EPTDwarf Fortress Mini Mafia - Page 10
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
| ||
|
Forumite
Sweden3280 Posts
Maybe claim if we have the Tracker, but not D1. Maybe D2 or D3. @sciberbia Fair enough, we´ve talked too much about the innocent child and need to scumhunt. Any tips on where to start? Also, did you write your first post with all the policy in advance? | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
On August 08 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote: @sciberbia Fair enough, we´ve talked too much about the innocent child and need to scumhunt. Any tips on where to start? Also, did you write your first post with all the policy in advance? @Forumite Yes, I have some tips on where to start. See my next post. And no, I didn't start actually writing my first post until I read my role PM. But I've been thinking a lot about the setup ever since I /in'd, and I outlined everything I wanted to say on some scratch paper (I was planning on making the same post regardless of my role). I didn't want to be too late for work this morning lol. | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
Shiaopi On August 08 2012 00:08 ShiaoPi wrote: Well well, let's get started! Skip policytalking, we all know lurkers suck, you should not lie etc. etc. LiquidTomb's fallen demand justice, so let's go hammer some goblins. I agree with Forumite that this post seems off. Shiaopi is no vet, yet he starts off the thread with this bravado, confidence, and authority. It just doesn't seem to fit with the more reserved Shiaopi I remember from NMM XIV. I see this post as a conscious attempt to look bold, which fits in more with scum goals than town goals. + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 05:39 ShiaoPi wrote: @HiroPro: Seeing as you seem to want a tracker to claim at some point, how do you plan to confirm him (like an innocent child would be)? I don't think we would get mod-confirmation for a tracker and therefore scum could fakeclaim just as well. Kind of defeats the entire purpose you had when you try to confirm a townie via claiming. On August 08 2012 06:28 ShiaoPi wrote: @risk: It's more the general concept of Hiro to use a tracker claim as means of confirming town that I am against, not against claiming in general, but scum can easily counterclaim so it won't work that way. Shiaopi's analysis of HiroPro's innocent child proposal really doesn't sit well with me. He objects to the innocent child plan on the grounds that the tracker wouldn't even be confirmed town because scum might counterclaim. On August 08 2012 06:36 ShiaoPi wrote: While it would be sub-optimal play for scum to trade 1 for 1 that early, you cannot dismiss the possibility. This is the part I have an issue with. He admits that it would actually be suboptimal for scum to counterclaim, but says that you should consider the possibility anyway. This suggests to me that he was just nitpicking the plan for the sake of nitpicking the plan. Why would townie Shiaopi object to a plan on the grounds that scum will play suboptimally and defeat the plan? Shouldn't he be assuming scum plays optimally? I'd really like other people's opinions on this point, because I might be biased by my own view of the innocent child proposal. prplhz On August 08 2012 06:43 prplhz wrote: Too weak? Callign ShiaoPi out for nothing and now you are actually complaining about the setup, in a game that already started. What exactly are you trying to do? This post seems sketchy. He is basically just criticizing Fortumite's play for the sake of criticizing Fortumite's play. This isn't constructive in any way -- prplhz doesn't say or even directly imply that Fortumite is scummy. Forumite I'm surprised nobody is calling out Forumite as I write this. His wishy/washy suspicions on Shiaopi are clearly sketchy: + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 00:46 Forumite wrote: I think ShiaoPi is a Goblin On August 08 2012 01:09 Forumite wrote: I´d prefer not to discuss my read yet though, I hope you understand. On August 08 2012 06:07 Forumite wrote: Yay, prplhz! ShiaoPi looks like scum, just read the few introposts. On August 08 2012 06:37 Forumite wrote: Okay. It´s based on the first post, quoted below: When I read that I see someone who is rushing a greeting to show that he´s here, doesn´t say anything on his own views and wants to shut down policydiscussion. It´s the very first post of the game, and he wants us to NOT talk about the only thing there is to talk about. On August 08 2012 07:00 Forumite wrote: On ShiaoPi, I wanted to see if my scumsenses were working after my break with a quick read. No, I´m not convinced he´s scum. Seems like he makes a falsely confident read, voices a falsely confident case, and then backs off when marv and prplhz call him out on it. I'd appreciate some thoughts on any of the points I brought up. | ||
|
Forumite
Sweden3280 Posts
