|
On July 03 2012 12:11 BioSC wrote:
If I could stress this enough, Activity (lack thereof) is what killed town. I sure as hell know I wasn't playing a perfect scum (It was my first scum game) but the lack of posts in the thread at times let us come up with a plan, even when it turned bad. Like the hosts said, this game could have soooooooo easily been a town victory. Well played guys, can't wait for analysis on this game, because I feel like I could have played way better.
This is usually the downfall of towns. It is a good lesson to learn early on. However, towns don't just need activity. They need constructive activity. A bunch of spam doesn't help that much. However, the entire town discussing suspects in a calm and organized fashion and then working their way down to one candidate every day? That town will win 80% of the time or more.
|
Thanks for the analysis Kita. I was planning on writing up a case against Bio but work ended up getting in the way and I didn't have time. 
If Vivax hadn't DT claimed and just played standard VT, Bio was next on my list and I would have put more effort into hunting him. I think a Bio lynch D2 could have won us the game considering how much more information a scum lynch gives the town.
|
On July 03 2012 12:22 Miltonkram wrote:Thanks for the analysis Kita. I was planning on writing up a case against Bio but work ended up getting in the way and I didn't have time. If Vivax hadn't DT claimed and just played standard VT, Bio was next on my list and I would have put more effort into hunting him. I think a Bio lynch D2 could have won us the game considering how much more information a scum lynch gives the town.
We actually thought you were DT, with a check on me. That's why you got the bullet.
Since we knew I would show green to a check, we figured that's why you were so vehemently on my side during D2's wreck.
|
"but if you have a strong read, don't take it to your grave."
3 hours b4 the deadline, i realized that Bio was scum. I would be away from the net for 4 hours. That sucked.
|
On July 03 2012 12:22 JingleHell wrote:
We actually thought you were DT, with a check on me. That's why you got the bullet.
Since we knew I would show green to a check, we figured that's why you were so vehemently on my side during D2's wreck.
I just didn't think much of the case against you. Roflwaffles hadn't been very active and you came into the thread with an opinion I agreed with. Vivax's "lynching for information" posts seemed really scummy to me and his case against you felt like OMGUS. Kudos to you for entering the game with a bit of a fire under your belly. It made you look really townie and it threw off my reads.
|
On July 03 2012 11:05 kitaman27 wrote:
Keirathi
Not voting on day one is pretty harmful to town. Not only does it mean one less town aligned vote in the lynch, it also prevents others from getting a good read on you. More posting on day one definitely would have helped. Your logic was pretty sound throughout the game and you were one of the easiest players to follow. The biggest problem was that you only pushed one target the entire game. The no-lynch plan that you pushed on day three doesn't work in a game that isn't majority lynch. If the entire town votes for no lynch, the three mafia players swap to a player at the deadline and its GG.
I found him to be terribly stubborn and incapable of seeing logic and argue once he has his mind set on something, for d3 and d2 as in the QT.
|
I found Release, Milton and Monk to be smart and sensible townies, though those 2 don't have time to post and Release was chaotic, I'm sure he'll be good at scum hunting. It's just that we got lucky with Esspen.
|
On July 03 2012 09:59 BassInSpace wrote:
Out of curiosity, it seems everyone in obs had esspen pegged as town. Is this true?
Well, I bet my kidney twice that Esspen is town in the obs QT  Otherwise, as others stated before, there was not enough questioning each other to get a clear read for me, only Bio was an early scum read for most observers.
I'm wondering: JieXian announces a big post in N2, doesn't deliver and nobody cares??
|
On July 03 2012 12:43 JieXian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 11:05 kitaman27 wrote:
Keirathi
Not voting on day one is pretty harmful to town. Not only does it mean one less town aligned vote in the lynch, it also prevents others from getting a good read on you. More posting on day one definitely would have helped. Your logic was pretty sound throughout the game and you were one of the easiest players to follow. The biggest problem was that you only pushed one target the entire game. The no-lynch plan that you pushed on day three doesn't work in a game that isn't majority lynch. If the entire town votes for no lynch, the three mafia players swap to a player at the deadline and its GG.
I found him to be terribly stubborn and incapable of seeing logic and argue once he has his mind set on something, for d3 and d2 as in the QT.
As far as D2, I was right to trust my gut. Lynching the target rather than the, admittedly fake now, DT is just a smarter practice than lynching the claimer, as long as you make the assumption that the claimer isn't trying to throw the game.
D3 is a whole other story. I honestly wasnt aware that even if we had 5 no-lynch votes, and 3 votes on someone, that there would be a lynch instead of a no-lynch because I've never played in a game like this. No one ever made that argument, and when I asked for no-lynch clarification, it wasn't mentioned. That would have made it a completely different ball game, and a no-lynch could never work in that circumstance.
