Normal Mini Mafia III - Page 2
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
| ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 22 2012 18:36 Djagulingu wrote: I'm a little bit familiar with how shady plays. He lurked to the death as scum in Newbie MM 23 (which was his first game as far as I know), was pretty active and attended the scumhunt pretty well in 24 up until he got lynched at the end of day1. Meta analysis suggests that this Shady we have seen up to now is more like the scum one in Newbie MM 23. However (I don't know how big of a factor this is but) he could be a lot less easygoing in his first game of mafia, being a scum is another factor contributing to that, just like this being his first game against bigger dawgz (which I'm not one of) and not newbies might also cause him being less easygoing. On the other hand though he might have taken lessons from NMM23 as well, which may help him adapt his scum play better into bigger dawgz. I don't know and can't estimate how well or poorly he adapted though. Other than that, I'm not familiar with any of the players, except for the notorious troll Chezinu (from BH's explanations in this thread). Should add that my first game was actually Newbie XXII, where I flipped mason and tried to follow Keir's lead on pretty much everything up until he got NK'd since he was the other mason and more experienced. I'm disappointed with the level of activity here. I think that we're letting lurkers get off a little too easy. I'm especially suspicious of people who haven't posted, as it's already been a full 12 hours since the game started, more than enough time for players to post. Moreover, this playstyle is unfair to town, since town by default has to go off of evidence to scumhunt and if everyone is lurking scum gets a free ride in terms of not having to give up much evidence. I'm going to go with a rando-vote on a lurker unless someone can claim me otherwise with a compelling case. I haven't yet seen a case that's good enough so far. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
One thing I am going to require: all lurkers who are making their first posts in here from now on, if you don't make a case in the post (given all that's happened in the thread already) I am going to vote for a lynch on you. Why? This forces scum to choose to bus or shoot for a mislynch right from their first post in the thread, giving them zero opportunity to "test the waters" on the town's reaction to their claim. A townie should have no problems with this. Only scum should be made uncomfortable by this requirement. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
All aboard the midnight express... to hell. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 22 2012 21:42 Kville wrote: Lemmings will be lemmings and you just happend to be the one in front. What i gathered is that you claim to 'sheep' and yet you yourself have done nothing else but provide one liners and start nothing but chaos. If it makes you feel any better #Vote marvellosity to this: On August 23 2012 01:02 Kville wrote: The question of what i thought of talis and obvious? Well i can't say much about talis but his posts do seem a little sketchy aslways as obvious. My top three suspects seem to be : talis obvious shady I'll post more about these three later when i get home from my classes. Until then ##Unvote In the span of 3 posts. That's pretty wierd. Marv goes from being a vote to being not even in his top 3. With no justification on any of his reads except a rain check. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
That's strange. Shouldn't the town response be to build a solid case on someone instead of posting rainchecked analysis? | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
| ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 01:20 Obvious.660 wrote: Djagulingu, you're right and perhaps I should have cast my vote earlier in the game. I did, however, want to give the people who hadn't participated much a chance to show their initial scumminess before casting my first vote. The first thing I want to bring up right now is BL (and others') suspicions of me for not voting Palmar based on being convinced that he truly intended to push for random lynch. Being my first game with Palmar, I wasn't certain that he was indeed serious about his claim there. My response to this line of inquiry about me was to, as VE put it, put the ball in Palmar's court to find out why exactly it was he proposed and endorsed a random lynch. I never did get a satisfactory response from Palmar about this. Palmar, would you be so kind as to share why you have once again pushed for a random lynch? KVille is pretty scummy-looking right now. Could you give a clear read yourself on him, one way or another, instead of simply questioning him and moving on? | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 01:20 Kville wrote: You are correct. There should be a solid case, which is where my mistake was given such little time given at this moment i cannot post one right now which is why I provided much little information about what i gathered about my suspects Which is the sole reason why I withdrew my vote. Does not mean he is off my radar, So basically you're pretending to agree with me to make me think we are on the same page even though you logically claim to be on the opposite side from me. AKA appeasing me and sweeping it under the rug, just like you did with Marv. