|
On September 19 2012 02:46 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:37 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
I don't really agree with your approach. I wanted to pressure you on the off chance it was serious. Pressuring you gave me the explanation that it was "scum bait", which still doesn't make sense to me. Pressuring someone can give you more information that might be more useful than the original one. And I still want you to explained your rationale behind your post being "scum bait". Ok. Every newbie game I've played in has started with tons and tons of talk about lurker policy, the term I used earlier for it was a "lurker policy circle-jerk." I didn't want this game to go down that path, so I needed to say something that would give people something to argue about instead of everyone just agreeing with each other about lurkers for the first half of D1. So I said something completely ridiculous that I thought should have been obvious to everyone that it wasn't a real suggestion...... obvious to everyone except scum, who are over eager to jump on anything in order to push a mislynch. Hence, "scum-bait." So yes, it was a serious question that I was hoping to get responses to, but it wasn't my personal choice for D1 lynch. A few posts after that I outlined my real D1 lynch ideas.
Well, I think this rationale is bad. First, newbie townies will jump on the opportunity to contribute and question someone to establish their towniness. I, as a slightly more experienced player, questioned you to force more information. I don't see what type of player that wouldn't bring it up in any way.
Anyway, what I find even weirder is that Debears actually seems to find this argument both intuitive and convincing. Debears?
On September 19 2012 02:48 thrawn2112 wrote:
EBWOP sorry sonic didn't see your post before i posted my response
No worries, should've thought about it earlier.
|
On September 19 2012 03:42 thrawn2112 wrote:
sonic: The point is not to see who disagrees with a obviously ridiculous statement, the point is to see who is eager to build a case against me because of it. Other people casually mentioned that it was a flat out awful idea but you presented the false dichotomy that either I posted it as town which you see as most unlikey, or that I posted it as scum.
I can see your point more clearly now. If someone actually would've tried to push for a lynch based on that post alone it would've been weird. Not sure if it would've been particularly scummy though. Why would scum want to draw attention by going balls out early d1 lynching wagon with poor reasoning? It's kind of what Kush did as town last game.
Your reasoning makes some kind of sense though, which is the most important part for me at this point.
|
On September 19 2012 03:30 debears wrote:
Sonic,
First, you say i had a "hardcore defense" and "strong town read" of thrawn. I never used the word strong. "I think thrawn is town". It is not I know thrawn is town or thrawn is confirmed town. I'm "taking a shot in the dark" for now and and saying he is town to me. Also, most of my "defense" of him was trying to explain to you the possible logic behind his post. You said it was a "breakdown of logic" and that you found it "weird", making you sound as though you were more confused, which from what I've seen, is a scum tell.
That's basically an argument of semantics. What I was question is why you felt it would be productive to make a long ass post about thrawn's innocence. I don't see why any town would reach this conclusion.
Taking shots in the dark in order to establish innocence induces little to no information. Like I've argued ealrier, it might even have the opposite effect.
Being confused is not a scum trait. If anything, having perfect information (as scum) makes you too confident in your "reads". Last game I made a small scum slip stating I was "almost dead sure" Kush was town (he was town). That's a result of me being too confident because I had full information and didn't know how I would've viewed the situation with imperfect information (as town). Imcasey made an even worse scum slip like that and Kreb kind of picked up on it. Imcasey said he was sure Xatalos was scum (he was).
Then, you say it is "stupid and anti town" to say that I think someone is town. At the very least, my statements put me and thrawn under a microscope and ignites good discussion. Also, since I think thrawn is town, I can focus on some one else, like you, and analyze what you're saying.
You can focus on me without making unfounded town reads on thrawn.
Next, you say I look through all his posts and try to rationalize them from a townie perspective. That is wrong. I look at it from both perspectives. You never stated why you would think that mafia would do that. With my posts, you could say that you are rationalizing them all from a mafia's perspective.
What I found weird is how you analyze ALL his posts and conclude EVERYTHING is townie. A townie is likely to have doubts. However, as scum it's easy to think you need a strong opion on everything, not realizing that as town you wouldn't have a strong opinion.
In terms of preventing lurker discussions, it prevents us from saying, ok which lurker candidate should we lynch? It's a specific phrase: let's lynch the last poster in the thread. Since it's specific, we can say, "oh thats dumb" or "i agree". Then, that can lead us to wondering, "thrawn seems kinda scummy" (you) or "he seems good to me". It puts attention on a specific player, leading to higher quality discussion.
Then, you say the argument "convinced me". First, thrawns initial statement was a one liner at the beginning of the game. Then, you come along and bring it back up and make a big deal out of it. It didn't need a huge 3 paragraph answer to explain, although you seem to need it. I said it confirmed what I thought it was. As I looked at it, I thought, "wow thats dumb" also. But thinking as to why he would post it as mafia or town, I decided that it was a townie move.
