EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXVII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
| ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
I will attempt to contribute while at work from my phone, but the messages probably won't be that in depth until I get home. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
Lets focus on getting a mafia lynch for the first day. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote: Here are my suggestions for discussion topics: I will try to discuss all your topics. On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote: 1 discuss lurker policy. I know you are bored with it or whatever, thrawn, but for peopel to say how they feel about lurkers and if they want to lynch them or let them lurk (both are viable strategies imo) gives us a baseline for FOSing people that go back on their lurker policy. Like what if a scum says lynch all lurkers, then one of the scumbuddies turns out to be the biggest lurker. That puts him in a bad position that he could avoid without lurker policy discussion. I don't think we should waste the first lynch on a lurker. Without sufficient information it could end up being detrimental to us. However I don't want to forget about people who are lurking and leave them unscrutinized. On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote: 2 I think we should discuss a plan for how to spend time. Here is my proposed plan: Freely making cases against anyone you think is scum in the first 24 hours of the day, then focusing on a couple of the biggest bandwagons in the second 24 hours. Do you like this plan or do you have a better one? I would a more systematic scumhunt this game though. We have to start somewhere, so I'll post a theory. + Show Spoiler + On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote: I am so fucking sick of lurkers from last game. #1 They make the game shittier regardless of if they are scum. #2 They are 100% null reads all game long. You ask them a question and of course they aren't going to responsd because they post like 1 thing a day and dont even read the thread. #3 It gives scum safe people to accuse. Most of the time they aren't mafia but in the 2 games I played both of them had semi-lurker mafia. Lurker Policy: LYNCH ALL LURKERS, semilurkers at the top of the lynch list if we don't have a very strong scumread to bandwagon. Kushm4sta, you say that it gives scum safe people to accuse, and I agree with that point, but your comment in your policy looks like it would fit that point. It would be pretty safe for a mafia if they were able to convince people to lynch lurkers. Also Thrawn pointed out your contradiction. So right now i am FOSing kushm4sta. On September 18 2012 11:18 kushm4sta wrote: 3 Give an introduction of yourself. How experienced are you? Are you a total noob or have you obsed some games? Very important IMO is will you be around for lynch time? That's 9 pm normal time btw if you are new. How active do you plan on being. Honestly I think once a day is okay IF your posts are good. I am RemedySC. This is my first game ever, although I read through two previous threads. I have the lynch day off work, so I will be around a lot that day. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
I also have the next four days off, so just be patient, I'll have something good tonight. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 18 2012 12:08 kushm4sta wrote: remedy getting a good scum read d1 is impossible. It's the easiest thing ever for scum to look like town day 1. Unless we have no lurkers, we should lynch the biggest lurker or the scumiest semilurker but please not someone active. I disagree, nothing is impossible  I don't like that *active* part in the second line. Being active shouldn't exclude someone from a possible lynch candidate, so I still have my suspicions, but i'll leave those for later. ##FOS kushm4sta (There, not in a spoiler!) Now then... This Sharrant vs. Debears arguement. I think both of them are posting very strangely. I have a stronger scum feeling on Sharrant though as of this moment. I don't see why you would switch your vote after having two decently long posts about Kush with a semi-good arguement, and than after one paragraph about debears, change your vote. So I also ##FOS Sharrant I am going to do some more reading and try to have a better argument done before going to sleep. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 19 2012 07:21 debears wrote: Why are you trying so hard to associate drazak, thrawn, and me. Understandly, my earlier posts would link me and thrawn. However, drazak does not come anywhere into play. Look at my filter there is one post about drazak. Debears posts do seem to link him and Thrawn, and if drazak is a part of this trio, than this post could just be another defense for his said teammate. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
I will be back early in the morning. Good night. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 19 2012 19:46 kushm4sta wrote: ok second question: why do I want to lynch debears over sharrant...I talk about this a lot. basically i see scum motivation in debears bad play but not in sharrants bad play. Can you go into more depth about what you see as scum motivation? Most of your argument is in this post. - + Show Spoiler + On September 19 2012 03:11 kushm4sta wrote: ##FOS Debears I looked at this guy's filter again. And yeah it's fishy as hell. So now I'm less suspicious of killingtime, more suspicious of debears. First thing isn't it da bears not de bears?? His initial dickriding of thrawn strikes me as something that could just be indicative of newbie play. It's more productive to make cases against scum than cases for town, especially out of the blue when no one is even accusing the townie. But the latter is easier so it is very possible this is just a newb mistake. But in his latest post he simultaneously continues the dick ride and defends his right to dickride. Incoming possible scumslip: People really need to learn to specify antecedents btw. After about an hour of rereading I figured out that what he is actually saying here is that thrawn's retarded idea to lynch the last person who posts makes him town. He purports himself an expert on the "mafia perspective" even though this is his first game. I would like more explanation about this line specifically: What do you mean mafia would "jump on him about the idea?" As in they would like or get mad at him for it? Are you saying that thinking that idea is bad makes you scum? It is pretty much information that had been mentioned before, so can you elaborate more? | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
