does not want to force his opinion onto the town. He's offered vague statements that do not really put himself out there("a bit rash", "would probably", "I think, but we should") which do not prove him being mafia but merely cause me to be watchful. I am also somewhat suspicious of Navillus, but it is more of a general feeling than specific evidence. It looks like he's trying to steer the town in the right direction in his first post, but later he comes in and derails the thread onto a 2-page argumentation about masons that doesn't really give us anything. His claim seems stupid (if not anti-town, considering how much he managed to shit up the thread). At any rate, Pandain seems to be more interested in arguing game mechanics and game setup than finding scum. I'm happy with a lynch on either Pandain or Navillus, and currently I think that I'd rather have Pandain hanging from the gallows. ##Vote Pandain | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 06 2012 21:59 ghost_403 wrote: I'll catch up on the thread in a bit, but I still have no idea why people think Navillus is scum. If no one can point me to a case, I'll have to work it out myself, and I don't want to do that because I'm really lazy. I think Artanis meant this post when he talked about my case on Navillus. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
I've got this gut feeling that at least part of the Mafia is lurking. They might have one active veteran player in VE/BH but I think that at least one (likely two) of them are skating by without posting much. My proposed lynch target for Day 2 is zelblade. My first issue with him are these questions: + Show Spoiler + On June 05 2012 12:08 zelblade wrote: Why would it take "huge balls" to claim if he is town? Why would you let him live for only "a day"? Why would you put his analysis specifically to be dismembered and examined just because his is immune to checks? Does this mean you think this claim is suspicious? On June 05 2012 15:54 zelblade wrote: How does claiming miller paint a targert on his head if hes town when its an anti-town role. And you didnt answer this: Why did you state that you are going to let him leave for only "a day?" On June 05 2012 16:46 zelblade wrote: Eh wait what did you mean by "paint a targert on his head" It generally means a targert for scum to shoot (thats what I thought you said) but did you mean a targert to be lynched instead? They make him appear pro town, when in reality he doesn't really have to anything at all. They make it seem like he's contributing to the town even though he's not. I wouldn't have as much of an issue with them if it weren't for his lack of contributions to the town. (VE also poses a lot of questions, but he also brings new information to the table, makes his own cases, etc.) After this he returns after about 24 hours just to jump on the Pandain lynch with this post: On June 06 2012 22:21 zelblade wrote: Apologies for the splotchy activity have been a little busy of late. Either way I would be perfectly fine with a Pandain lynch. The blueslip feels exteremely fake to me. Slipping like that is akin to making a major scumslip... and one is more likely than not going to be more careful about leaking their role no? As pointed out, the random vig claim as well as the random mason discussion managed to severly derail the thread which reeks of scum. A couple more points is that he tries to dump suspision on me through a vauge statement. [1] + Show Spoiler + I'm also very suspicious of Zellblade, as he's hardly posted at all. In fact, hilariously enough, he's just asked interogative questions. Which I find hilarious and will do one day. So why are interogative questions suspicious? I found hyaach's post to be a little.... wierd so I questioned it. Why do you even bring me up if you dont intend to lynch me today? (Assuming this since he wants to lynch BH + he isnt even bothering to make a serious case) Town doesnt bring up every little suspision they have and put it out in the open, and this side comment looks alot like mafia attempting to derail the discussion onto me. Note that this is when pressure starts going onto him. [2] ##vote: pandain
Keep in mind that this is the only lenghty (it's lenghty compared to his other posts) post that zelblade has written, it contains only bullshit, and he does not take a firm stance on anything. He is just "fine with the Pandain lynch". His two most recent post about furerkip's scum slip (which furerkip has yet to explain, by the way) brings no new information either. Basically what I'm saying is that if zelblade doesn't do some quality posting during Day 2, we should lynch the fuck out of him. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 07 2012 11:42 Navillus wrote: Shraft I agree about lurking but I think the first order of business should be to get as many people as we can to stop lurking, I'm worried about making a case like this on ZB at this second because I think it's case on the lurker who's contributed the most because he has contributions to look at while there are others (furer and hyaach among others) who have yet to make any strong statements, they have almost nothing that can be analyzed and that's something we should make clear they have to stop even before we try to get someone lynched. Yes, I agree that we do need to get them to post. Out of the lurkers (zelblade, furerkips, Hyaach, and maybe Snarfs) I think that zelblade is the one looking most suspicious. That's exactly why I wrote my analysis on him. I don't think your reasons for worrying are valid. zelblade has not made a strong statement about anything yet either, and his posts are lacking just about as much as Hyaach's. I don't know what you really mean with "... and that's something we should make clear they have to stop even before we try to get someone lynched". If you think my way of putting lurkers in the spotlight is bad, how'd you suggest we get them to post? By asking nicely? We need to threaten them, or they are going to keep lurking (and get away with it), that's just how it works. Regarding Hyaach, I find him the second most suspicious of the lurkers, simply because of his complete lack of contributions along with just jumping on the easiest lynch without much thought. I believe that furerkips has posted most out of the three lurkers (I'm not saying that he's contributed enough, or that he's probably town). It's disturbing that he has not posted anything for two days. He seems to be indifferent to the outcome of the lynch as well, coming in and just placing his retarded vote on VE in the beginning of the day and then disappearing, not coming back for two (?) days. Snarfs has not posted that much either, I don't really know if I'd call him a lurker. Either way, when he has posted, he seems to post relevant stuff, and he does not simply come in and vote on the easiest target without providing any reasoning. I'm getting a town vibe from him. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 07 2012 17:48 zelblade wrote: I dont see how me saying that the blueslip seemed fake is bullshit, when it seemed so forced. I cannot wrap my head around someone "slipping" like that, and thus thought it was fake, and thus thought he was fakeclaiming scum since doing that as town makes no sense. It makes little sense as scum as well. Either way, the jump from bad claim -> scum is not straightforward, and you do not offer any explaination about it, except that it "reeks of scum". It's bullshit because it's taking an action that is not very telling of his alignment and saying that it reeks of scum, without you explaining why. On June 07 2012 17:48 zelblade wrote: Basically I agreed with the pandain case and thought that he was most likely to flip scum on a couple of points, and I mention them in passing. So just because I dont bring up any new points means im scum? Really? As town I usually sheep cases that I find are good/likely to hit scum, might I ask, how is this suspicious to you? It's not suspicious by itself, but when you're not contributing anything at all, along with only sheeping your votes, it starts to worry me. On June 07 2012 17:48 zelblade wrote: Also, "im fine with a pandain lynch" = I want to lynch pandain, I think hes scum and he needs to hang. Are you really going to nitpick over a small thing like phrasing? Me voting him means me making a stance on the issue. What does "firm" stance even mean? I guess its fine to accuse me if I try to shrink away from responsibility after the lynch, but am I doing that? I agree that it's a minor thing, but I don't think that "I'm fine with the Pandain lynch" equals "I want to lynch Pandain". | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 07 2012 18:36 zelblade wrote: I think its fairly obvious why fakeclaiming vig as a vt d1 isnt exactly the smartest thing. As stated I was busy with stuff. Will have more time so dont worry about it. It does equal it -_- Even if you dont think it does the fact that I voted him along with the post should say something no? Townies do stupid stuff as well. There's a difference between doing something dumb and doing something scummy. You might be right about my concern with your wording/not taking a firm stance issue, but that's still just a minor part pf my concern with you. We should stop arguing this. It is not going to render us anything useful. There is a better way for you to convince us that you are town. Go look for scum. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
Today I'd like to lynch either zelblade, Hyaach or furerkip. Between the three of them I'm not really sure who is the most suspect. I'm going to come back in a little while with my thoughts after reading through all their filters. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