Well, here I disagree. I think it needed an explanation. I didn't see his intentions as clear.
And in regards to stifling accusations, it can be good if it prevents dumb arguments that clutter up the thread, allowing mafia to hide. I didn't want to read through kush's warned, you suck because you accused me posts since he already warned about it. Not to mention, if we had accused kush in that situation, then you accuse everyone else who said lynch the lurkers.
If the accusations are stupid Kush could've dismantled them himself and in the process we would've gained information on Kush.
To emphasize why I made the defense post, I did it to prevent repeating what everyone else was saying and bring a new discussion topic into the thread (and it has succeeded). Also, I did it to try to narrow down the list of possible mafia to concentrate our efforts.
Repeat what exactly? It's good to narrow down the list of suspects, but not this early and with this limited information. And the only new topic you introduced seems to have been your own allignment and putting yourself up as a potential lynch target. That's not something to be proud of if you're actually town.
The post in thrawn's defense is already helping the town by presenting a discussion about my alignment. We are now making specific accusations. We can look at bandwagons as we get closer to lynch now.
However, Sonic, I am still having trouble understanding why there isn't any logic in what thrawn and I do.
Reading thrawn's explanations and looking back at Debears filter it's possible he understood thrawn's plan and I was just being fucking stupid. His comments makes sense for someone understanding thrawn's stated intentions. I still find the defense of thrawn suspicious for the reasons I stated.
|
On September 19 2012 04:20 thrawn2112 wrote:
OK so kush do you think I'm scum? Do you have reasons for that or is it just a shitty halfway into D1 association case?
I went through debear's filter and here's what I've got:
People are jumping on him for defending me, under the reasoning that either A) he's mafia trying to make safe posts or B) he and I are both mafia and he's trying to defend me. B is the vibe I'm getting from kush and sonic. But what about option C) that he's town and talking about something that everyone else is talking about? Obviously I say B is dumb excpet from the perspective of sonic who had been accusing me most of the game, but I don't see any indicator that option A or option C is more likely. To me it looks like the people who are accusing him are doing so because they already thought I looked scummy, or because they are scum themselves pushing a mislynch.
Not at all. That's why I posted this:
On September 19 2012 01:21 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 22:42 debears wrote:To me, thrawn is giving a town read at this point. + Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler + thrawn2112
Yeah I agree, there's not much else to add other than that lurkers are assholes and they are going to lurk whether there is strong support of a lurker lynch policy or not... especially in these newbie games.
So on to more important matters, here's an idea:
last person in the thread gets lynched A couple of you (SDM for instance) are concentrating at how stupid an idea lynching the last person is. Let's look at motivations for this: 1) Thrawn as town - prevent the lurker discussion from going overboard. Present an idea that should provoke an "you're an idiot" response from town members (with a long shot of some mafia jumping on him about the idea). 2) Thrawn as mafia - Put up an idea that a thinking town would take seriously, make himself look suspcicious. Possibly lynch the most inactive player if it works. The idea has far superior town motives. remember that Thrawn didn't linger on the idea. He dropped it after the responses were pretty clear on it. SDM did + Show Spoiler +Sonic Death Monkey Sweden. September 18 2012 15:12.
Is this question serious? I think Thrawn has sufficiently answered the question. I also believe that thrawn's defense of kush earlier was not indicative of scum. + Show Spoiler + thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 12:36. Posts 1077
So him having that anti-lurker opinion is not anything that would be a strong tell in either the town or mafia direction The argument that Remedy was more of a shot in the dark, seeing as all of us hate lurkers. Thrawn dismissed a possibly dumb argument before a giant flame war started (kush did give warning earlier). I also support thrawn's logic with drazak: + Show Spoiler +thrawn2112 United States. September 18 2012 14:45. Posts 1077
On September 18 2012 13:49 drazak wrote:
I'm already accused of being trashy town? Really Kush? Man, you're prejudiced right off the bat. I know you can post while you're at work and stuff, but I can't post in class and I can't post when I'm tutoring people. If you'd like I can sleep-post and it'll be really bad. Sorry if my posts last game weren't up to your posting standard kush.
For the record, I might not post consistently at different times, and maybe I'll push agressively against someone, my reasons will usually be good. I'd ask that people use their own logic after reading my posts, look at the evidence provided and use your logic. Last game we had a lot of people not thinking for themselves, I'll be going to bed soon so don't expect another post from me. I'll probably post in the morning, and I think I'll post before tutoring, but I don't think I'll be posting until maybe this time tomorrow again after that.