HiroPro called me out too. I agree that my case was bad and that it makes me look bad, but I object to one thing; I´m always falsely confident of my bad reads. On prplhz Right now I´m in danger of falling into the OMGUS-trap, because the only thing I´ve gotten from him is the greeting and him calling me out. prplhz calling me out makes me think there´s something wrong with MY play, which makes prplhz a nulltell. | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
Can you more fully explain your initial read on shiaopi, your current read on shiaopi, and why your read has changed? That last post makes it look like you have completely thrown out your initial suspicions on shiaopi. Is this solely because people such as prplhz have disagreed with you? | ||
|
Forumite
Sweden3280 Posts
On August 08 2012 10:43 sciberbia wrote: @forumite Can you more fully explain your initial read on shiaopi, your current read on shiaopi, and why your read has changed? That last post makes it look like you have completely thrown out your initial suspicions on shiaopi. Is this solely because people such as prplhz have disagreed with you? Initial read: On August 08 2012 06:37 Forumite wrote: Basically I thought I saw some kind of anti-town motivation here. I´ve gotten good reads from initial posts in other games, so I thought I had found something here. When I read that I see someone who is rushing a greeting to show that he´s here, doesn´t say anything on his own views and wants to shut down policydiscussion. It´s the very first post of the game, and he wants us to NOT talk about the only thing there is to talk about. Current read: Nullread. I´ve thrown out my initial scumread, it was probably just the one odd post, especially as ShiaoPi showed that he was willing to discuss the setup just a few posts after the initial incriminating post. I changed my mind because I knew I wasn´t getting anywhere. I didn´t have much to start with, and I got conflicting reads the first time I reexamined the case. That HiroPro, marvel and prplhz spoke up against me making accusations and/or against the actual case mattered a lot too, because I doubted my read if none of the other "veterans" agreed, and because I didn´t want to distract the thread more than I had allready done. That´s about it, I´m back to square one on ShiaoPi. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On August 08 2012 11:11 Forumite wrote: Initial read: Basically I thought I saw some kind of anti-town motivation here. I´ve gotten good reads from initial posts in other games, so I thought I had found something here. Current read: Nullread. I´ve thrown out my initial scumread, it was probably just the one odd post, especially as ShiaoPi showed that he was willing to discuss the setup just a few posts after the initial incriminating post. I changed my mind because I knew I wasn´t getting anywhere. I didn´t have much to start with, and I got conflicting reads the first time I reexamined the case. That HiroPro, marvel and prplhz spoke up against me making accusations and/or against the actual case mattered a lot too, because I doubted my read if none of the other "veterans" agreed, and because I didn´t want to distract the thread more than I had allready done. That´s about it, I´m back to square one on ShiaoPi. So do you think for yourself, or are you going to let HiroPro, marv, and prplhz do the thinking for you for the rest of the game as well? Do I think your initial read was suspicious? Maybe a tiny bit. It was really early, but at least you were taking a solid stand. I understand changing your mind can happen. I've changed my mind a lot in the past. But your reasoning for changing your mind is bogus. "Because the 'vets' questioned me" is just flat out boggling. | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
I'm glad you find Forumite's explanation suspicious as well, because I don't think I've ever felt this good about a scumread after only 12 hours of D1. I'm planning on writing a sizeable case against him as soon as I finish playing my evening starcraft. If you're still online, can you tell you me if you agree with anything I said about shiaopi? | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On August 08 2012 10:08 sciberbia wrote: Shiaopi I agree with Forumite that this post seems off. Shiaopi is no vet, yet he starts off the thread with this bravado, confidence, and authority. It just doesn't seem to fit with the more reserved Shiaopi I remember from NMM XIV. I see this post as a conscious attempt to look bold, which fits in more with scum goals than town goals. I dunno if I buy this point very much. Its been what...3, maybe 4? months since XIV. I didn't go back to check, but assuming his gameplay hasn't changed in that amount of time. I would expect someone to get more confident the longer the are around mafia games. Hell, I've gradually gotten more confident in just the last month of being around TLMafia. On August 08 2012 10:08 sciberbia wrote: + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 05:39 ShiaoPi wrote: @HiroPro: Seeing as you seem to want a tracker to claim at some point, how do you plan to confirm him (like an innocent child would be)? I don't think we would get mod-confirmation for a tracker and therefore scum