EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XVII - Page 38
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Unforgiven_ve
Venezuela1232 Posts
| ||
|
Miltonkram
United States310 Posts
- If suki had been scum, Crossfire's support of her could have caused her to become overconfident, possibly causing a slip. - Since I was scum, Crossfire's pressure could have caused me to panic (it did) and slip up. I can't tell you how many posts I had to keep myself from posting out of panic that would have been slips. I think if he had stated that he was for lynching a player, but in reality left himself open to both possibilities, he could have gotten a ton of information. I say this because I'd be interested in adapting some form of that into my own town play. Crossfire, is there anything you think you should have changed about your approach to the final lynch? Are there any vets who know a way of tweaking his approach in order for it to be more effective? @ suki Don't blame yourself for pressuring players hard. If they are town, they should be able to explain their actions by simply telling the truth. A town player who doesn't explain their actions or makes bad decisions, such as Unforgiven's VT claim or trackd00r and Golden's decisions not to defend themselves, does no credit to the town, and in fact actively hurts town. I say this not to shame them, but to show the responsibility they have to their fellow townies. You can't be blamed for their play. The only thing I think needs improvement is your D1 play, but like marv said, D1 is really hard. I'm a big fan of how you played this game. Hopefully we'll be on the same team in the future because being opposite you is really stressful. | ||
|
suki
Canada1159 Posts
| ||
|
Crossfire99
United States1529 Posts
On June 28 2012 06:08 Miltonkram wrote: I'd like to get people's opinion on Crossfire's play during the final night and day. Not the part where he suddenly switched votes, that was a pretty obvious mistake, the parts before. I liked how he took a hard stance against me and let me know that I was in his sights even though he didn't necessarily mean what he was saying. I think it's a good play for the following reasons: - If suki had been scum, Crossfire's support of her could have caused her to become overconfident, possibly causing a slip. - Since I was scum, Crossfire's pressure could have caused me to panic (it did) and slip up. I can't tell you how many posts I had to keep myself from posting out of panic that would have been slips. I think if he had stated that he was for lynching a player, but in reality left himself open to both possibilities, he could have gotten a ton of information. I say this because I'd be interested in adapting some form of that into my own town play. Crossfire, is there anything you think you should have changed about your approach to the final lynch? Are there any vets who know a way of tweaking his approach in order for it to be more effective? Ok, I'll just explain my whole plan near the end, so you can understand what i was doing. I was always more suspicious of suki than I let on, but it wasn't really even suspicion, it was just a hint of doubt. I honestly felt she played completely townie day 2 on, but her day 1 play was suspicious to me (and others). I originally had written it off as just being a too aggressive townie. See my night 1 post where I analyze the lynch. I had suki correctly pegged as town there. From day 2 on I just went with my original read that suki was town based on the lynch and her continuing aggressive and open play. People kept on being suspicious of her, so I thought that if she kept on surviving the lynches and nks I would have to revisit her. Basically, if she and I both survived to lylo I would need to take a real hard look at her because everyone was suspicious of her. I would say it was around night 3/day 4 where I decided I would defend suki hardcore to accomplish 2 things: 1) I thought she was town so I actually wanted to defend her and 2) if she was actually scum and I survived to lylo I would have the advantage of being able to trick her into thinking I would defend her til death, while in reality I would be suspicious of her. Ok, so everything happened according to my plan. I continued to pressure you milton, while defending suki. I can't remember but I think it was right at the end of night 4 or beginning of day 5 when I was posting, but I found 1 post from her which pretty much convinced me she was scum. I'll have to find it for you suki and edit it in so you can see what changed my mind. I might have looked at it wrong in hindsight, but let me find it first... Ok I found it. Here it is + Show Spoiler + On June 16 2012 00:01 suki wrote: sciberbia quoted this post and pointed out that he doesn't see any logical holes in rofl's play, and that he doesn't think rofl did either. The part I find strange is not whether or not rofl saw 'logical holes', but how there's an implicit expectation that alan would 'poke through' those 'obvious logical holes'. As a townie you make your cases with as few logical holes as possible so that you can put the most pressure on your target and force out information. You don't want, and certainly don't expect, those holes to be pointed out. As scum, though, you know that your arguments have holes in them, this kind of wording comes out a lot more naturally. It's also telling that he straight up admits that his case was full of holes, which serves to ease the pressure off of him for making such a weak case (weak in his mind). The list of potential mafia is also very strange. It also has the trait of looking like he's contributing without actually contributing anything at all. Also take a look at this post: I wrote down early on in my personal notes how the 'you defeated yourself' lines seemed like a very scum-like thing to do. Rather than simply defending himself, he uses Milton's words against him, to further discredit Milton. I find that full of scum motivation. After all, if you can use a player's words against them, it feels like your case is a lot stronger. "I backed down because I hadn't received any support towards my case" is also not very townie. Town motivation is to convince people to agree with your