My thoughts while reading this: "man this guy is going out of his way to defend himself when there's no need to"
Thrawn is currently not timid about calling people out within reason. To add to the argument, drazak's post also sounds indecisive. might, maybe, probably, think. While that alone is not anywhere near enough to condemn someone, it does raise suspicion on drazak. I think thrawn is town. Anyone with evidence pointing otherwise, please present. Your hardcore defense of thrawn is suspicious and it seems to lack logic. Making a strong town read, especially this early on, is really stupid and anti-town because it makes this person more comfortable, whereas asking more questions will induce more information (information is always good, as it can be used for scum and town reading). You're going thru all thrawn's posts and try to rationalize them from a town perspective. Having played as scum in my last two games and now experiencing the confusion that is townie, this looks like someone having full information. I can't believe someone without extra information would be willing to actually draw this conclusion based on a handful of early d1 posts. Cockriding one of the most respected player in the field (especially if thrawn = town) is a very convenient scum strategy, as it makes you less likely to be suspected and is an easy way to blend in.
If Debears is scum, I think you are more likely to be townie. That's not some kind of definite read or attempt to association. I view you separetely and think any combination of t/t, t/s and s/s is possible, I just think the apparent cockriding would be a bit less likely for s/s (too apparent for a scum strat, unless it's levelling).
|
Sharrant, I've been suspicious of you for a while and I'm only getting increasingly suspicious as you continue to post. At first it was just a "feel read", but I feel there's a full case to be made now.
You make a case against Kush, a very easy and obvious target Stutters had been attacking before. This is not necessarily scummy, but it's certainly not very townie. The arguments against Kush are mainly:
1) Flip-flopping on whether posting one post per day is good enough.
2) Insincere wrt his apology to Cubu.
3) Skeptic about his rationale for wanting to avoid being NKd.
1) Kush's "one post per day is good enough" was silly, but it had been attacked before. It thus becomes an easy target for scum and it's and doesn't require original thinking (original thinking as scum, when you know who's town and not, is suprisingly difficult).
2) It's possible his apology was insincere, but how does that make him scum?
3) Again, this was a silly statement by Kush, but it had already been attacked by Stutters and is an easy target.
What really came off as weird though, was how he not only implied Kush was scum, but that he even was SK. Seriously, that read is so specific it's ridiculous. To be claiming reads on SK this early, a 1 in 13 shot assuming there's even one in the game, is really weird. Spotting a SK hasn't even been in my range of thinking this early into d1. It's interesting though, because the players likely to be thinking about a SK this early in the game is scum. Just consider the information they've got. They know all townies and all maffia, figuring out if there's a SK is their only "black box" aside from blue roles (which he also mentions in his post). It's not at all weird for scum to think about SK at this point, but I do find it weird for townies. Ask yourselves, before his post, had any of you guys even been you guys been even considering a SK read?
Now to what I find to be the strongest part of the case, thrawn just pointed out a classic scum slip: voting for someone you don't think is the most likely scum. He thinks lynching him to resolve "a distraction" and for information on thrawns allignment. Other than that his read has been that he's town and no additional reasoning is given.
I'll admit, while playing XXVI I didn't really know this was a scum slip. Kush did it and I just found it weird. However, after I had gotten lynched, I was having a conversation with one of the coaches (Hapahauli). He said he was 99% sure Kush was the final scum because of those scum slips. He was absolutely amazed that he was not. It's documented in the Obs QT and I could quote some PMs as well, but I'm not sure I'm allowed.
Anyway, the Obs QT is here and the main post I'm referencing is post #46. In it, two of the reasons given for a Kush being scum is because he:
1) Saying "cubu is probably town" and voting him anyway.
2) Wanting to lynch Cubu to determine Thrawn's allignment.
Sounds familiar? I know Kush turned out to be town, but a coach considering this to be such a strong read and coupled with my other suspicions, I think it's a good case. I'm willing to hear you out, but for now my I'm going with...
##vote Sharrant
|
Btw, I had to put that case out there because I'm going to bed now and I didn't want to present it too close to deadline (not sure when the next time I can post will be, hopefully before work in ~7 hours). It's my strongest case of d1. I still think Debears is kind of suspect acting with too much confidence, but when going back to read both thrawn's and Debears' filters I'm afraid it was me being stupid for not realizing thrawn's intentions while Debears did.
Also, I guess the official voting is in this thread this time around and I just used incorrect formating:
##Vote: Sharrant
|
Sharrant, I don't have time to read you defense tonight, but I will hear you out tomorrow.
|
On September 19 2012 19:46 kushm4sta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 15:52 Stutters695 wrote:I'm really not sure about Kush. He's hard to read. He's active however so I'd like to see him contribute more and get a better read on him. One major question for him: On September 18 2012 20:27 kushm4sta wrote:
@stutters I want to improve my play because last game I sucked quite hard. anyone can attest to that lol. I also don't want to be the best town because getting nk sucks imo. I like being around for the end of the game. I'm just being honest. but thanks for accusing me because it makes it less likely that ill be nk, since scum usually kill the towniest person.
what I said about flame wars.. that is what I did in the last two previous games. for instance drazak accused me really hard and I basically just called him a bad player again and again. I am trying to avoid that this game though.