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 22 2012 21:42 Kville wrote: Lemmings will be lemmings and you just happend to be the one in front. What i gathered is that you claim to 'sheep' and yet you yourself have done nothing else but provide one liners and start nothing but chaos. If it makes you feel any better #Vote marvellosity This makes no sense. How does "leader lemming" = scum? Also, you're twisting Marv's efforts to spark discussion here--a perfectly townish action--into scummy play. Why? | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 01:32 Kville wrote: No your still a scum and i plan to prove it. Wha? My response was directed at your Marv vote. You vote Marv, then you withdraw your vote. Then in your defense of that withdrawal above, you say that there should still be a solid case on Marv, which you cannot post right now because you are short on time. Which is why you withdraw your vote, but he is still on your radar. But then you fail to include him on your list of scummy players. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 01:32 Kville wrote: No your still a scum and i plan to prove it. FYI, now it just looks like you're trapped and you're blindly OMGUSing because there's nothing else you can do. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 02:37 VisceraEyes wrote: Interesting. However, that aside, his actions since joining the game are damning. He stated upon returning that he wants to lynch lurkers because "they're bad for town later". However, as his recent play shows, lurkers was never really an issue for him...because there are still people who qualify as lurkers in the game (damaging, even) yet he's contented to ride this Kville wagon. Why? Doesn't he care about town? Didn't he want to remedy the lurker situation? So what you're saying is that just because KV has started posting, I should switch my vote to players who are still lurking, while completely ignoring the content of what KV has posted? My read on KV stands because of the lurkiness of his posts. Policy lynching lurkers is never meant to be a hard and fast rule--it's always there to flush bad town players and scum out into the open. Thought you knew that, VE, since you were quite knowledgeable about that point when you coached the newbie games. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
| ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
This is what I wrote: I'm disappointed with the level of activity here. I think that we're letting lurkers get off a little too easy. I'm especially suspicious of people who haven't posted, as it's already been a full 12 hours since the game started, more than enough time for players to post. Moreover, this playstyle is unfair to town, since town by default has to go off of evidence to scumhunt and if everyone is lurking scum gets a free ride in terms of not having to give up much evidence. I'm going to go with a rando-vote on a lurker unless someone can claim me otherwise with a compelling case. I haven't yet seen a case that's good enough so far. I clearly state that it is because I haven't seen a good case that I want to go with a rando-vote on a lurker. Would appreciate it if VE didn't twist that to somehow mean I wanted to lynch lurkers no matter what happened in the thread. | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 03:23 talismania wrote: upcaught! VE I was with you on shady until he started going after kville. I thought the reasoning behind going for lurkers smelled like bs but the way he went after kville was genuine. like picking up on the fact that marv was out of kville's list is a townie trait and it all fits with what people say about him being a tunneler. Thanks for the support... what's your read on KVille? | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
| ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 02:05 Obvious.660 wrote: Alllllrightythen. I'll take a look at Kville, who apparently came into the thread to push some suspicion away from himself and cast wild accusations at others. Then to disappear. So that's cool I guess. So his preliminary, opening "case" that is his list of people have "sketchy posts": Followed up by adding Marv who has has already cast suspicion on AND voted for, after being called out for forgetting to add him to the list. So there's no evidence exactly what those sketchy posts were, outside of the train of votes for Kville and somehow the interactions between those players being evidence of a scum team?This post above is making mountains from molehills. Implying connections this early in a mini game, where people working together (scums, masons) are likely to be far more careful of being linked by meta-factors such as post timing, is rather silly. It's a good bit of evidence to bring up when looking at other such coincidences and making further reads, but until those situations present themselves I just don't see any justification for making the call that it's linking them as scum partners. I think I like this one the most, though:Marv has earned his FOS and Vote for what I see as OMGUS reasons, and Kville is now certain that he has found a second scum in Shady Sands. Oooookay. Next we're going to hear how if X flips Red then Y must be Red? Kville's entire train of though needs to be explained. So basically your read on KV is that his train of thought on Marv and me is suspect/OMGUS, as well as his attempt to link Marv and DJ? | ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
| ||
Shady Sands
United States4021 Posts
On August 23 2012 04:55 marvellosity wrote: don't we have forever until deadline? game started early so i think it's tomorrow evening/night, no? Got about 26 hours. btw thanks for sticking up for me back there. | ||
| ||