|
I certainly agree, a shouting match doesn't solve anything.
So, you said you agree with much of what I have said. What specifically do you not agree with?
And to the point of defending myself because Milton pointed a very, very fragile argument towards me: since we now know that Vivax *WAS* town, how was my staunch DEFEND THE DT stance anti-town at all, even if he wasn't DT in the end? I still fully stand by my actions; taking a chance on lynching the DT, no matter how small, is silly.
And for more defense, lets assume that I am mafia for one moment. Why would I, BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE, lobby for a no-lynch policy for today? It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation, its actually a bad thing for them. Higher odds that one of them gets lynched and all. Agreeing with the proposal after-the-fact is one thing; you can't really afford ti disagree with it if people in the town feel its the right decision, but to flat out propose it during the night before any discussion has taken place would be flat out idiotic. Not to mention, the call for last minute role-claims tonight hurts mafia too, because assuming everyone complies, they *WILL* be forced into lying. They will have to make up evidence to support there claims, and dismiss evidence of other people's claims. Much more liable to slip up when you have to lie.
|
EBWOP: That was directed towards JingleHell. I thought I hit the quote button, but apparently not.
|
On July 01 2012 09:53 Keirathi wrote:
I certainly agree, a shouting match doesn't solve anything.
So, you said you agree with much of what I have said. What specifically do you not agree with?
And to the point of defending myself because Milton pointed a very, very fragile argument towards me: since we now know that Vivax *WAS* town, how was my staunch DEFEND THE DT stance anti-town at all, even if he wasn't DT in the end? I still fully stand by my actions; taking a chance on lynching the DT, no matter how small, is silly.
And for more defense, lets assume that I am mafia for one moment. Why would I, BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE, lobby for a no-lynch policy for today? It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation, its actually a bad thing for them. Higher odds that one of them gets lynched and all. Agreeing with the proposal after-the-fact is one thing; you can't really afford ti disagree with it if people in the town feel its the right decision, but to flat out propose it during the night before any discussion has taken place would be flat out idiotic. Not to mention, the call for last minute role-claims tonight hurts mafia too, because assuming everyone complies, they *WILL* be forced into lying. They will have to make up evidence to support there claims, and dismiss evidence of other people's claims. Much more liable to slip up when you have to lie.
My biggest concern is that discussing policy may well be what tips us into the point where we don't have time to hunt scum. I'm not entirely against a no-lynch, in fact, I prefer it if it's the best option, I just feel we're really running far too late to take that sort of risk. It's entirely in what-if land, and assumes scum don't have any scum-vigi holding a shot.
As for how Vivax flipped, yes, that was unfortunate, but it really has no bearing on the actual cases involved. Like I said, I'm not accusing you, not right now, likely not at all. I just thought those things were at least worth mentioning, and since Milton pointed that admittedly light finger at you, it would have been strange not to mention them as well, for things to look at while digging through filters.
Frankly, though, I think I may be looking too much at the small picture now, though. Can we find anything Milton and Release had in common? The two night shots?
|
On July 01 2012 10:00 JingleHell wrote:
I'm not entirely against a no-lynch, in fact, I prefer it if it's the best option, I just feel we're really running far too late to take that sort of risk. It's entirely in what-if land, and assumes scum don't have any scum-vigi holding a shot.
There is no mafia extra shot role. The only possibility for losing tonight if we no-lynch is if we have another town vigi and he shoots a townie. I would certainly hope that wouldn't happen though.
|
On July 01 2012 10:05 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 10:00 JingleHell wrote:
I'm not entirely against a no-lynch, in fact, I prefer it if it's the best option, I just feel we're really running far too late to take that sort of risk. It's entirely in what-if land, and assumes scum don't have any scum-vigi holding a shot.
There is no mafia extra shot role. The only possibility for losing tonight if we no-lynch is if we have another town vigi and he shoots a townie. I would certainly hope that wouldn't happen though.
Oh, damn, I should have read through the list of available scum roles more carefully.