could fakeclaim just as well. Kind of defeats the entire purpose you had when you try to confirm a townie via claiming. On August 08 2012 06:28 ShiaoPi wrote: @risk: It's more the general concept of Hiro to use a tracker claim as means of confirming town that I am against, not against claiming in general, but scum can easily counterclaim so it won't work that way. Shiaopi's analysis of HiroPro's innocent child proposal really doesn't sit well with me. He objects to the innocent child plan on the grounds that the tracker wouldn't even be confirmed town because scum might counterclaim. This is the part I have an issue with. He admits that it would actually be suboptimal for scum to counterclaim, but says that you should consider the possibility anyway. This suggests to me that he was just nitpicking the plan for the sake of nitpicking the plan. Why would townie Shiaopi object to a plan on the grounds that scum will play suboptimally and defeat the plan? Shouldn't he be assuming scum plays optimally? I'd really like other people's opinions on this point, because I might be biased by my own view of the innocent child proposal. You're right. We *SHOULD* assume that mafia are going to play optimally. However, I can't find any scum motive by saying they might play suboptimally. Maybe you could clarify why you think its scummy? Nitpicking just to nitpick is suspicious, but I've seen tons of townies do it too. Not sure if its enough for me to think he is scum yet, but enough that I'll keep a closer eye on him. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
| ||
Custos Luna
United States96 Posts
shiaopi triggers my scumdar. prplhz raised an eyebrow, but i keep looking night - gotta go protect the moon | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
His read on shiaopi (the logical inconsistencies) 1) Why didn't he explain his initial read on shiaopi?+ Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 00:46 Forumite wrote: I think shiaopi is a Goblin On August 08 2012 01:09 Forumite wrote: I´d prefer not to discuss my read yet though, I hope you understand. On August 08 2012 03:17 Forumite wrote: That´s okay, you are more likely to scumslip if you don´t think there´s any danger. If Forumite wanted shiaopi to feel a sense of security, why did Forumite voice his suspicions of shiaopi at all? I see no good explanation for why Forumite voiced his suspicions, but would not explain them. I find it suspicious that Forumite tried to provide townie motivation for his behavior, but it didn't really make sense. 2) What exactly did Forumite find scummy about shiaopi?+ Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 06:37 Forumite wrote: Okay. It´s based on the first post, quoted below: When I read that I see someone who is rushing a greeting to show that he´s here, doesn´t say anything on his own views and wants to shut down policydiscussion. It´s the very first post of the game, and he wants us to NOT talk about the only thing there is to talk about. When I asked Forumite to explain precisely why he has changed his mind about shiaopi, Forumite said this: On August 08 2012 11:11 Forumite wrote: Current read: Nullread. I´ve thrown out my initial scumread, it was probably just the one odd post, especially as shiaopi showed that he was willing to discuss the setup just a few posts after the initial incriminating post. What I gather from this is that: -- Forumite's main beef with shiaopi was shiaopi's stance on policy discussion -- Forumite later decided to null this suspicion because shiaopi showed willingness to discuss the setup This logic is dubious to me, but what I find really suspicious is that Forumite continued to talk about his bold, red scumread on shiaopi even after shiaopi made some posts about setup and policy. The timing doesn't match up. Here are the relevant posts in chronological order:+ Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 00:46 Forumite wrote: I think shiaopi is a Goblin On August 08 2012 00:51 shiaopi wrote: @scib: I can agree with your thoughts about the roleclaims, but I have a question about the 1+ Lynches. In your 2nd example you say that we can get an extralynch off if we lynch 2 instead of 1 at 6 vs 1 wouldn't it end still in 2 cycles as the night following a double mislynch would be 4-1. with the subsequent nighthit it gets to 3-1 and another mislynch ends the game as it will be 1-1 after the NK. Just my maths being wrong or an oversight from your side? On August 08 2012 00:55 shiaopi wrote: Watcher/Tracker are probably weaker than DT. Speculating on them being in the possible setups does not get us far though imo. Maybe for balance purposes but as marv points out the watcher at least has 2 things to watch. On August 08 2012 00:58 shiaopi wrote: Ah so another doublelynch instead of a single one. Makes sense now. On August 08 2012 05:39 shiaopi wrote: @HiroPro: Seeing as you seem to want a tracker to claim at some point, how do you plan to confirm him (like an innocent child would be)? I don't think we would get mod-confirmation for a tracker and therefore scum could fakeclaim