I could keep arguing my point about it working, because I know for a fact it does work, but that's not the point of this discussion.
|
Oh I didn't know that about the no lynch either. The only reason I chose to vote for it though was because at that stage of the game I thought there was a higher chance of getting a no lynch than a lynch of a player besides esspen. We really did waste too much time talking about the no lynch.
|
Oh and thanks kita and blazinghand for hosting 
|
On July 03 2012 15:01 BassInSpace wrote:
Oh I didn't know that about the no lynch either. The only reason I chose to vote for it though was because at that stage of the game I thought there was a higher chance of getting a no lynch than a lynch of a player besides esspen. We really did waste too much time talking about the no lynch.
That's probably true, but Esspen was the least scummy of my suspects in my personal notes, and simultaneously the hardest to make a case for being townie. Despite everything he did, it just didn't "feel" like he was scum. It felt like he was a townie that was being railroaded and didn't know how to defend himself, so he threw in the towel. There's no way to defend that. So I resorted to constantly arguing a point that I see now was utterly stupid.
|
The only confirmed i had was Bio scum, Bass town. Everyone else, to my mind, was neutral.
|
On July 03 2012 13:54 hegeo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 09:59 BassInSpace wrote:
Out of curiosity, it seems everyone in obs had esspen pegged as town. Is this true? Well, I bet my kidney twice that Esspen is town in the obs QT Otherwise, as others stated before, there was not enough questioning each other to get a clear read for me, only Bio was an early scum read for most observers. I'm wondering: JieXian announces a big post in N2, doesn't deliver and nobody cares??
hahahaha trying top Esspen eh?
I was about to post a long post about Keraithi but I dropped it since there wasn't the need for it and there seemed to be more important issues.
On July 03 2012 14:21 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 12:43 JieXian wrote:On July 03 2012 11:05 kitaman27 wrote:
Keirathi
Not voting on day one is pretty harmful to town. Not only does it mean one less town aligned vote in the lynch, it also prevents others from getting a good read on you. More posting on day one definitely would have helped. Your logic was pretty sound throughout the game and you were one of the easiest players to follow. The biggest problem was that you only pushed one target the entire game. The no-lynch plan that you pushed on day three doesn't work in a game that isn't majority lynch. If the entire town votes for no lynch, the three mafia players swap to a player at the deadline and its GG.
I found him to be terribly stubborn and incapable of seeing logic and argue once he has his mind set on something, for d3 and d2 as in the QT. As far as D2, I was right to trust my gut. Lynching the target rather than the, admittedly fake now, DT is just a smarter practice than lynching the claimer, as long as you make the assumption that the claimer isn't trying to throw the game. D3 is a whole other story. I honestly wasnt aware that even if we had 5 no-lynch votes, and 3 votes on someone, that there would be a lynch instead of a no-lynch because I've never played in a game like this. No one ever made that argument, and when I asked for no-lynch clarification, it wasn't mentioned. That would have made it a completely different ball game, and a no-lynch could never work in that circumstance. I could keep arguing my point about it working, because I know for a fact it does work, but that's not the point of this discussion.
I don't plan on arguing with you since the game is over but not clarifying 1 last time would be rude, especially since I didn't expect the QT to be opened up.
Posting complete arguement is making me feel like I'm still posting a case against you so in short my problem with you is that you base your entire thought process around assumptions (maybe even gut feelings as you so put it) as axioms. Which is terribly fallacious. More so since you were convinced that you could make deductions based from it.
A common point between your D2 and D3 was to treat mafia like it were a game of chance, taking away the human element of it which is to ANALYSE and THINK whether someone is scummy or not but most of all being completely oblivious to oppositing arguements while you were "arguing".
Lynching the target rather than the, admittedly fake now, DT is just a smarter practice than lynching the claimer, as long as you make the assumption that the claimer isn't trying to throw the game.
That was only a small part of the D2 anti vivax arguement which was raised by Bio and I was against him making that statement in the QT because it made 0 sense to me.
Your D3 point doesn't seem like a defense or attack at all because this is the first time anything like it was brought up.
That last line shows that you're still stubborn after even Kita told you it won't work. Either you can't present the merits of a no-lynch properly, or refuse to listen to and address opposing ideas.
Since I don't think you're that stupid to not know the merits, I think this further proves my point that you're stubborn and refuse to believe anything that goes against your idealised assumptions which frequently ignores other points (sometimes facts) that doesn't fit it.
However a mass roleclaim makes some sense as a last minute town all-in in case anyone slips (though we'd all claim VT anyways) and I was aiming to not let that happen. I don't think anyone was really opposing that, because there was nothing wrong with it.
GG and thank you hosts!
|
On July 03 2012 15:29 Release wrote:
The only confirmed i had was Bio scum, Bass town. Everyone else, to my mind, was neutral.