Also since people are pushing for a vote from everyone i'll put mine down now. ##Vote Kushm4sta | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
Buddying is a tactic used to subconsciously become perceived as less of a threat by another player. While this is usually done by scum, Townies have been known to do this as well. This is typically accomplished by the buddying player acting unnaturally friendly to its target, either subtly or outright. Originally, this made it so that once the buddying scum died, it implicated the victim they were acting friendly toward. In addition, by budding up to a victim, they will become less likely to want to lynch the buddying player in the first place. More recently, though, this has become used as a pre-emptive accusation against anyone who acts nicely toward another player, regardless of intent. States that townies have been known to do this as well. Also the last sentence... "this has become used as a pre-emptive accusation against anyone who acts nicely toward another player, regardless of intent." So I can see how it would indicate scum, but I don't think it would rule out town either. Also it would be a good way to accuse him of this, and draw attention towards him. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 20 2012 00:47 kushm4sta wrote: @remedy Why would you vote for me at this point? I'm not a serious lynch candidate today. At this point your vote just unfocuses the town. You don't even say why you are voting for me. Your case against me was made a really long time ago. Also it is real weak. And you blast me for the weakness of my cases? You are actually one of the biggest lurkers at this point btw. I would vote for you because I don't believe in the lurker policy lynch, and you're my biggest suspect at the moment. (Answers first two questions.) It's still the first day, my case wasn't made that long ago. Just because it is nearing the end of the day doesn't diminish my case against you. This is my 10th post in the thread since the game started. Explain to me how after saying 1 post is enough to stay out of lurker status, yet you say i'm one of the biggest lurkers. There are still a few who have posted less than myself, and I don't find it necessary to have almost 50 posts in day one, like yourself. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 20 2012 00:54 Sharrant wrote: Well, fuck. I'm sorry, everyone. I had to PM the mod, and the mechanics in this game are similar but not quite the same to what I am used to. Enough to the point that were my plan successful the information would still be 50/50 on proving mafia. Debears, your play has struck me as scummy, but I wasn't playing with full knowledge of the situation. You and Thrawn both stand a much better chance of being town in my eyes than you did 5 minutes ago. So, I'm going with the lurkers now. Remedy, that vote randomly popping up on Kush is pretty suspicious to me, but I'm still more suspicious of stutters. So that's where my vote is going for now, but depending on Stutters next post, it could end up on Remedy very easily. ##unvote debears ##vote stutters695 How is my vote random? I have to vote before the lynch, and i have been clear on who I find the most suspicious. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 20 2012 01:03 kushm4sta wrote: @remedy. lurking is not just about post count. It's mostly about post quality. It's also about when you choose to show up. If you read my posts before the game, I do give my work hours. 12 hour work days is pretty tiring, so I didn't stay up too long after I got off. I have four days off now, so it makes sense I'll be able to contribute more. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 20 2012 01:12 kushm4sta wrote: Remedy postpone your suspicion of me until d2 please. Who of the possible lynches, including lurkers, do you want to lynch? Also guys if we are going to have an choice to lynch a lurker, which one shall it be? Cubu's filter is just enough to prevent modkill. Kush, you seem way too intent on lynching a lurker. Why does it have to be a lurker? On September 20 2012 00:47 kushm4sta wrote: @remedy Why would you vote for me at this point? I'm not a serious lynch candidate today. At this point your vote just unfocuses the town. You say my vote unfocuses the town. Why would my vote on you unfocus the town? Your defense seems to be that my vote would just bring confusion. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
| ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
On September 20 2012 03:23 kushm4sta wrote: The lynch votes are amassing for sharrant. Lynching someone active d1 almost always results in lynching a townie! Can i present an alternative bandwagon for the people who think he's probably town: CUBU... He is winning the race for biggest lurker. At least if he is town we can lynch and not feel so bad if he flips green. So basically he is saying that he will continue to lurk throughout the whole game. Until next week is a long time. We have 3 options. 1 We lynch him now as a policy lynch. 2 We let him live and continue to argue lurker policy until we lynch him. 3 We ignore him and just rely on the 75% chance he is town. Our read of sharrant will get better. Our read of drazak will remain null. I'm unvoting debears but I still suspect him. Just that bandwagon isn't happening anymore and I would rather lynch a lurker anyway. ##unvote debears ##vote cubu Why so obsessed with Cubu? Unless you are mafia and know he would be an easy town to get rid of quickly. You don't even seem to consider whether he is town or scum. Your only reason to lynch him is that he is lurking. Also why would the town feel less badly about Cubu turning up green than sharrant? Everyone else seems to have a good indication that he is mafia. Are you trying to protect him? Does any one else have an opinion on Kush's motives? | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
Gonna look into people who voted for Drazak, starting with who I think is mafia. On September 20 2012 05:34 kushm4sta wrote: OK so as I see it here are our options atm: Sharrant, cubu, killing. Killing is not that much of a lurker. He's not lurker enough to even be considered a lurker IMO. Killing is scummy looking to me, but he looked that way last game too. Okay, so you state the three you want to focus on. Killing would be a reasonable choice, you have pushed for him a little bit earlier. Instead you don't think for yourself and just hop on a bandwagon. I also think saying you're hopping on bandwagon isn't much defense. | ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
| ||
|
RemedySC
Canada176 Posts
I will have a post up with my reads and defense soon. | ||
| ||