I really hate waking up to people fosing me...feels bad Why were you honest about this? Telling everyone you're going to avoid getting night-killed so you can maintain a pointless streak serves no purpose from a town perspective. All it does is provide excuses for you for any potential bad play and if you're town waste time on unnecessary discussion. You also say: On September 19 2012 11:46 kushm4sta wrote:
Killingtime is missing. Seems pretty convenient that he goes missing as soon as the heat is off him. But for now there are more important matters to discuss since I doubt a banwagon on killing is happening.
I'm not going to vote yet. Day 1 scum reads are pretty bad. They are necessary, definitely, but it seems like they are just wrong more often than not. This leads me to the unpopular topic:
How do people feel about lynching a lurker. I would much rather lynch a lurker day 1 than let them sit there with his automatic null read forever. And who would we lynch instead? A possible active townie who is just playing bad?
Think about this, we have serious lurkers in CUBU and ATREIDES.
We have semi lurkers in REMEDY and STUTTERS.
How sure are you that Sharrant is mafia? Personally I'm not sure enough to vote for him over a lurker. He says he isn't sure enough to vote Sharrant over a lurker, but he's willing to vote debears. What makes you think he is a better scum lynch than removing a lurker or lynching Scharrant. bringing up the nk shit again....ok. i think its bad play to make yourself a nk target because you are worthless if you are this super strong townie d1, then get nk n1. I think thrawn is a good player but he definitely fell into this trap last game. he made himself a target and his death told us nothing. I only bring this up again to save stutters the task of reading through my filter.
This is just wrong. You're basically saying that not making good contributions is a good thing because otherwise you'll end up getting NKd. The problem is that with that strategy we end up without any good contributions and we can't solve the game.
The obvious and correct strategy is for EVERYONE to make good contributions. That way it doesn't matter who gets NKd because there are others making good contributions to cover for the loss.
|
Some thoughts on d1 so far.
The thrawn and Debear association:
+ Show Spoiler +In short, it's a silly case, but here's why. When a game starts and from my point of view as town, there's a 25% chance a random player is scum, so at the start of the game a d1 mislynch is pretty likely. We want to lynch someone with preferably >>25% chance of being scum. Making a pure association read is silly (which is what rethos is making), because the chance of two random people both being scum is only ~5%. In other words, you need a really good reason to support an association, because the default is so unlikely. Let's look at his reasonings. On September 19 2012 16:21 rethos wrote:
Ok i have looked back through thrawn2112 and debears filters. There is one thing that is very odd. They are always on the same page they are always agreeing. BUT they never talk. How can two people be always on the same page without ever interacting? This is really not that weird. I basically never respond to someone making a town read on me. Why would I? Also, if I make a town read on someone, it rarely ends up with me having a discussion with this person. Why? Simply because if my read is town I don't think he's suspect and I don't have question to ask about suspect behaviour. On September 19 2012 16:21 rethos wrote:They are always in sync they always think the same. thrawn2112 agrees with what debears is doing, finds nothing suspicious all is ok. debears is certain on his thrawn2112 town read and he follows thrawn2112 in voting for Sharrant. He ofcourse says that they have "beaten him to the punch" meaning that he had a case on him but the others were faster. He never presents said case even though it would be useful for everybody. (You need to clarify what you meant by that post debears - see I am not asking questions  ) Everybody has noticed the interaction everybody is mentioning it but nobody is mentioning the fact that they don't communicate at all. thrawn2112 has preatty much talked to everybody that was willing to answer back but not debears. They never answer eachothers posts, always answer to posts made by other players about the other on of them. This all screams to me that there is out of thread interaction. I am happy with either one of them going. Seeing that there is a greater possibility that debears gets lynched than thrawn2112, my vote is on him. From my experience, I would find it unlikely that the d1 conversation in the Maffia QT was thrawn saying something along the lines of: "Day 1 we should agree with eachother. Debear, you start riding my dick to establish an association between us. Agree with everything I say". In XXVI me and Xatalos had the exactly opposite conversation. We wanted to create some distance between eachother, attack eachother's reasonings etc. This is way more easy to do d1 rather than later on. I'm not saying this is proof of a non-association, I'm just saying the association read is weak. Fwiw I still think your way of analyzing is good. Lack of interaction can indeed be scummy and might imply out of thread conversations. I just don't think it makes for a strong case here.
Thrawn and Debear are both masons:
+ Show Spoiler +This is an even stronger and worse attempt at an association read. Yet again, I don't see why masons would go out early d1 and make their connection super apparent. It's not a good argument. Not only that, but we really should be discussing blue roles, that's fucking stupid since it'll help maffia. I realize masons aren't technically blue, but the roles are helpful for town. That's all I've got to say.
