|
On July 03 2012 00:06 Keirathi wrote:No. No, no, no to every single one of your points. Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 21:27 JingleHell wrote:
We won't have any concrete information.
I can't imagine a scenario where this could possibly benefit the town.
How do you know we won't have any concrete information? Lets just make a hypothetical situation: Let's say I'm a doctor, and tonight I decide to protect you. I did my last minute role claim, saying that I'm protecting you tonight, and no one else claims any kind of vet/doc/jailer role. Day dawns tomorrow, and no one dies. I get a PM that my target was shot, and I share that information with the town. Now there are 2 people that are 100% clear (The Doc and his Target). Everything they've said and everything they will say, none of it has scummy motives; you don't have to try to pick apart their arguments. I'm not sure why you don't see the benefit of this. Yes, there is a chance that we have no useful information and we are back at this exact same spot tomorrow, but if we do by some miracle get concrete information, we are in a MUCH BETTER spot tomorrow. That's really all I can say. I don't want to spoon-feed the mafia with what to do to hard-counter my proposal. Show nested quote + JingleHell wrote:
If it was early game and there were a lot of lurkers, to the point of it nearly being a shot in the dark, no lynch could easily make some sense. But not when it's so perilously close to us losing, and as good a case against one person as we could hope for.
There are definitely more solid cases that can be made. Lets go back to my previous hypothetical. Now we have 2 people that are completely clean, and then 6 people (there was a doc save) that are still suspects. Even just the elimination of 2 people from the suspect pool has some subtle (and in some case, not so subtle) changes on every other individual suspect's case. Every thing that the 2 clear people have said has slightly more weight just because of the fact that we KNOW they aren't lying. Anyone who has every made an accusation towards the 2 clear people now looks slightly scummier, just because of the what-if of them being mafia and knowing that the cleared people were town beforehand. That said, there's not NECESSARILY a more solid case that can be made in our situation, even if we no-lynch. Its a gambling game (although, despite what everyone thinks, i don't think losing a townie is actually detrimental, ie 4 townies to vote tomorrow vs 5 today, but i can't seem to get the idea from my head and expressed into print in a convincing way, so I'm intentionally avoiding those arguments) on the hope that we do have blue role claims with good information. There's a very good possibility that we don't, but at the same time, I don't see how the case against Esspen changes any if we're back in this spot tomorrow. It doesn't magically make his case not the strongest still, it just means that maybe we have other information to consider alongside it.
I'm really finding trouble seeing the benefits to your proposition............... why wait 1 more day? WE can roleclaim right away if you want. I see a absolutely no sense in giving in to a 3-4 when we have a 3-5.
Your doctor proposition is a waaaaaaaaay riskier gamble as compared to the evidence we have against Esspen that you discredited.
|
Wait a minute are you in a way beating round the bush to create doubt on Esspen ......
|
I'll wait for a while in case you can make me realised that I've missed something but otherwise, good night.
I'm going to set my alarm for lynch time too. Hope I don't miss it if I made the wrong move.
|
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 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.
|
thanks for the criticism kita. I do realise after some time that I'm FOSing everywhere with weak reads. I was thinking that an FOS could spark discussion and doubt before a strong case is built. Wrong approach to the game?
About the D1 lynch, 8 am is really bad for me and I wasn't expecting that at all, being my first game. Sorry Bio, d1 was great play by you.
About weird and confusing, am I just missing a few lines to imply that they are hence scummy or is it a wrong approach?
I used obvious to mean that it's obvious that he's in a bad position, not that he's obvious scum, meaning I don't need to provide any justification to my list of 4 people under suspicion. Let me know if you still think it's a bad move.
|
Playing Mafia at this time zone really takes away a part of the game, sadly. (We need one with a different time zone!)
My final Vivax justification was indeed weird, again due to time zones:
I will give him the BOTD if he would address my questions before I went to sleep, but he didn't.
|
And as for the 1 liners, which I think was mostly on D3 (correct my if I'm wrong) were when Esspen was the obvious lynch target, without me wanting or having any townie motive to change chat and I was left pointing out the problems in Keirathi's no-lynch proposition. I didn't know what else to post >_>
|
Ok blaze :D
On July 04 2012 09:15 kitaman27 wrote:Postgame part twoAnother thing I happened to pick up on while going through each of your filters was signs of post lynch guilt. While nobody is likely to pick up on it, there were quite a lot of GG's towards players you pushed hard to get lynched  .
So... what's with GGs and post lynch guilts? Could you elaborate please?
|
On July 04 2012 18:47 Blazinghand wrote:
If you vote to lynch a player and he flips town clearly it wasn't a gg
And your reasons should be as good post flip as they were pre flip. Don't apologize for sound logic.
Hmm since only Vivax's lynch applies to me. I, along with everyone were saying that he deserved it.
...................................
Scummiest townie EVER >_>
about the gg thing, I'm alien to mafia etiquette haha so you only gg when you kill a mafia .__. ?
On July 04 2012 21:05 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2012 14:21 JieXian wrote:
thanks for the criticism kita. I do realise after some time that I'm FOSing everywhere with weak reads. I was thinking that an FOS could spark discussion and doubt before a strong case is built. Wrong approach to the game?
About the D1 lynch, 8 am is really bad for me and I wasn't expecting that at all, being my first game. Sorry Bio, d1 was great play by you.
About weird and confusing, am I just missing a few lines to imply that they are hence scummy or is it a wrong approach?
I used obvious to mean that it's obvious that he's in a bad position, not that he's obvious scum, meaning I don't need to provide any justification to my list of 4 people under suspicion. Let me know if you still think it's a bad move. I told you about this in QT
Really? Could you please repeat?
They don't have a filter in QT and I don't feel like going through 1000 posts =D I only remembered that part about keeping a list of scumminess and unleashing it only when there's a substantial amount.
|
I know how to use ctrl f, however i don't see an all messages button
used ctrl f too btw
|
![[image loading]](http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/1091/capturesfo.png)
I don't see it......
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