Only thing that stuck out to me when I read his filter was this: On June 05 2012 11:15 Hyaach wrote: I would let VE live for a day unless something really scummy comes out from his play. it takes huge balls on claim this early, be it fake/real and its not a fool proof plan imo mafia or town. Besides, from his claim, i would put all his analysis on a magnifying glass to be dismembered and examined piece by piece. which seems like an easy thing to say to appear pro town without having to do much. (He is not promising analysis, just saying that he will examine VE's posts, which means that he doesn't have to make any follow-up on this statement.) Either way, he has promised analysis and I'm waiting eagerly. furerkip seems like a bad Epicmafia townie to me. He plays exactly like the townies over there, speaking about "having mislynches", calling VT's "blues", saying that scumslips = scummy play, and speaking about "three way lynches" (a situation much more common in Epicmafia games than in forum mafia). He could maybe be Mafia, but I think that his aggressive posting is quite out of place for a first time (forum) Mafia player. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 08 2012 19:33 zelblade wrote: Also assuming furekip doesnt come back should we lynch him anyway or try to get him modkilled and risk him ningavoting? A ninja vote should not be very dangerous. The only scenario where it can make a difference is if we have five votes on someone, and he comes in and drops the deciding vote. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 08 2012 21:07 Navillus wrote: I'm on my phone so I can't do anything big but bh I think the sk is very unlikely as that would require for the sk to have ALSO missed their shot somehow or for them to have held it for some reason. Also in general we don't know if there is a jk an if there is who they jailed and we don't know about any possible sk, we do know about 2 RBs and frankly I think it's much more likely that one of the RBed people were the scum shot as if they were they're forced to claim or look like they're hiding it, than some possible way they were both RBed then a shotmissed for some separate reason. I'm on my phone so can't do much analysis but I'll probably vote hyaach when I get home for a combination of this and my past reasons for seeing him as scum. I kind of agree with this. The most likely explanation is that one of them is scum. I think the vote should be between BH/Hyaach today, and I am on the BH side. ##Vote Hyaach | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 08 2012 23:02 VisceraEyes wrote: ##Unvote Furerkip ##Vote Blazinghand ? | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 08 2012 23:17 Hyaach wrote: Why is no one seeing my side of the story? Just because BH claim first doesnt mean he cant be the mafia who got RBed. BH's claim now is sketchy at best. Zelblade is red. 1. BH's reaction to Pandain's claim can be explained with BH being a vigilante. 2. You are a shady lurker. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 08 2012 23:55 ghost_403 wrote: (Corrected your question.) You're in that it's hard to explain that vote. My only explanation would be that BH was sure that MrZ would flip scum, but it's still quite strange why he would change like that. If he was a real vigilante, he would probably be a lot more set on lynching Pandain. I might have to reconsider this situation.@shraft: Why would he wait? You think that he purposefully waited to vote to lynch the guy that he knew was lying in order to hide the fact that he Blazinghand knows Pandain is lying, so why would he be willing accept lynching someone else? Blazinghand is a good player, and I've never seen him back down, even when he doesn't know he's right. Why would he be willing to back down here, when he's so sure that Pandain is lying? | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 09 2012 00:03 Hyaach wrote: What do you Nav or Shraft or Snarf think happen inbetween the first post and 2nd post by BH? To be honest, I don't really get much of your case. It's badly structured and hard to follow. Can you please point me to the two posts you are mentioning? The only thing that's valid is the part where BH tries to make it seem as if Pandain contradicted himself. (But I don't understand how BH "direcly contradicts himself" in that post.) | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 09 2012 00:20 Hyaach wrote: Also BH only voted after VE started the wagon. If he was so sure, why wait till VE to cast the first vote? This I actually missed as I was only reading BH's filter. I'm going to re-read the entire Pandain-event once tonight. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
Then there's also the strangeness about BH not going after Pandain that hard, only voting after VE had already placed his vote, although I think that can be explained by BH wanting to have more to go on when he finally voted (i.e. he wanted to avoid counter-claiming and decided to prod Pandain for a bit more to get something else to base his vote on). | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 09 2012 05:24 Artanis[Xp] wrote: This shit is confusing the fuck out of me and I don't have enough time to read things through thoroughly at this time. My initial read on Hyaach was that his early comments were too dumb to be mafia. His RB claim after BH claimed to be RBed also feels like it's not something a mafia would do. Either he's playing dumb, or he's telling the truth. I wasn't planning on killing BH today but with no day kills it feels like someone has to be lying. The thing with BH not instantly bussing Pandain after his claim doesn't work in his favor either. My gut says Blazinghand, and that's where my vote goes. ##Vote: Blazinghand Well, as already pointed out, if the roleblocked Mafia didn't claim the roleblock it would be apparent to the RB that his target is scum. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