Thrawn by himself as scum:
+ Show Spoiler +People seem to have think I had strong suspicions against thrawn. I never had. His post was just a decent entry point for me to get more information. My approach is like this: push for information -> form an opinion. Me questioning someone doesn't have to mean I'm suspecting him, but it might. The information I got out of it finally didn't turn out to be very useful, at least not good enough to push a case against anyone. At this point my read is slight town: he's active, analytical, asks questions and seems to be making pro town posts in general.
Debear by himself as scum:
+ Show Spoiler +Debear on the other hand was someone I actually suspected and thought I would be able to build a case against. It seemed to me that he had more information than I had, because his conclusions wrt thrawn was something I couldn't understand him making. But oh, the awkward moment when I think I'm about to make a solid case against him, just to realize that any way I look at it, the reason it seemed like he had more information wasn't (necessarily) because he did, but because he had processed the available information much more efficiently.
What was left of my case was loose accusations of him dick riding thrawn to blend in. This alone doesn't make up much of a case. I will say though, that I still think his actions are kind of suspicious. Some of those actions can be rationalized from a town perspective, like thrawn has explained. His lengthy defense of thrawn and him jumping the Sharrant bandwagon immediately after two of the most active posters had present it is still kind of suspicious, just not nearly as suspicious as I originally thought.
Kush, I went through your filter to find some good arguments against Debears, but all I could find was you copying my read. Could you expand on why you think Debears is suspicious?
|
When I went to bed I felt I had made a strong case against Sharrant, but now I'm having some doubts. I still think it's a decent case, but my vote is subject to change (my final vote will probably be 2-3 hours ahead of deadline).
I will be back for questions to Sharrant and hopefully questions to other players as well.
|
Some thoughts on Sharrant. First some comments on Atreides' defense:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 19 2012 11:55 Atreides- wrote:
In defense of Sharrant -
He's in a similar position to debears - bad decisions do not necessarily mean scum. Think about it - what could a mafia hope to gain by this? Getting a lynch is far too ambitious, and a role claim isn't worth getting so much attention to yourself Note that in my case against Sharrant, nothing is based on him simply playing bad. I don't think he's playing bad in the most commonly used sense of the word: he doesn't appear like a confused newbie who has no idea what he's doing. However, there's 1) an odd call out of Kush as SK and 2) a scum slip. On September 19 2012 11:55 Atreides- wrote:
He's actively scumhunting, and both of his ideas (kush being SK, pressuring on debears) are original.
The Kush being SK read I've already commented on. His target is not original and I think calling out SK is weird. The Debears read is most certainly not original, since he's adding basically nothing to my case. He also made after he had already gotten accused.
I also mentioned a feel read yesterday that I didn't commented on. Being a feel read it's possible it's weak, but I might as well spell it out as well as I can to see how others view it:
+ Show Spoiler +Sharrant's is posting not like confused newbie. It's apparent he's got a reasonably good understanding of the game and how it works. If you look at his first posts they are kind of fluffy and don't add much. It's also apparent he's using what I would call a cold, calculating and logical style. Looking back at XXVI, his style is very reminiscent of Xatalos and I would also argue rather similar to mine. This is a style that makes sense for a logical and reasonably good player playing as scum. However, aside from Xatalos and me, there wasn't really anyone using it in XXVI. It seems to me it's not a very common town style, because as town you're usually going to be more confused whether you like it or not.
To add to the read, look at his way of responding to accusations. It's textbook maffia. It says in the maffia guide to just keep calm when faced with accusations and that's how Sharrant has reacted. Again, looking back at XXVI, that's also exactly how Xatalos and myself reacted, but basically no one else. For example, when drazak came under fire he became very apologetic and Stutters shot back with his own accusations.
Like I've said before, one big problem as scum is that you don't know how you would've reacted as town. I found myself pretty much emotionless when someone accused me and kind of like a sociopath asked myself, "how am I supposed to feel here". This is where discrepancy between scum and town might shine through. When I voted for Sharrant, his response was that he was "glad to see another person is voting". That's really not the way I would react to me getting wagoned as town and probably not how you should react.
The reason I think you're likely to feel emotionless and cold as scum is because knowing the allignment of basically everyone in the game, a lot of the excitement is gone. When you make a case on someone, you're just doing it to survive. In contrast, I felt excited making a case against Sharrant because I was having the feeling I was solving a mystery. As scum you're never solving a mystery.
I will make a separate post in response to his answers and about why I'm still not entirely convinced.
|
Damn, I can't keep up. I guess this will be volume 1. Sharrant, first a couple of questions:
1. I want to know your actual experience level. How many games have you played outside of TL? Where did you play games with a SK?