I'd still rather dig through and find something, though, than discuss policy. Can we at least agree to disagree on that, and I'll promise not to point a finger if someone else wants to discuss it with you later and you talk about it with them? At least in the absence of an abundance of other reasons to suspect you?
So, back on track, can you think of a possible link between Milton and Release?
Or, maybe we're supposed to get confused about something like that. Maybe that's what we're supposed to do. That's the problem with the metagame. Regardless, since you're here and open to hunting, can you think of anything?
|
While I agree that we have to find some credible evidence to decide on who to lynch eventually, it's pretty counter-productive to discuss it today if we do decide to no-lynch. If we have even the slightest evidence against someone, and lay it out, then decide to no-lynch and they are in fact town, then there is virtually 0% chance that the mafia night-kills that person, which just leads to more suspicion towards them the next day, giving mafia a stronger case to get them lynched and win the game. No-lynching gives us one less person to have to try to build a case against.
Like I said, its not that I don't agree with you, its just that no-lynching is our best solution, and until it happens, any information we disclose can give mafia ammunition to use during the next day.
|
United States8477 Posts
FoS: Esspen
On both nights of votes, Esspen switched to the guy we eventually lynched who turned out to be a townie. On both nights, he switched from roflwaffles55/JingleHell(same person) to that townie. On both nights, he switched when he was the deciding vote and extremely late into the game. Other suspicious comments:
There isl no chance he's detective, I'm ready to bet on my kidney. Why would he be accusing all the people he accused if he could focus on the one he knew to be the scum and make a good case on him. This seems like a very sad fake roleclaim.
I do not get all this Jingle vs Vivax discussion. Whomever we lynch, the result will be the same in the end. Even if we confirm that Vivax is the DT, he'll be killed during the night immediately.
In addition, Esspen was on Vivax's short list of people he narrowed down mafia to be in.
Of course, also FoS: JingleHell.
If Esspen is indeed mafia, then my argument makes perfect sense that he's been trying to protect JingleHell.
Also, if Esspen is mafia, then BioSC probably isn't mafia, because of how rather adamantly Esspen tried to go after BioSC at the beginning of the game(check his filter)
Also, I suggest we pay close attention to Vivax's list that he left us. Vivax lost his life to give us his last testament, part of which is the list of people he suspects to be mafia. We know that Vivax is telling the truth, because we know his role, and we know that he tried rather hard to provide us with this information. I find it suspicious that no one has yet mentioned much about it, probably because mafia are trying to discredit it. The list is as follows:
Conclusion: the mafia is among these: Miltonkram, BioSC, JingleHell, Esspen, NrGMonk. I'm not entirely sure about JieXian, but Id prefer to not include him in the list as of now, I'd still keep an eye on him as townie.
So with Miltonkram eliminated, the list boils down to the following, from my perspective:
- Esspen-I suggest lynching this guy first and if he's mafia my whole argument falls into place.
- JingleHell-The guy Esspen's been trying to protect.
- BioSC-Esspen's antagonized him at the start of the game, so if you buy my argument, he's probably not mafia.
- NrGmonk-this is me, but I don't mind being suspected as of now, as according to Vivax and my analysis combined, I'm most probably the 3rd mafia member from an outside perspective if you buy both our arguments.
- JieXian-another maybe, possibly the 3rd mafia if you believe Esspen/Jingle to be mafia and not me
Of course there still might be people on mafia not on Vivax's list. I'm going to go through Vivax's argument in depth and check all the filters of people he suspects in the near future. I suggest all townies do the same.
My initial gut impression on Miltonkram's lynching is that mafia wants to throw us off the trail, discrediting Vivax's list and forcing us to discuss something rather irrelavent. If they lynched someone not on the list, it would further reinforce the credibility of the list.
|
I'm going to let my defense stand as it already is, for now.
As a short recap: I can't help what rofl did or did not do, but the majority of the case against him was lurking, which I have not done.
The Vivax vs myself situation could have potentially been resolved much differently had he not OMGUS'd and then faked a roleclaim to try and force his assumption (based mostly on rofl's lurking) down all our throats.