just as well. Kind of defeats the entire purpose you had when you try to confirm a townie via claiming. On August 08 2012 05:54 shiaopi wrote: So your scenario would not differ much from a standard claim and therefore it should be examined and then judged based on the situation and not just accepted (like child claim would be), would be too easy for scum then. Too bad I thought you found a way to circumvent the gamerules to modconfirm a tracker  On August 08 2012 06:07 Forumite wrote: Yay, prplhz! shiaopi looks like scum, just read the few introposts. On August 08 2012 06:21 shiaopi wrote: But stilll there is no need for him to claim. Just with his presence it would let our doc work much easier as scum cannot do too many RB's with his potential check. Do not see the need to lynch both claimers, just evaluate on the claims independently,I dislike both options , whether it is giving it a freepass or lynching. On August 08 2012 06:36 shiaopi wrote: While it would be sub-optimal play for scum to trade 1 for 1 that early, you cannot dismiss the possibility. On the other hand I could see it working out for the better if he claims as early as you suggest. He would leave scum fishing for the doc between the other townies. On August 08 2012 06:37 Forumite wrote:Okay. It´s based on the first post, quoted below: When I read that I see someone who is rushing a greeting to show that he´s here, doesn´t say anything on his own views and wants to shut down policydiscussion. It´s the very first post of the game, and he wants us to NOT talk about the only thing there is to talk about. ... On August 08 2012 11:11 Forumite wrote: Current read: Nullread. I´ve thrown out my initial scumread, it was probably just the one odd post, especially as shiaopi showed that he was willing to discuss the setup just a few posts after the initial incriminating post. To recap 1) shiaopi is aganist discussing setup/policy 2) Forumite finds shiaopi very suspicious for not discussing setup/policy 3) shiaopi discusses a good deal of setup/policy 4) Forumite still finds shiaopi quite suspicious ... 5) Forumite no longer finds shiaopi suspicious because of the posts shiaopi made in phase (3) I trust you can all see the inconsistency here. In Forumite's explanation to me on why he has retracted his suspicions on shiaopi, Forumite references that "shiaopi showed that he was willing to discuss the setup just a few posts after the initial incriminating post". But this did not stop Forumite from telling prplhz all about how shiaopi is scum. And I don't believe for a second that Forumite wasn't paying close attention to shiaopi's posts after he stuck his neck out and accused shiaopi. I see a significant contradiction here. 3) Why exactly did Forumite change his mind on shiaopi?+ Show Spoiler + This post took him 28 minuts to come up with after I asked him to more fully explain why he changed his opinion on shiaopi: On August 08 2012 11:11 Forumite wrote: Current read: Nullread. I´ve thrown out my initial scumread, it was probably just the one odd post, especially as shiaopi showed that he was willing to discuss the setup just a few posts after the initial incriminating post. I changed my mind because I knew I wasn´t getting anywhere. I didn´t have much to start with, and I got conflicting reads the first time I reexamined the case. That HiroPro, marvel and prplhz spoke up against me making accusations and/or against the actual case mattered a lot too, because I doubted my read if none of the other "veterans" agreed, and because I didn´t want to distract the thread more than I had allready done. That´s about it, I´m back to square one on shiaopi. OK so let me break this down: 1) shiaopi showed that he was willing to discuss the setup -- I discussed my issues with this logic previously 2) Forumite knew he wasn't getting anywhere -- This means nothing to me 3) Forumite didn't have much to start with and got conflicting reads -- That's not what it sounded like when he told prplhz how shiaopi is scum 4) The vets didn't agree This last point about the vets I find especially bad. Forumite references marv, HiroPro, and prplhz marv On August 08 2012 06:08 marvellosity wrote: don't be insidious, explain why you find them scummy or shut up about it. This is all marv says on shiaopi. Marv doesn't actually give any read on shiaopi whatsoever. Marv merely expresses displeasure at Forumite's behavior. This does not count as 'disagreeing with the case' HiroPro On August 08 2012 05:00 HiroPro wrote: (directed at Mordanis) What do you think of Forumite witholding his reason for thinking Shiao is scum? On August 08 2012 06:49 HiroPro wrote: Forumite, what do you make of the fact that Shiao has been willing to discuss the setup right after that? In the first quote, HiroPro casts some doubt on Forumite's behavior, but doesn't address shiaopi at all. In the second quote, unless I'm mistaken, HiroPro is actually supporting the idea that shiaopi is scum, by showing how shiaopi has contradicted his own distaste for discussing setup/policy. HiroPro certainly doesn't "disagree" with