Hyaach said that he tried to jail VE. I agree that if we have a town RB, he should claim. I don't think the chance of blocking another Mafia NK is high, and I think the advantage of having two almost confirmed townies (RB + BH/Hyaach) is bigger than that of having a "non-claimed" RB. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 09 2012 20:20 Artanis[Xp] wrote: Okay, it seems that for Hyaach to be town there needs to be both a Town roleblocker and a Jailkeeper. For Blazinghand's claim, there just needs to be a vig and a mafia roleblocker. Going to go occam's razor on this. ##Unvote ##Vote: Hyaach It is not that easy. If you assume that there is only a vig and a Mafia RB, you would still have to explain why Hyaach would lie about getting getting about 5-6 hours after BH had already claimed his roleblock. It makes no sense to lie about that as scum. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
Red name means Scum and green name means Town. + Show Spoiler [Assuming that no one lied about being…] + Scenario 1: BH | Hyaach Comments: Is it likely that we have a vigilante, Town RB, and Scum RB? Why would Hyaach claim JK? Scenario 2: BH | Hyaach Comments: For this to work we need to have Scum RB, Town RB and a JK (if Hyaach isn't fake-claiming JK while still being town). Is claiming vigilante worth it for BH? Scenario 3: BH | Hyaach Comments: Highly unlikely. If no one of them are fake-claiming there needs to be a lot of power roles in this game, and why would they be fake-claiming if they are town? Scenario 4: BH | Hyaach Comments : Very unlikely. If this is true they are pulling some huge stunt in order to trick the Town. + Show Spoiler [Assuming that the one being Scum is ly…] + Scenario 5: BH | Hyaach Comments: Why would Hyaach lie about getting roleblocked 5-6 hours after BH claimed his roleblock? It does not make sense. This scenario is not likely. Scenario 6: BH | Hyaach Comments: Why would BH fake claim vig? I don't think the gains outweighs the risks. People were not super suspicious of him at his time of claiming, and claiming only leads to drawing more attention, something that you want to avoid as Scum. However, it could lead to getting a bit more Town credibility (not enough to justify fake-claiming, in my opinion). I have omitted scenarios where the Townie lies about getting roleblocked, as I don't think that fake-claiming a roleblock makes any sense whatsoever as Town. Out of these scenarios I think that scenario one, two and six are much more likely than the others, so in the end it boils down to whose claim I think is more trustworthy. I think that the best way to handle this situation is to have our Town RB (if we have one) claim. Also, if the Town RB does not claim, he's either stupid or he does not exist. If we assume that he is not stupid (meaning that he does not exist) we can rule out scenario one and two, leaving only scenario six remaining. Am I oversimplifying things or does anyone else think that this makes sense? TL;DR: Best way of solving this is to have our Town RB claim. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 10 2012 04:29 Blazinghand wrote: God, has it ever occurred to anyone that this "town RB" that is required for Hyaach's explanation to exist hasn't claimed because he doesn't exist? Clearly the real town JK isn't claiming because claiming right now would be terrible. But why'd he lie about getting RBed? All it did was strengthen the Hyaach vs BH situation (i.e. made it seem more likely that one of you are scum) which is something he would want to avoid if he is scum. I still haven't really decided who to vote for, actually. I am considering switching my vote onto you, but I have not made up my mind yet. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 10 2012 05:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote: It was looking like either one of them was going to get lynched. Claiming a power role if you know mafia has one isn't a bad idea, especially if it means you either get the other guy mislynched first or expose a town power role that was forced to counterclaim. It seems like a decent strategy from the position he was in. If you read more carefully, you'll notice that I am talking about his RB claim, not his JK claim. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
On June 10 2012 06:07 Blazinghand wrote: Well, if Shraft was RBed, he has to claim it, doesn't he? If he doesn't claim it, the real JK knows he's hiding it and is scum. You are missing the point. Read his original reason for voting. We are arguing from the premise that there is only one roleblocker, meaning that either you or Hyaach is scum. Voting for Hyaach means that he has to explain why Hyaach fake-claimed RB 6 hours after you claimed your roleblock. | ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
| ||
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
| ||
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
I know from before that my scum hunting skills aren't very good, so this game I tried to focus more on looking town and reading other people's thoughts and researching their scum suspects. I'd appreciate pointers on my play, especially advice on how I can improve my scum hunting. | ||
| ||