case. If you don't get support but you still feel your points are valid, you continue to press. The fact that rofl is so concerned about having support is very fitting for scum. All in all, I agree that rofl looks extremely scummy and the #1 candidate for vig shot or Day 2 lynch. It seems we have reached a strong consensus on who scum #2 is. Before the night is over, I think we should start talking about other candidates for the day 2 lynch to gain a more broad discussion before the night is over. In particular, I would like to ask for opinions on my case against trackd00r. On June 16 2012 04:23 s0Lstice wrote: Alright so there aren't many fish in this sea. The two bad ones are roflewaffles55 and suki. Roflewaffles55 I won't rehash. If you are still not convinced go have a look at sciberbia's and alan's cases. This is a done deal in my mind. Suki She learned a lot from her first game as scum, and it showed this game. She looked pro-town enough for me to set her aside in favor of other endeavors. That said, there is plenty of incriminating evidence in her filter to be had. I'll organize this as best as I can. Let's look at how she has been going after the town win condition: Her case on trackd00r: + Show Spoiler + She divebombs the thread with this accusation as her first post, and then in short order backs down from it when it doesn't gain any traction. On June 14 2012 00:06 suki wrote: As has been pointed out, the contradiction isn't as severe as I initially thought it was. ##unvote trackd00r I thought at the very least I could rouse a response from trackd00r, however my case was too weak and I feel that no useful information can be gleamed from people simply agreeing on its flimsiness. On June 14 2012 13:21 suki wrote: Quite simply you (and several other people after you) answered your question. The motivation is to get the ball rolling some way, any way. I feel I failed a bit in that regard as my attack was so full of holes that there hardly was any discussion developed from it, but it was made with good intentions. On June 14 2012 00:06 suki wrote: My case on trackd00r was/is a flop, and up until your vote on alan no one has really pointed out anything suspicious about any other player On June 14 2012 13:36 suki wrote: @sciberbia I think a lot of your argument stems from the impression that I was absolutely sure trackd00r was scum. I definitely worded my post that way on purpose, in spite of knowing my case wasn't solid. I was genuinely surprised that my case was as weak as it was. Basically one good post from you was strong enough to let everyone basically say 'yeah, I agree.' My comment that 'at the very least I could rouse a response from trackd00r' was because I thought even if my case was really weak, I could aggravate an interesting reply from trackd00r, but it didn't. Regarding the contradiction, and the comment that the contradiction isn't as severe as I thought it was. It's simply not taking the time to really think about the topic, after reading the rebuttals and being disappointed. There is no contradiction, it was just me being careless with my choice of words. Actually, the offhanded and subtly confident way he deflected my attack is a townie point for him in my book, so as it stands I don't suspect trackd00r at all. On June 14 2012 13:36 suki wrote: As for opening the game, I posted my policy post after the accusation because I wrote the accusation first. I did want to start the thread off boldly, I'll give you that. Look at how she dances around. She explains what was going through her head in 3 different ways: -I knew the case was weak when I posted it -I didn't know the case was weak until people told me after I posted it -I thought my case may have been weak, but I was just trying to get the discussion going. Also that last quote is scum-slip. Sciberbia pointed it out earlier. A townie has one agenda: finding scum. Scum have several agenda: stay alive, sow confusion, cause chaos. Admitting to adhering to an agenda of aggressiveness for it's own sake is very scummy. Suki has addressed this point, calling it WIFOM. Minus her comment on the matter, it would be WIFOM. It is her stated reason for wanting to appear aggressive that makes it a scum-slip instead. She has returned to trackd00r recently, and I'll address that later. -snipped- I guess the thing I did wrong was I didn't do enough research on you milton and didn't find the scummy things you did to actually be scummy. For example, when I was reading suki's case on you, I disagreed with some points. The first one was the post you made about being nervous for the heavon lynch. I actually thought it worked in your favor because by that time rofl was already voting for heavon, so I thought that clearly the mafia know that heavon is dying day 1 and have decided to jump on the bandwagon, so there is no reason for a scum milton to be nervous because he has already decided that heavon must die. Looking back on it, I realize I didn't compare it to your posts near the other lynches and I didn't take into account that sometimes people can just make a subconscious slip of the tongue. Additionally, I kept on misreading rofl and yours exchange at the beginning. I feel retarded now looking back, but for some reason I kept on messing up the actual context of this exchange. I clearly remembered that rofl continued being suspicious of alan, but he didn't really state that until after this exchange and not before, so that had me reading that point wrong. I guess I also put too much faith in my generic overview reads of your filter because nothing scummy just jumped out at me when I was doing so. Ugh I feel so dumb right now... Also, just so you actually know. I was already planning on voting for suki when I had voted for you, milton. I did this so I could see how each of you responded while also allowing for an exciting end to the day (lol). I even pmed both hosts to let them know that I planned on changing my vote so they could write the endgame post. I see they incorporated my double cross quite well and made for an exciting story and I give them mad props for that. Lastly, when I came back to thread, I even read your goodbye post as confirming your innocence, while marv apparently saw it as scummy. Ugh, I need to practice a ton more. That won't be happening for a while though because I'm not going to have time to play mafia in the coming months, but it has been a blast playing with you all. I hope to see you guys again in some other games if I ever come back. | ||