the case in any way. prplhz On August 08 2012 06:43 prplhz wrote: Too weak? Callign shiaopi out for nothing and now you are actually complaining about the setup, in a game that already started. What exactly are you trying to do? prplhz does think that Forumite's case on shiaopi is bad, but like Keirathi said, why on earth is Forumite taking prplhz's opinion into account here? First of all, prplhz has done nothing to convince anyone that he is town. And secondly, prplhz doesn't even explain why the case on shiaopi is bad. Put yourself in Forumite's shoes: 1) You have a scumread on shiaopi that you feel good enough about to announce to the thread 2) some vet comes into the thread and calls you an idiot but doesn't justify himself 3) You conclude that you must have been wrong about your scumread??? It just doesn't follow. See his thoughts on prplhz here: On August 08 2012 10:39 Forumite wrote: On prplhz Right now I´m in danger of falling into the OMGUS-trap, because the only thing I´ve gotten from him is the greeting and him calling me out. prplhz calling me out makes me think there´s something wrong with MY play, which makes prplhz a nulltell. I have a hard time believing that this would be any townie's reaction to essentially being called an idiot with no justification given. Other scummy points the way in which he discredits his own reads+ Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 10:39 Forumite wrote: On me HiroPro called me out too. I agree that my case was bad and that it makes me look bad, but I object to one thing; I´m always falsely confident of my bad reads. I find this response suspicious. It looks like he is trying to garner sympathy and not inflate the issue. I don't know why a townie would call his own cases bad and cast doubt on his own scumhunting ability. he seems scared of marv, prplhz, me + Show Spoiler + Not sure if all of this really fits under the term buddying, but I get the feeling that he is playing a bit scared of influential players: marv -- Forumite explains his read on shiaopi only when demanded by marv -- "I agree with marvellosity, not tracking nightkills make the Tracker and Watcher too weak." -- changes his read on shiaopi based on opinion of vet marv prplhz His interactions with prplhz seem really odd. It's like he worships prplhz. I looked through Forumite's D1 of Wheel of Fortune, where Forumite was scum and spent some time defending prplhz, so I find this especially suspicious. On August 08 2012 06:07 Forumite wrote: Yay, prplhz! shiaopi looks like scum, just read the few introposts. -- backs off his read on shiaopi after scolded by prplhz -- concludes that he himself must be playing bad because prplhz thinks he is scummy me On August 08 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote: @sciberbia Fair enough, we´ve talked too much about the innocent child and need to scumhunt. Any tips on where to start? On August 08 2012 10:39 Forumite wrote: On me HiroPro called me out too. I agree that my case was bad and that it makes me look bad, but I object to one thing; I´m always falsely confident of my bad reads. It's actually remarkable how much of his filter I take issue with considering we are like 15 hours into D1. As I've been writing this case, I have a pretty good feeling about it. The only thing that really makes me hesitate is it seems almost too obvious, and that no scum would be so obvious on D1. Forumite doesn't seem like a bad/noob player, and I think he made it to the end of Wheel of Fortune as scum. I really want opinions on this case. If you are online, please post your thoughts. I think Forumite is more likely scum than not, and he is far and away my top scum candidate at this point, so ##Vote Forumite | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
Anyways, any of the blue roles can be used to the "innocent child" effect. Scum are extremely limited in their ability to fakeclaim because it is a blue-wise open setup (we might not know the 2nd blue identity but we can still cc any blue claim instantly). I recommend whoever is blue to consider this and not hastily throw away a potential advantage here by claiming early (mainly tracker but same thing extends to watcher/cop). No go on double lynch. Too exploitable / volatile in a game this small. On August 08 2012 03:34 Mordanis wrote: I actually disagree that talking policy early on is bad. It is only bad when the policy talk tells scum how to get off free. "We will only lynch active players" tells scum that they can get one or two players to the late-game with as little content to hold against them as possible. On a similar note, it's probably not a good idea to discuss your heuristics for finding scum until you find examples of them in people's play. If you start talking about them right now, unless you list 173 of them, scum probably will actively avoid fitting your heuristic, thus ruining your chance of finding scum. On August 08 2012 05:23 Mordanis wrote: Wow, Forumite's accusation came much earlier than I expected. All Shiao had done was come out as anti-policy, and then when pressed came out against lying and lurking. What in that is scummy, I have no idea. I think its clear that Forumite has some type of plan hatching, but until we find out what the plan is, his early accusation is sort of weightless. It could be an attempt to draw scum out or to force townie mistakes in order to mislynch. Hey Mordanis, could you explain this contradiction? If this was an attempt to draw scum out, you have now just alerted them all with the second post, which goes against what you said in the first post. You said you are currently null on Forumite yet it seems like you are leaning a certain direction in your read of him. | ||