As for Esspen, he could easily be scum seeing towny vs towny mislynch scenarios trying to set things up to force a third mislynch, via suspicious behavior.
I did ask if anyone wanted to discuss this during the night, I assume nobody really got in on that out of some sort of fear it was a scum ploy, which I suppose I should have considered, but I actually just wanted to get it out of the way ASAP, so we wouldn't waste time on it today.
|
On July 01 2012 02:32 Keirathi wrote:
Because with 8 players left, if we mislynch, the game is over, barring a doc save (which we don't even know if we have a doc).
8 people left: if we lynch a townie (5/8 chance), then mafia kills a townie, that leaves us at 6 people with 3 mafia. Game over.
If we no-lynch at 8 players: mafia kills an extra townie, but we are at 7 players now. 3/7 chance to get mafia, rather than 3/8.
Let me point out some glaring flaws in your idealised assumption.
Firstly, you're correct. But you were wrong in leaving out a few facts:
You do know that at 7 players every single townie needs to be on the same page to win?
Thats a really huge risk you left out from your analysis, just like your arguement for Vivax. You're presenting a situation while hiding some facts.
ATM I have very little confidence that all townie can be on the same page. I wonder why you do.
|
On July 01 2012 09:53 Keirathi wrote:
I certainly agree, a shouting match doesn't solve anything.
So, you said you agree with much of what I have said. What specifically do you not agree with?
And to the point of defending myself because Milton pointed a very, very fragile argument towards me: since we now know that Vivax *WAS* town, how was my staunch DEFEND THE DT stance anti-town at all, even if he wasn't DT in the end? I still fully stand by my actions; taking a chance on lynching the DT, no matter how small, is silly.
And for more defense, lets assume that I am mafia for one moment. Why would I, BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE, lobby for a no-lynch policy for today? It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation, its actually a bad thing for them. Higher odds that one of them gets lynched and all. Agreeing with the proposal after-the-fact is one thing; you can't really afford ti disagree with it if people in the town feel its the right decision, but to flat out propose it during the night before any discussion has taken place would be flat out idiotic. Not to mention, the call for last minute role-claims tonight hurts mafia too, because assuming everyone complies, they *WILL* be forced into lying. They will have to make up evidence to support there claims, and dismiss evidence of other people's claims. Much more liable to slip up when you have to lie.
If higher odds are so good why wouldn't a 3-3 be a better situation since it's 50%?
Because it means you have no power in the voting. That' why 3-9 is better than 3-8.
About roleclaiming, it sounds good.
|
United States8477 Posts
Going to be more assertive, as no one has responded to my argument. ##Vote Esspen
|
On July 01 2012 09:53 Keirathi wrote:
I certainly agree, a shouting match doesn't solve anything.
So, you said you agree with much of what I have said. What specifically do you not agree with?
And to the point of defending myself because Milton pointed a very, very fragile argument towards me: since we now know that Vivax *WAS* town, how was my staunch DEFEND THE DT stance anti-town at all, even if he wasn't DT in the end? I still fully stand by my actions; taking a chance on lynching the DT, no matter how small, is silly.
And for more defense, lets assume that I am mafia for one moment. Why would I, BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE, lobby for a no-lynch policy for today? It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation, its actually a bad thing for them. Higher odds that one of them gets lynched and all. Agreeing with the proposal after-the-fact is one thing; you can't really afford ti disagree with it if people in the town feel its the right decision, but to flat out propose it during the night before any discussion has taken place would be flat out idiotic. Not to mention, the call for last minute role-claims tonight hurts mafia too, because assuming everyone complies, they *WILL* be forced into lying. They will have to make up evidence to support there claims, and dismiss evidence of other people's claims. Much more liable to slip up when you have to lie.
I'm going to have to FOS Keraithi for that.
|
On July 01 2012 12:45 JieXian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 09:53 Keirathi wrote:
I certainly agree, a shouting match doesn't solve anything.