2. Do you have any information on the XXVI game (or other TL newbie games)? If so, how did you get this information?
On September 19 2012 03:14 Sharrant wrote:
People I would like to hear more from: debears, KillingTime, Rethos, Jacob
...
My current suspicions are Kush (SK, possibly blue or self important green), KillingTime/debears (One of these two is mafia I think, more likely KT), Stutters (Maf, low content, low posts)
It seems to me this is the time you mention Killing and Debears. Your read on one of them being scum seems to be completely out of the blue. Killing jumped the Debear wagon because of my case, Debear hadn't really engaged with Killing.
On September 19 2012 05:07 Sharrant wrote:
This whole KillingTime versus debears is interesting though. I believe at most one of them is mafia. I'm really split on this one though.
I don't get this.
3. What about "KillingTime versus debears"? How is the few interaction between them been suspicious? How did you arrive to one of them being scum? What makes their situation something that needs to be "resolved"?
On September 19 2012 06:52 Sharrant wrote:
Everyone keeps saying I had no read on debears, and I'm not sure why. I hope that my last post cleared that up, but if you look back you'll see that I made no mention of him being town. I only made mentions of slight or medium scum tells, or reads that are up in the air when they're on their own.
That's just not true:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 18 2012 23:54 Sharrant wrote:
Other reads I have right now aren't too strong, I have a weak idea that Thrawn and debears are town, and I'm bouncing back and forth between weak town and weak scum on SDM. I'd like to think he's town because so far he's amused me. Drazak is still undecided in my mind until he posts more.
4. How did your read on Debears change from slightly town to most suspicious scum? Your claim that Debears seems slightly town came more than an hour after Debears defence of thrawn.
On September 19 2012 07:45 Sharrant wrote:
I've stated several times that I think Kush is SK, or town. Not mafia. My read was either that he was a townie who just wrote everything that came to mind, or he was the SK. The way he played did not strike me as mafia, it was too independent and too loud.
5. Let me get this straight. Your read of Kush being SK is based on that you think he stumbled into the thread basically saying "I will conciously make bad posts in order not to get NKd"? And the reason he said that is because he's SK and don't want to get NKd?
|
On September 20 2012 01:20 Sharrant wrote:
2. No, I haven't read through any of the games on this forum in detail. I've read through a number of games at mafiascum though.
Have you used any reads from other games when playing this game? If so, how did you get this info?
On September 20 2012 01:20 Sharrant wrote:
When I looked at what they said, I had an incorrect grasp of the roles, their abilities, and their possibilities in this game, looking at it with new information it strikes me as very possible that they are both town.
How was your grasp of the roles was incorrect and how that have changed your view?
|
On September 20 2012 00:16 Sharrant wrote:
And if that happened, you guys would auto lynch me and the guy who came in with the lurker vote. It'd be suicide. Killing one townie (even a blue) is not worth one mafia, let alone 2. KT definitely has been lurking, he only just made a few posts with no substance.
So if I'm mafia, my plan is akin to gamethrowing. I'd be killing two mafia to kill a single person that 3 other people agree is suspicious enough to warrant a vote. THAT MAKES NO SENSE. I'll gladly tell you after my plan fails or succeeds what it was. Hell, at this point it's almost worth dropping just because it's going to get me lynched at this pace.
To be fair, you're not exactly in the sense maknig industry yourself:
On September 19 2012 23:53 Sharrant wrote:
Good morning, everyone.
Yes, SDM, I like staying calm. It doesn't really help if I suddenly flip off the handles at being accused. I stay calm because I know I'm town, and I want to win. If you can't stay calm, and think cooly, you can't set traps for scum. I was happy that you voted for me, just because everyone in this game sits on their hands when it comes to voting, I said before, it's a tool not a weapon. I wasn't happy being under that much pressure right away, I'm still not happy about the amount of pressure I'm under. But it brought more activity and has made people use their votes more. I know I'm innocent, so I know I'll be fine.
I'm used to mafia games where I have more information about the set up of the game, and in those situations using a logical analysis makes for very easy wins.
Now here is where I run into a problem. We're 2 votes away from the point I set out to get debears to. I still want to force a claim on him, no matter how scummy you think that is, it just doesn't make sense from a mafia perspective. Nor an SK perspective. But I have a plan, and I am sticking to that plan. I won't say it's the best plan ever, in fact there's a huge chance that it fails.