|
slOosh
3291 Posts
I do, however, have a question with one of your prior posts: On August 08 2012 10:08 sciberbia wrote: OK I've made brief notes on everybody. Here are the people I find sketchiest so far: Shiaopi I agree with Forumite that this post seems off. Shiaopi is no vet, yet he starts off the thread with this bravado, confidence, and authority. It just doesn't seem to fit with the more reserved Shiaopi I remember from NMM XIV. I see this post as a conscious attempt to look bold, which fits in more with scum goals than town goals. Here you take issue with the same post that your case on Forumite is based off. What are your current thoughts on ShiaoPi, and how do they play in relation with Forumite? | ||
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
On August 08 2012 16:35 slOosh wrote: Here you take issue with the same post that your case on Forumite is based off. What are your current thoughts on ShiaoPi, and how do they play in relation with Forumite? @sloOsh Earlier, I pointed out two things in Shiaopi's filter that I feel are a cause for concern. Nothing in his filter jumps out at me as especially townie-looking, so overall I'm slightly suspicious of Shiaopi. My personal views on shiaopi's posts don't really factor into my case on Forumite at all. I'm not saying Forumite is scummy because he made a bad case on a townie looking player. Rather, I think Forumite is scummy (in part) due to inconsistencies in the way in which he presented his case, explained his case, and backed down from his case. His first actual points about shiaopi's first post seem reasonable IMO, although I think he overstates their importance by calling shiaopi scum. I'm not sure if you are trying to ask if I think Shiaopi and Forumite can both be scum, but the answer would be that I'm not really thinking about them that way right now. Forumite looks rather suspicious to me regardless of Shiaopi's alignment. | ||
|
Forumite
Sweden3280 Posts
On August 08 2012 16:35 slOosh wrote: I think it went like; Read sciberbia's case and it's pretty good - there are some clear inconsistencies in Forumite's play, and he does seem to be "taking the temperature" of the thread according to player sentiments. I'd disagree with some of your interpretations of said players' intentions but it doesn't change the fact of Forumite's reactionary play. It could possibly be a result of lowered confidence in play due to a period of inactivity, so I'll be waiting to see how he responds to it. "Hey guys, ShiaoPi looks scum to me! Let´s pressure him!" "Nah, I don´t see it, let´s not pressure him." "Oh, okay, nevermind then." Continuing without revealing what I initially felt was scummy would have derailed the thread, and once I did reveal my "case" and reexamined it, it felt silly, weak and premature to me too. Even my first post accusing ShiaoPi of being scum was premature, it would have been better to take that initial read as a sign to watch ShiaoPi more closely, but at the time I wanted to create some pressure. | ||
|
Forumite
Sweden3280 Posts
| ||
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
@Custos I would really like you to contribute more. All you have done until now is pointing out a rather silly (read almost nonexistent) contradiction in one of sciberbia's posts and voicing some concern regarding me and prphlz. Mind elaborating why? Currently I am having an issue with Mordanis: Take a look at his opening post: + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 03:34 Mordanis wrote: I actually disagree that talking policy early on is bad. It is only bad when the policy talk tells scum how to get off free. "We will only lynch active players" tells scum that they can get one or two players to the late-game with as little content to hold against them as possible. On a similar note, it's probably not a good idea to discuss your heuristics for finding scum until you find examples of them in people's play. If you start talking about them right now, unless you list 173 of them, scum probably will actively avoid fitting your heuristic, thus ruining your chance of finding scum. Discussing when/how to use novel mechanics is simply a rational thing to do early in the game, though. Personally, I haven't had too much time to think about when/how to use the double lynch mechanic, but I can say that in my experience it happens fairly often that neither candidate up for lynching D1 is scum, and going from 9 town 3 scum D1 to 6 