So, you said you agree with much of what I have said. What specifically do you not agree with?
And to the point of defending myself because Milton pointed a very, very fragile argument towards me: since we now know that Vivax *WAS* town, how was my staunch DEFEND THE DT stance anti-town at all, even if he wasn't DT in the end? I still fully stand by my actions; taking a chance on lynching the DT, no matter how small, is silly.
And for more defense, lets assume that I am mafia for one moment. Why would I, BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE, lobby for a no-lynch policy for today? It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation, its actually a bad thing for them. Higher odds that one of them gets lynched and all. Agreeing with the proposal after-the-fact is one thing; you can't really afford ti disagree with it if people in the town feel its the right decision, but to flat out propose it during the night before any discussion has taken place would be flat out idiotic. Not to mention, the call for last minute role-claims tonight hurts mafia too, because assuming everyone complies, they *WILL* be forced into lying. They will have to make up evidence to support there claims, and dismiss evidence of other people's claims. Much more liable to slip up when you have to lie. If higher odds are so good why wouldn't a 3-3 be a better situation since it's 50%? Because it means you have no power in the voting. That' why 3-9 is better than 3-8. About roleclaiming, it sounds good.
3-3 is game over. Theres no possible way for town to win. I dunno if the rules specifically state that mafia has to OUTNUMBER the town to win, but since we're using priority voting, it works out to the same thing.
On the day that its 3-3, the 3 mafia just agree to fast vote someone as soon as the day starts, and since their 3 votes happened first, they have priority. Even if the 3 town consensus to vote on one of the mafia, its too late.
|
On July 01 2012 13:11 JieXian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 09:53 Keirathi wrote:
I certainly agree, a shouting match doesn't solve anything.
So, you said you agree with much of what I have said. What specifically do you not agree with?
And to the point of defending myself because Milton pointed a very, very fragile argument towards me: since we now know that Vivax *WAS* town, how was my staunch DEFEND THE DT stance anti-town at all, even if he wasn't DT in the end? I still fully stand by my actions; taking a chance on lynching the DT, no matter how small, is silly.
And for more defense, lets assume that I am mafia for one moment. Why would I, BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE, lobby for a no-lynch policy for today? It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation, its actually a bad thing for them. Higher odds that one of them gets lynched and all. Agreeing with the proposal after-the-fact is one thing; you can't really afford ti disagree with it if people in the town feel its the right decision, but to flat out propose it during the night before any discussion has taken place would be flat out idiotic. Not to mention, the call for last minute role-claims tonight hurts mafia too, because assuming everyone complies, they *WILL* be forced into lying. They will have to make up evidence to support there claims, and dismiss evidence of other people's claims. Much more liable to slip up when you have to lie. I'm going to have to FOS Keraithi for that.
Also I'm not really sure why the statement you bolded initiated a FoS. If you can tell me how lobbying for no-lynch is anti-town, then please do.
|
On July 01 2012 12:26 JieXian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 02:32 Keirathi wrote:
Because with 8 players left, if we mislynch, the game is over, barring a doc save (which we don't even know if we have a doc).
8 people left: if we lynch a townie (5/8 chance), then mafia kills a townie, that leaves us at 6 people with 3 mafia. Game over.
If we no-lynch at 8 players: mafia kills an extra townie, but we are at 7 players now. 3/7 chance to get mafia, rather than 3/8.
Let me point out some glaring flaws in your idealised assumption. Firstly, you're correct. But you were wrong in leaving out a few facts: You do know that at 7 players every single townie needs to be on the same page to win? Thats a really huge risk you left out from your analysis, just like your arguement for Vivax. You're presenting a situation while hiding some facts. ATM I have very little confidence that all townie can be on the same page. I wonder why you do.
I guess I could have combined these all into 1 post, I apologize.