Yes, I'm sorry, but your plan is about to fail miserably. Your stoic calmness is not something I'd expect from a townie trying to save his ass. At this it should be apparent you getting lynched is a very real possibility. A townie wouldn't say: "I know I'm innocent, so I know I'll be fine". There's not much pointing in that direction right now.
|
Btw, I think the significance of Sharrant's claim that he wanted to force a claim is being overstated. What he's saying is he wanted a red to claim blue (or green). Not that he wanted a blue to claim blue. It's a long shot and I'm not saying it's a great strat, but starring blindly on one small piece of the puzzle can easily result in a mindless lynch.
|
If we're going for a lurker lynch, I wouldn't go for Stutters. Cubu is a fucking mystery and shouldn't be allowed into any more maffia games. I'm also suspicious of Remedy and Ataheitalos. I haven't really looked into a possible lurker lynch yet, so take those opinions with a grain of salt.
I'm getting a deja vu from XXVI where we had a Stutters vs Cubu wagon. Both were town and d2 was basically just a restart of d1 with two fewer townies. I'm definitely not set only lynching a lurker aorn.
|
On September 20 2012 02:14 Atreides- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 01:48 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
If we're going for a lurker lynch, I wouldn't go for Stutters. Cubu is a fucking mystery and shouldn't be allowed into any more maffia games. I'm also suspicious of Remedy and Ataheitalos. I haven't really looked into a possible lurker lynch yet, so take those opinions with a grain of salt.
I'm getting a deja vu from XXVI where we had a Stutters vs Cubu wagon. Both were town and d2 was basically just a restart of d1 with two fewer townies. I'm definitely not set only lynching a lurker aorn. Typo? I'm guessing that means me?
Yes. You've contributed with absolutely nothing productive when it comes to scum hunting. Your only kind of significant post is a defense of Sharrant.
|
On September 19 2012 00:35 KillingTime wrote:
I don't understand the point of FoS'ing on day 1 - no-one has a huge list of strong scum reads and you can change your vote at any time. If you think someone is scum then you should vote for them, if you are not sure or looking to pressure than a vote is also a much better way to do that than a FOS which at best is just going to cause scum to play more carefully.
Useless fluff 100% trademark.
On September 19 2012 01:56 KillingTime wrote:
Thrawn - I don't think it is a major point, it is a short post - if someone thinks that FOS's are valuable day one, then please tell me why. I thought the discussions about Sonic's "survey" and Thrawns " lynch question" were dumb, which were the main things in the thread at that time.
I think the other things that are on this page are more worth discussing though:
I agree that Kush's statements about not wanting to die were dumb and anti-town. I haven't voted him yet though because a) I think the serial killer case, while I can follow the logic, is a huge overreach when we don't even know whether we have a serial killer. It would be equally plausible to argue that kush was trying to attract attention to himself with that kind of remark. b) Kush made a significant number of dumb comments at the start of XXVI and turned out to be town. That doesn't excuse these comments, but they are not enough on their own to make me think he is scum.
I like sonic's last post on Debears though - For now my feeling is that Debears is mafia trying to blend into the thread. Debears who do you think is scum?
For now:
##Vote:debears
Again useless fluff. Just bandwagoning my Debears case*. Extra useless points for the question to Debears. It might be designed to look like a good contribution while it's really not.
*I've had the feeling when making my Debears case that it seemed to be a retard magnet. A lot of people seemed to be jumping it for no good reasons, which made me kind of paranoid. I got extra paranoid when I realized my case wasn't very good.
On September 19 2012 15:07 KillingTime wrote:
Ok - well I think the best thing for me to do Is go through the questions drazak asked me last night:
Players I want to see more from - There are lots of players in this category:
1. RemedySC - Not much interesting in his posts, nothing scummy but nothing strong
2. Drazak - Again, he made fair points about me and I am answering his questions - he has said he will also try to post more today. If there is one thing that I learnt from XXVI it is that associational cases are bad though. So leave off this how is he connected to X&Y on D1.
3. Stutters
4.Cubu!!! - I am quite happy to policy lynch cubu every game I play with him if he is not posting more. Cubu post more or I will vote for you.
Two strongest town reads: (though town reads are kind of dubious atm, because strong mafia probably look like town now -d1 we are more trying to catch a weaker mafia I think)
1. Thrawn - I don't put much stock in the idea that him & Debears are necessarily linked in some way - but his posting has been strong all day
2. Sonic - Solid town posts, less high up for me though, just because I have the experience of playing with him in XXVI and know he is a strong player who fooled me for large parts of that game.
When I went to bed, I thought Sharrant was towny - he was following the same train of logic that I did and he was . Now I just don't know - others have totally fought with him on asking debears to roleclaim and that was a bad idea, I don't think he is a good d1 lynch, there is too much chance he flips bad town, but he is definitely a player I want to look at more closely as the game progresses
And the most important part - scum:
1.Debears - my scum read on him from yesterday has not changed that much, his hugely defensive posting since then is a bad, and I agree with Kush's attack on his last post. I sort of like that he is attacking rethos - but rethos is an easy target, a lurker who has only posted questions so far. I await to see what he has to say about Sharrant.
