EPTGet it started!
Newbie Mini Mafia XIX
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
Get it started! | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 26 2012 05:05 ghost_403 wrote: Time Cycle: This game will follow a 48 hour day cycle. In case I am not able to post around deadline, any votes after the 48 hour mark will not count and the game will be put on halt until the night post is up. Currently the deadline is 22:00 GMT (+00:00), but that is subject to change. Actions/votes will be accepted up to and including the posted time, but not after. Im assuming its related to that deadline. But I could be wrong. Dead wrong. For crossing said line. Or something... | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 29 2012 06:26 Anacletus wrote: What is a 3rd Party Planar Dragon? I sort of want to be that role...pew pew That would be pretty filthy... Is there a 3rd Party Planar Dragon? I hope the dragon doesn't eat hamsters | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 29 2012 06:08 marttorn wrote: That's not suspicious at all... | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
Everyone on board? | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:19 JingleHell wrote: Actually, if many people neglect to post, it's the worst time to lynch lurkers, so why would you suggest it, Myles? Mathematically, if 6 lurk, then, if we assume 100% of the scum are also amongst the lurkers, we're already at a coinflip to get a scum. Very true. At that point its useless to policy lurkers. Now is the time to get this crap out of the way though. I do think we need some kind of policy to follow since the game is majority Lynch. Let's figure out our options and get the scumhunt on. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:32 JingleHell wrote: And just in case people decide to show up, and start trying to take my lack of posts as suspicious, I'll be leaving in a bit for TKD. On June 29 2012 07:42 JingleHell wrote: Well, Myles, if you have a suggestion for flushing the scum with people not talking until we have something to go on, feel free to elaborate on that plan. Otherwise, I'm going to stick with the established method of getting people talking enough that we either get something to work with, or at least get enough people active to be physically capable of lynching anybody. Aha! That's what we're looking for you lieing...Or maybe 10 minutes counts as a bit...Whatevs, Not a big deal. I do probably need to read better though. Everyone else needs to hurry up and get in here, im freaking out man. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 29 2012 11:41 Anacletus wrote: I am not sharing my thoughts as of yet, I don't think that that is in my best interest to do so. Dumb jokes aside, that is garbage and scummy behavior for anyone in this game. You would be better off lurking and pretending you weren't here, and even that could be considered suspicious. Our goal this early should be making whatever little reads we can and start building cases. Unfortunately we cannot do that with joke posts. Are you planning on giving us any reads? Right now, you have at best 1 post so far that I don't consider a complete write-off. Everyone has to start somewhere... | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 29 2012 12:13 Anacletus wrote: Yeah I know, I've played mafia before. It's just that refusing to participate is pretty serious and is mentioned in the rules. Riiight...So where exactly in the rules is that mentioned? Except for the mandatory requirements (voting and posting at least once etc..), you're obligated to - Help your team win - and not cheat. sounds like you just don't feel like talking in general. Eventually you supplied: On June 29 2012 12:36 Anacletus wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=347856¤tpage=8#155 If you actually thought that this was true... I think JingleHell is playing aggressively which leads me to believe that he is a townie. I only made the one about any supposed notes, the thread has 10 pages. So no, I am not filling the thread with trash about notes. Not the most informative post ever, but at least better than you've done so far./\ **I'm going to set a FoS: Anacletus on you. Nevertheless, I'm trying to give you the botd, since you've been bandwagoned hard. That's the best I can do for you at this point. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 30 2012 06:17 Fencer710 wrote: Single words are fine, though. Damn lack of edit button increasing my post count artifically.  It's like accidently opening no-gas in a matchup where you normally open gas because you forgot his race, then forced to all-in because you don't know how to open gasless FE. Argh...Thanks for derailing us hard ghost. It's time to get back to scumhunting now? and for future reference, the quoted post is usually seen as a complete waste of time and reason for suspicion. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 30 2012 06:35 Fencer710 wrote: Saying "I'm not mafia" holds just as much leverage as 'I'm a walrus who is GM in SCII so I can say whatever I want" in an [H] thread by NrGmonk in the SCII strategy section. I don't think it's possible to tell who is mafia based solely on who is or is not voting, unless only one or two people are/aren't voting. Votes may not tell you who is scum directly but it is a crucial part of building cases in the later stages of the game. Even though we don't know very much right now, we shouldn't be tossing votes around like they're going out of style. Having all these votes piled up on Anacletus so quickly disturbs me. I still consider him the most suspicious, but that's primarily because no one else has done anything noteworthy, except perhaps jingle going crazy at the start there. btw, Did you expect him to tell you he is mafia? Even if he was, that would be the dumbest move ever. He's not even trying to save himself with that statement, he's assuming hes as good as dead and suggesting that the non-voters are the scum. Pretty pro-town mentality imo. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 30 2012 12:20 Fencer710 wrote: OK, guys. I have to go to bed. My closing thoughts in case I don't make the deadline tomorrow: Remember, 7 people have to decide to lynch the same guy in order for there to be a lynch. It's me, Anacletus, or nothing. You can be meta all you want in your head, but it doesn't change what actually goes on in the thread. Remember to read and reread all the posts! I'll take you over Anacletus today. You're posting is extremely unproductive to me. It doesnt seem all that scummy, but its a massive hindrance when you don't provide anything for discussion, just constantly droning about how your new and guides are super cool. ##Vote: Fencer710 | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On June 30 2012 13:38 Promethelax wrote: You don't think Fencer is scum but you voted him? What the hell? If you are town this is horrible play, vote for someone who you think is scum not someone you think is annoying. Now, I think Fencer is scum so I voted him; what are you doing? This is really good advice, we should all follow it. We don't need townies acting like scum just because they are dumb. Come on guys there are 9 of us, we need to start working together, our strength is in numbers. This is why I can't imagine that you are town, I bring a case against you and your reaction is to give really generic advice and go to bed? You may as well just claim scum in the thread. I think Anacletus and Fender have had the scummiest play so far. However, I do not think that there is enough evidence that the [i]are[]/i] scum. However, I feel obliged to lynch someone, and Fender's death would be less hurtful to the town since Anacletus (was) posting somewhat relevant things to the thread. <--This is not a good reason to lynch someone I know, but its the best I can come up with under the circumstances for placing my initial vote. As you've already changed your vote to ensure a lynch, it probably doesn't matter anymore, but I was going to do the same thing (Switch vote from Fender to Anacletus) closer to the deadline (unless Fender got jumped). My reason for not immediately voting Anacletus was that they're both looking scummy and if I hammered, it could very well have halted all discussion for the rest of the day until we lynched him. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
| ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
My point with the two players under suspicion is that I value the information from either lynch higher than the analysis of the lynched player or the lynched player's vote (Because they're targeting each other and not posting much analysis). I know town is down a player (potentially two) but the game is practically designed to mislynch day 1. I agree that our goal should be finding scum, not just getting information, but there is too little to go on so far other than ensuring someone gets lynched today due to bandwagoning. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On July 01 2012 00:17 JingleHell wrote: If you'll look back, since the very start, I've been against "yes or no" type play. I'm not evading anything, I'm saying we need to actually consider the angles. This isn't something we can just say one or the other is always better, so I'm not going to be forced to answer a question that doesn't line up with the way I believe we should play, and I'm not going to be called scum for being consistent that way. Why are you trying to force a decision based on too little information? That seems entirely more relevant at this point, because in the end, you'll see what decision I come to when I place a vote. You have been against yes/no play, I agree. You didn't really want to policy lynch to begin with. For the record I do not think your play is scummy. However, in order to vote for anyone you must come to the conclusion that it would be (or at least seems to be) beneficial for town. My problem with your answer is it assumes we will always be able to find scum, which right now I cannot. Too many bandwagons and lurkers. Therefore, my choices are to (semi-)knowingly go into either a mislynch or no-lynch situation. I qualified my question with "in a situation like this", by which I meant relatively poor cases, only two real options for voting, and a good chance to mislynch. My stance is it is better to mislynch for information than to no-lynch for an extra vote tomorrow. The votes that do get made are based off of better analysis due to having more information available. There is also the chance that we are lucky enough to pull scum. | ||
|
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
WORST CASE SCENARIO No Lynch Day1 + Show Spoiler + Day1: 9 Town, 3 Scum (33.333% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch) No Lynch, Mafia hit on town Day2: 8 Town, 3 Scum (37.5% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch (Mis)Lynch Day1 + Show Spoiler + Day1: 9 Town, 3 Scum (33.333% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch) Lynch Town, Mafia hit on town Day2: 7 Town, 3 Scum (42.8% Chance of hitting scum with random lynch) Conclusion: Mislynch Bad. No Lynch Worse. On July 01 2012 02:09 AmericanUmlaut wrote: SNIP My read on Anacletus isn't changed at this point, though; I still think he's got a good chance of flipping scum. I'm a bit concerned that there might be too many players who will be inactive between now and the lynch, in which case I'll be switching my vote back to Anacletus to prevent a no-lynch. WTF YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS WHY AM I DEFENDING MYSELF TO YOU?? | ||
| ||