Anyways, 4 townies have to be on the same page in either situation. It's basically one extra night of possible blue roles vs arguing today over who to lynch and then voting with lesser odds.
|
On July 01 2012 13:36 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 12:26 JieXian wrote:On July 01 2012 02:32 Keirathi wrote:
Because with 8 players left, if we mislynch, the game is over, barring a doc save (which we don't even know if we have a doc).
8 people left: if we lynch a townie (5/8 chance), then mafia kills a townie, that leaves us at 6 people with 3 mafia. Game over.
If we no-lynch at 8 players: mafia kills an extra townie, but we are at 7 players now. 3/7 chance to get mafia, rather than 3/8.
Let me point out some glaring flaws in your idealised assumption. Firstly, you're correct. But you were wrong in leaving out a few facts: You do know that at 7 players every single townie needs to be on the same page to win? Thats a really huge risk you left out from your analysis, just like your arguement for Vivax. You're presenting a situation while hiding some facts. ATM I have very little confidence that all townie can be on the same page. I wonder why you do. I guess I could have combined these all into 1 post, I apologize. Anyways, 4 townies have to be on the same page in either situation. It's basically one extra night of possible blue roles vs arguing today over who to lynch and then voting with lesser odds.
No no no >_> once again you seem to keep leaving out things. Yes, 4 townies need to be together in either situation. However today 80% need to be on the same page (with better timing) as opposed to 100% tomorrow. Your idealised situation is only optimal if you already have a 4 townie alliance.
It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation,
I'm arguing that this statement is not true. Mafia does have something to gain as I explained above, hence I question "extreme pro-townness".
On the other hand, what would you expect from a roleclaim? (this isn't an attack) I'd assume mafia will claim VT and blues can be excluded from being targets. I don't get how you can "catch people lying".
|
On July 01 2012 14:11 JieXian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 13:36 Keirathi wrote:On July 01 2012 12:26 JieXian wrote:On July 01 2012 02:32 Keirathi wrote:
Because with 8 players left, if we mislynch, the game is over, barring a doc save (which we don't even know if we have a doc).
8 people left: if we lynch a townie (5/8 chance), then mafia kills a townie, that leaves us at 6 people with 3 mafia. Game over.
If we no-lynch at 8 players: mafia kills an extra townie, but we are at 7 players now. 3/7 chance to get mafia, rather than 3/8.
Let me point out some glaring flaws in your idealised assumption. Firstly, you're correct. But you were wrong in leaving out a few facts: You do know that at 7 players every single townie needs to be on the same page to win? Thats a really huge risk you left out from your analysis, just like your arguement for Vivax. You're presenting a situation while hiding some facts. ATM I have very little confidence that all townie can be on the same page. I wonder why you do. I guess I could have combined these all into 1 post, I apologize. Anyways, 4 townies have to be on the same page in either situation. It's basically one extra night of possible blue roles vs arguing today over who to lynch and then voting with lesser odds. No no no >_> once again you seem to keep leaving out things. Yes, 4 townies need to be together in either situation. However today 80% need to be on the same page (with better timing) as opposed to 100% tomorrow. Your idealised situation is only optimal if you already have a 4 townie alliance. Show nested quote +It's an extremely pro-town stance to take; a no-lynch doesn't benefit Mafia in any way whatsoever, and in every possible situation, I'm arguing that this statement is not true. Mafia does have something to gain as I explained above, hence I question "extreme pro-townness". On the other hand, what would you expect from a roleclaim? (this isn't an attack) I'd assume mafia will claim VT and blues can be excluded from being targets. I don't get how you can "catch people lying".
Sorry about this, but I think I'm going to sleep before I reply. I wrote up a long post, but it felt like I was just rambling without getting my point across and repeatedly losing my train of thought. I'll discuss more in the morning.
|
##Vote Esspen
after 2 mislynches, mainly because of him, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that he is scum.