2.Atreidies - 3 posts, all bad , random setup speculation. You can pretty much sum up everything he has said so far as "I'm not convinced" - That is not at all scummy per se - but you need to combine that attitude with efforts to scumhunt yourself and contribute actively. Because he hasn't, it looks scummy to me.
"Players I want to see more from". The easiest way to fill a post and try to make it look useful is to simply state which posters haven't been active. Obviously it's not useful. Again it's the same old Debear read that he didn't contribute anything to. The town reads are just fluff. The only new valid point he brings up is about Atreides. I agree with him, but again, pointing out someone isn't posting isn't good scum hunting.
On September 19 2012 22:41 KillingTime wrote:I don't think "having assignments due" makes Cubu any less scummy. Last game we gave a pass D1/2 to weetee who had to get replaced and let Xatalos off the hook because he was at the army - they were still scum and that was a mistake. As far as "My" case (not really "my" case - but my vote) on Debears goes I still prefer him slightly over sharrant. see Debears as more scummy than sharrant because he led with stupid play and then tried to explain it away, whereas on my reading the Sharrant case seems more "bad towny" than a strong scum read, he started trying to help town and then made a dumb mistake. Show nested quote +
also why are so many people already voting sharron? His play is really stupid with the roleclaim call, but stupid play doesn't make you mafia. you think first time mafia would really be so confidently retarded like that?
Isn't sharron's roleclaim call as stupid as my defense of thrawn early on? You could make the same argument for me.
So for me it is kind of similar - but yours looks worse. That said, this game still has too many lurkers - I am not sure at the moment whether debears is strong enough to justify not shooting one of them, hopefully I won't need to make that decision because they will all come in with plenty of useful posts (fat chance).
I think thrawn covered this bad town vs scummy town. Makes little sense.
On September 20 2012 00:30 KillingTime wrote:
I am here at the moment (around for a half hour or so) - if you want to ask me anything then you can. Other than the fact I was away last night (and therefore "lurky" to you) - why else do you think I am scum?
This is probably his most scummy post. Note that he hasn't asked anyone a single decent question indicative of scum hunting, while wanting people to question him. That's a sign of him knowing there's no hunting out there for him, because he's the hunted. He wants to try to clear himself (scum thinking) instead of scum hunt (town thinking).
On September 20 2012 01:40 KillingTime wrote:
I'm going out to dinner. I will happily support a lurker lynch. Stutters or Cubu - both should know better from XXVI. Not commenting on Sharrant atm until I have thought about his new posts more.
Umm yeah, thanks for your input.
|
On September 20 2012 04:37 Stutters695 wrote:
Killing or any other lurker is a better lynch than Sharrant at this point for two main reasons (IMO):
1) Sharrant is active. If he is scum it will reveal itself over time, while if we go into lategame with a bunch of lurkers we're boned in lylo.
2)You guys are painting the SK idea as way too scummy imo. Look at Kush's early posts. Self-survival is usually indicative of a power-role or scum. If he's a blue he wouldn't have so obviously painted a target on himself. If he's scum it seems to reason he wouldn't paint such a big target on himself. Given the option between SK and VT, SK makes a hell of a lot more sense.
I don't necessarily agree with that conclusion but it makes sense and he's putting himself out there on that read and gives us even more of substance to hold him accountable for.
Looking at the lurkers:
Drazak: Would like to see some more from him before the lynch. Nowhere near the least active and he has at least thrown out questions. Wouldn't be our best lynch target imo.
KillingTime has been actively lurking. He has 11 posts during D1. He has only one post with any real content. This is similar to his town play in XXVI but his reads in this have all been agreeing with other people while in XXVI his reads were more based on his observations.
Really I'd like to see a lynch on Cubu.
Regardless of if Cubu is scum or town, Cubu needs to die. For anyone who didn't play in NMMXXVI check his filter there (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=363923&user=153930). 9 posts before he was lynched on day 2. We let him live Day 1 with the hopes his play would improve and it didn't as VT. After we wasted a lynch on him D2 we put ourselves in mylo. We shouldn't let that happen again when we can easily avoid it. Our day 2 lynch candidate will be a much stronger one than our D1 if we're lynching someone active and Cubu has shown no intentions of actually playing.
##Vote Cubu
Would reading my post on Killing make you reconsider? It's not a super strong case, but I agree with him not bringing up own reads, while in XXVI he did. The complete lack of scum hunting coupled with him trying to clear himself makes it look like he's feeling dirty and wants to wash himself clean (scum), rather than attacking others (town).
Anyway, I'm with you on Cubu. I've played with him in two games and over 90 hours he's contributed with NOTHING. If he's got an extra 90 hours in NMMXXVI without contributing that makes it even worse.
I'm still considering my voting options.
|
EBWOP: And my 3 options are Sharrant, Cubu and Killing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