town 3 scum D2 would be pretty brutal. In short, I am strongly against D1 multi-lynching unless something very convincing happens to change my mind. Aside from that, the only other bit of policy I have to offer is that we should probably wait until night to discuss power roles, NKs, etc. During the day, all that really matters (in the absence of Day-vigis) is town/mafia. Daytime is for hunting scum, not deciding power role strategy. Enough with the policy now, I'm off to find scum. He is against cutting policy talk short and proceeds to do a good amount of it. The next sentence marks Mord as anti-lurker, but then he says that policy-talk should not be done, since it gives scum a pattern to avoid. But then he goes back to say that policytalk is useful based on the ground that there is nothing else to be done. This entire paragraph is extremely redundant and makes me think of him trying to boost the look of his filter by seemingly contributing in a circular logic pattern. His next two posts are hitting Custos, he questions why he quotes that part of scib. + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 04:26 Mordanis wrote: -snip- Funnily enough, the first person I'd like to ask a question is Mr. CL himself. In a way, Sciberbia's post telling people not to claim VT doesn't make any sense, especially when he comes out and says that he's a dwarf. On the other hand though, I don't see why you called out that illogical passage. Are you implying that bad logic is scummy? Or are you just poking fun at him? He is again extremely wishy-washy. Just look at it, first he critisizes scib for claiming alignment (which is pretty much a nulltell in my opinion), but then he also "does not see" how that could be called out. When Hiro says that it is a nulltell and differentiates between alignment claim and VT claim Mord responds like this: + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 04:35 Mordanis wrote: He is still implying that he's VT though, or else just asking for scum to kill him. When someone claims town, they are trying to make other people perceive them as VT. Why else would you claim town? Now he suddenly is much more concerned about claiming alignment (which he again links to VT). Flip-flopping at its best. Also on his latest post: + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 05:23 Mordanis wrote: Right, and so saying that you shouldn't claim VT when you make a statement that's only purpose is to make yourself be perceived as VT seems illogical to me. Enough on that subject though ^^ Wow, Forumite's accusation came much earlier than I expected. All Shiao had done was come out as anti-policy, and then when pressed came out against lying and lurking. What in that is scummy, I have no idea. I think its clear that Forumite has some type of plan hatching, but until we find out what the plan is, his early accusation is sort of weightless. It could be an attempt to draw scum out or to force townie mistakes in order to mislynch. Or it could be something completely different, or even some amazing, irrefutable meta-read that paints Shiao as scum already. I don't see how that could be possible, but without further information, it's sort of a null read on Forumite for now. I think Forumite does deserve some extra attention, as I'm always kind of wary of people who are scheming. Keep in mind that Forumite had already accused me much earlier than Mord posted. He only gives his opinion on it when Hiro asked him specifialy to do so. Mord sees no reason to suspect me, but hadn't he said that he also dislikes cutting policy short? Shouldn't he agree with Forumite's accusation based on that? Furthermore examine the rest of the post after the part I bolded. It is actually pure fluff. I feel that Mord has a higher chance of flipping scum than Forumite does, so ##vote: Mordanis | ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On August 08 2012 08:47 marvellosity wrote: I think postulating about a setup we only have 1/3 of the time with various unknown lynches/nightkills in the way is quite an unproductive use of thread space. Even in your post you say "for things without Hiro realises" without expanding upon them. Looks like crap designed to spam up the thread. Well let me explain further what I ment. When hiro first brought up the idea of using the tracker as an innocent child because tracking sucked in this setup, his idea was crap. When I gave it more thought and realising that doing this at a specific time gives us a mid-lategame confirmed townie and a high chance to stop a kp with a medic the idea started to look good. However the idea he explained to us was crap, so no matter where this leads hiro should still be held accountable for proposing a shitty plan. Last night was a good time to discuss these things marv. You claim I was spamming up the thread when what I was doing was discussiong ideas. Which is infinitly close to scumhunting then what you have been doing. Which is nothing. Prplhz also have done nothing. Glad to see we got some scumhunting going. I'll be on later and join the fray. | ||
| ||