Additionally he has a ton of scummy behaviour apart from those last minute votes.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On July 01 2012 09:18 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2012 09:13 Esspen wrote:
I'm confused, why would mafia kill somebody we suspected of being mafia? Wtf? Well, answering that requires that we understand what the scum were thinking. We don't, so all we can do is drive ourselves into a state of paranoia trying to metagame the people who know more than us. The best thing we can do is try to find the case where Milton being dead is beneficial to the scum. Look at his discussions, look at his thought process, look at other people's thought processes about him. Time to dive into the filters and start trying to piece things together, IMO.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 01 2012 09:30 JingleHell wrote:Milton calls Keirathi scummy. Which was something Vivax also thought before the OMGUS against me exploded into a rather unfortunate shitstorm. + Show Spoiler +On June 30 2012 07:59 Miltonkram wrote:
Keirathi, the question doesn't come down to "what does town lose if player X is telling the truth." It comes down to who you think is scum. The fact that you acknowledge that there is a decent case against him but you does not reflect well on your alignment. Here is why I'm voting Vivax over JingleHell: Vivax's play has been incredibly scummy, JingleHell's has not. It's that simple. On June 30 2012 08:02 Miltonkram wrote:
EBWOP: "The fact that you acknowledge that there is a decent case against him but you don't vote for him does not reflect well on your alignment." Keirathi, of course, was right in the thick of a lot of the hot points of that mess, and now he's trying to discuss policy when we're in a world of trouble numerically. Milton's other suspicion mentioned at one point... Show nested quote +On June 29 2012 10:20 Miltonkram wrote:
What do you think of dNa's reasoning for his Esspen vote? Pretty scummy right? Bear in mind, even though yesterday went terribly, Milton was one of the few people really trying to consider the cases, and look at alternatives even after it started exploding. This isn't even a read, this is ONLY Milton's last couple of times saying someone looked scummy, which gives us a place to start looking. After the debacle, I'm going to be as methodical as possible to avoid a town loss because of another OMGUS shouting match. These are only highlights, please read filters and help with this, the last thing we want is for scum to poke and prod us into a horrid bandwagon.
JingleHell, I feel like your second post is doing exactly what you cautioned against in your first post: metagaming the people who know more than us. Besides, I don't think Milton's point against keirathi holds any weight anymore, considering how Vivax flipped.
On July 01 2012 10:22 Keirathi wrote:
While I agree that we have to find some credible evidence to decide on who to lynch eventually, it's pretty counter-productive to discuss it today if we do decide to no-lynch. If we have even the slightest evidence against someone, and lay it out, then decide to no-lynch and they are in fact town, then there is virtually 0% chance that the mafia night-kills that person, which just leads to more suspicion towards them the next day, giving mafia a stronger case to get them lynched and win the game. No-lynching gives us one less person to have to try to build a case against.
Like I said, its not that I don't agree with you, its just that no-lynching is our best solution, and until it happens, any information we disclose can give mafia ammunition to use during the next day.
This might be true if it wasn't for one factor: Esspen. There is already evidence against him (and 2 votes currently against him from NrGmonk and dNa). We have to come to a consensus regarding him as soon as possible. He has been suspected the entire game so far and with good reason. If we decide on a no lynch, people will still be arguing about him the next day and mafia knows it. As you said, they won't shoot him; he's too valuable an asset for them if he's town (granted at this point even if he is mafia, he could still be considered an asset, just look at how many cases have been made against him or revolve around him, and he is STILL alive with no mafia lynched). If you want to no lynch, this point, combined with JieXian's points, must be considered.
I also feel we are wasting our nights because we are too afraid of posting some revolutionary new idea or case that will get us shot. If it is posted and gains enough momentum during the night with enough people agreeing, I don't see why mafia would choose to shoot that person over any other player who agreed. This no lynch is something that we could definitely have discussed in the night. Keirathi, you could've posted your no lynch idea earlier in the night for others to discuss. Had we reached a consensus before the day started, I see no reason for mafia to target you over any other player. Even if we did not reach a consensus during the night, your idea and posts during the night would still have been there for us to reflect on while discussing a no lynch.
Anyway, I am opposed to a no lynch for the above mentioned reasons for now, and am very likely to vote for Esspen.
|
Barring some strong evidence against another player of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