Ya Bio had 2 slips, 1 of them that would secure a case against him were you around. edit: And which really got me panicking.
|
waiting for the next mini to come up! A full game is just too much of a headache for me.
|
On July 03 2012 15:42 JieXian wrote:
That last line shows that you're still stubborn after even Kita told you it won't work.
I'm sorry, I wasn't specific in that line. I meant "I know that a no-lynch can work in a majority vote system." Because I've seen it work (and I've seen it not work too, but with a higher success rate than flat out lynching). It was obviously an extremely stupid argument in this case, like I said, because there's no way for it to work. I misunderstood the mechanics, and I admitted that.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On July 03 2012 16:01 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 15:42 JieXian wrote:
That last line shows that you're still stubborn after even Kita told you it won't work.
I'm sorry, I wasn't specific in that line. I meant "I know that a no-lynch can work in a majority vote system." Because I've seen it work (and I've seen it not work too, but with a higher success rate than flat out lynching). It was obviously an extremely stupid argument in this case, like I said, because there's no way for it to work. I misunderstood the mechanics, and I admitted that.
To repeat, you would have been a much greater asset to town if you'd actually scumhunted and made cases rather than proposing no lynch plans and the like.
Also I feel your point on never killing claimed DT is incorrect. It's just sloppy thinking.
|
On July 03 2012 21:09 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 16:01 Keirathi wrote:On July 03 2012 15:42 JieXian wrote:
That last line shows that you're still stubborn after even Kita told you it won't work.
I'm sorry, I wasn't specific in that line. I meant "I know that a no-lynch can work in a majority vote system." Because I've seen it work (and I've seen it not work too, but with a higher success rate than flat out lynching). It was obviously an extremely stupid argument in this case, like I said, because there's no way for it to work. I misunderstood the mechanics, and I admitted that. To repeat, you would have been a much greater asset to town if you'd actually scumhunted and made cases rather than proposing no lynch plans and the like. Also I feel your point on never killing claimed DT is incorrect. It's just sloppy thinking.
That isn't helpful at all. Please for the love of god tell me how I could have possibly convinced enough people to vote Jingle or Bio over Esspen (I  ID* have them as the 2 strongest reads in my personal notes) after he basically said "Screw it, I give up" on top of his other scummy actions? So, despite how ultimately ignorant it was, I argued for the option that was at least getting a bit of traction.
While I certainly understand your point, there was never a time when I could realistically lay out my reads.
And I didn't say never kill the person who claims DT. Or maybe that's what I implied, but its certainly not what I meant. There are certainly times when killing the claimer is the right course of action.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On July 03 2012 21:48 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 21:09 marvellosity wrote:On July 03 2012 16:01 Keirathi wrote:On July 03 2012 15:42 JieXian wrote:
That last line shows that you're still stubborn after even Kita told you it won't work.
I'm sorry, I wasn't specific in that line. I meant "I know that a no-lynch can work in a majority vote system." Because I've seen it work (and I've seen it not work too, but with a higher success rate than flat out lynching). It was obviously an extremely stupid argument in this case, like I said, because there's no way for it to work. I misunderstood the mechanics, and I admitted that. To repeat, you would have been a much greater asset to town if you'd actually scumhunted and made cases rather than proposing no lynch plans and the like. Also I feel your point on never killing claimed DT is incorrect. It's just sloppy thinking. That isn't helpful at all. Please for the love of god tell me how I could have possibly convinced enough people to vote Jingle or Bio over Esspen (I ID* have them as the 2 strongest reads in my personal notes) after he basically said "Screw it, I give up" on top of his other scummy actions? So, despite how ultimately ignorant it was, I argued for the option that was at least getting a bit of traction. While I certainly understand your point, there was never a time when I could realistically lay out my reads. And I didn't say never kill the person who claims DT. Or maybe that's what I implied, but its certainly not what I meant. There are certainly times when killing the claimer is the right course of action.
I would have killed Vivax in that situation. Of course in this situation he was VT, but he was definitely lying. If you really had a strong read on Jingle, then you push THAT fact, rather than that you shouldn't be lynching the DT (that's how it came across).
The best time to lay out your reads is asap.
See towards the end, where BassinSpace got a town read on you and figured that Esspen were town and mafia were trying to secure the mislynch? You weren't to know that's what he was thinking. But if you'd laid out your suspects with good cases earlier in the day, then between you/Bass/Monk you could have perhaps worked things out and lynched someone else instead.
Again, if I was townie on the final day, I wouldn't have spent my efforts trying to get a no lynch, but instead desperately trying to push through my strongest read. How is town supposed to avoid a lynch on Esspen if you were unwilling/unable to push and make a case on your strongest reads??
Edit: This goes for Vivax too. His play day 2 was just insane. His plan seemed to be to wait until everyone found him scum and then make a desperate DT claim? With all the "I have info later". Noooooooo. You clear your name by pushing your strongest scumread with good logical reasoning and getting town to see your point of view :/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