|
suki
Canada1159 Posts
Also, if you do come back and decide to play more mafia, PM me! we may be able to play again if I'm still kicking around the mafia board :> | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
@milton l lol'd as I read the mafia QT. You give me way too much credit. I really thought you were town. You could have just shot crossfire lol. But you still pulled off a win. well played. especially D1. @unforgiven sorry man, my reads weren't very good this game. I guess the mislynches of you/suki were both kinda my fault. I'll try to keep things simpler in future. @suki IMO, it's not good for townies to make "falsely confident" cases, and then back off of them. Kinda falls under Lynch all Liars. But D1 I think you were mostly just a victim of circumstance. You just happened to jump on and off the alan bandwaggon at bad times, and to defend HeavOnEarth when nobody else did. It also would have helped if you had been more strongly defensive of crossfire instead of unsure. Sometimes townies can just look scummy as a result of bad reads. Everyone makes bad reads sometimes (except unforgiven :p). I guess I should have put more weight on your very townie posts after D1. | ||
|
Crossfire99
United States1529 Posts
| ||
|
alan133
Malaysia159 Posts
Why I wrongly accused Sciberbia I don't know what motivates you to look at sciberbia, but when I started looking hard at sciberbia I thought everyone in the game looks green to me. I ignored Golden's non-existing defense against my case and his non-existing contribution ever since, and I ignored my Miltonkram's "not-sure-what-side-he-is" read. I thought scums must be good and it motivates me to re-read everyone's filter and I started with the player that I think is the best: sciberbia. Over-confidence Cases I think over-confident cases aren't bad. If you want to build a case against someone, go all out and assume your target really is mafia, if you are wrong, all you need to do is to say sorry. Of course, that does not mean that you should shut down whatever defense posted by your target. The reason why you want to build a case is to force a response, not only from the target, but from other people. It is by no means "you are mafia ##votes you kthxbye". (Sorry sciberbia) but I really dislike one thing he said once or twice in the game. + Show Spoiler + I couldn't find it yet, sciberbia's filter is 6 pages long lol. I will edit this if anyone wants me to quote it. It goes something like- "I know there is always possible town-sided explanation for the points I brought up against you, so I am going to ignore your defenses" That's one of the reason why I suspected sciberbia. I think instead of just focusing on the content itself, we should look at the tone of the defense, did the person make silly excuses, look for any slip etc. Did anybody else made slips. Building cases at night I don't know, but I feel like building case at night is bad, especially scums can use it as a wifom by killing you off. s0Lstice got killed right after he posted a case on unforgiven. We could have interpreted it wrongly, and he won't be here to "change his mind." Also, by leaving behind a case like this, I honestly thinks it carries more weight than it deserved. In the day where Unforgiven was lynched, I changed my mind from thinking he is scum because s0Lstice mentioned a "leak", until I learn that the "leak" was far sketched. I even feel uncertain about the lynch later when I reread MJ's posts, but I went ahead with the lynch without trying to fight it off because:
I think it also works the other way round. What if you were right but you did not post and got killed off? I think unless you got a solid read or a irrefutable scum slip, not speculations (host slipped, host did not modkill etc etc), I think it is better to post your reads on multiple players, instead of one big case where no one can challenge it when you die. Correctly Get Milton I think Milton played really well. While he is not the most townie looking guy, he is also not the scummiest, and I kept re-reading filters from players that are from both extremes. There is also a bonus: no one will be suspicious of him not dying. There are no obvious slips and I think everyone agrees with me that scanning through the filter, he looks townie. I think the only way to "catch" him is that the fact he doesn't even flinch when we get closer and closer to LYLO, his tone remains the same, if not, it feels like he is getting more confident mislynch after mislynch. He also show no resentment for pushing for the wrong mislynches, but he didn't really do much to get the lynch going, really. Summary Overall, I think suicidal blue, "screw you for reading me scum" townie, Unforgiven's non-commitment first few days due to RL constraints and townie tearing themselves up nullify any advantage we had in day 1. I also noticed scums wins the majority of the newbie games, I wonder if it is the same for normal games? + Show Spoiler + <joke>Mafia is imba, nerve Mafia plx</joke> | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
I did hold that case on me slightly against you. If you always let things like that slide, I feel like mafia benefits more than town because they can post a case and only back down from it if they don't get support. | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
| ||
|
Miltonkram
United States310 Posts
There's no one particular part of your D1 play that is bad. I see how you were trying to approach the game aggressively and you were just unfortunate to attack town players and slightly defend a scum player. You did a really good job of promoting discussion and getting D1 off to a good start. I'd take a step back though. Pressure people hard, make it look like you are absolutely convinced they are scum, but keep in mind that you could be wrong. Pressuring townies is only bad if you follow it all the way to a mislynch. Also keep in mind that weak/confusing play is not necessarily a scum play. | ||
| ||
