Liquid City Mafia
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
/in | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Biggest thing is stop saying "I wanna lynch player X what do you think?". There is no back up analysis, and it allows people to toss out names at random. You think someone is scum, back it up. Don't say "seems scummy maybe". It lets people sow seeds of suspicion and it makes mislynches more untraceable. Shady's vote makes no sense as VE pointed out. In fact the whole thing doesn't make sense, including how he has already started making connective tells on Kush based on Z-Boson. But it seems just as explainable by a combination of poor play / leftover emotions from TL-LVII. I'd wait to see what he can produce (case wise or whatnot) since arguing whether acting like a troll to incite a mod warning isn't conclusive to determining alignment. VE I don't see your issue with annul - or are you doing one of those reaction things because its leaning on the destructive side right now. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 01 2012 06:18 iamperfection wrote: Thats why i would like to lynch the nuke guy. come in to thread and says he wants to lynch someone and leaves. So do you think he is scum like i do? Well I've played with risk a couple times and he plays the more hands off approach as town. He takes his time with things and doesn't care what people think if he thinks he is right. At the same time he can be totally lazy so you have to wait for him to generate content then evaluate what he brings. Cf. PYP3, Poison Mini Mafia, Beauracracy and Dwarf Mini (town, scum town respective). So right now I'm null on him. What is your take on kush? Easy mislynch or newbie scum? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 01 2012 07:08 kushm4sta wrote: anul seems so angry for no reason. that's how I act when I'm mafia. Could you clarify on the "no reason" part? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Will read up on other candidates and give thoughts on them. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
With a total lack of follow through after his troll antics, he has disrupted early day discussion and dropped off. Not lynching him today on the basis of a potential modkill is stupid - he could easily trade his life for hurting day 2 discussion as well and he might not even be lynched. The nature of the Node lynch is really strange. Reason enough to lean the former. ##Vote: Shady Sands | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 02 2012 12:36 austinmcc wrote: Node lynch is "strange." Is Node himself scummy? Are Node's posts scummy? Node is scummy. I think what you found about his post was valid. However we can only lynch 1 at a time and I find Shady a better target for the reasons I stated. The strangeness of Node's lynch was that there was a disconnect between the push and the votes - you tossed out a bunch of names and his was just picked up. It's enough to sway me to Shady. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
I had less than two hours to reread everything and determine where my vote should go. I wasn't going to waste it talking about people who probably won't get lynched. It's evident that this town suffered a day 1 of inactivity and scum were probably happy to go along with that. The one that stuck out most to me was Mattchew: The clearest thing in his filter is that he is happy to take no stances at all, and is not interested in getting a solid lynch. On September 30 2012 15:02 Mattchew wrote: i re-read shady's "trolling" and it seems extremely forced and thought out. this is either proof to his point of him trying to get warned or him being too nervous to troll casually because he is scum. Which amounts to "Shady could be town because of this, and scum because of this". The next time he posts follow up is On October 02 2012 01:07 Mattchew wrote: Shady said before the game, before he knew his alignment, that he was going to troll. I have yet to see a shady case about his posting after his "trollfest" (if there is I missed it). If we lynch someone for doing something so non-alignment telling we are bad and we should feel bad. If you are voting Shady I want your reasons for the vote beyond "he was trolling and thats anti-town herp derp" STOP VOTING SHADY SANDS WITH SHIT REASONING I was thinking that we should lynch Coag because he hasn't put in any effort after getting mad at Caller about his game. He got mad at Caller for not allowing him to play in a game and then joins this one and parks a vote on Shady with shitty ass reasoning. The thing holding me back on this is that this might actually be how Coag plays, and I dont think I have played with him in a real game that I remember. Austinmc hasn't contributed jack shit, which is very different from his usual productive town self Kingjames was extremely awkwardly wishy-washy with his attempt to call out keirathi. He talks about focusing on scum hunting but has spent almost all his time trying to defend and focusing on himself. His first post also reeks of scum trying to look tryhard townie. I want to a lot more from BC, his lack of contributions make me very nervous about him. ##vote kingjames01 This post shows how detached he is from thread. The context surrounding it is discussion centered around kushm4sta and kingjames01. There is no avalanche of dumb sheep votes on Shady, people are looking into other lynch candidates. There is no purpose other than opposing the Shady lynch without actually calling him town. The rest of his post he calls Coag scummy and then takes it back, calls austinmcc scummy without actually saying it, parroting other people about kingjames and calling out BC. On October 02 2012 08:21 Mattchew wrote: BC mind telling me why you think i am scum? also, I could get down with an austin lynch. he doesn't feel like he is hunting scum as much as he is hunting for an easy out to vote. I am willing to ##unvote for the meantime. I am caught up on the thread but don't actually understand some of the arguments. He says he is caught up on the thread, but doesn't understand the arguments. However, he makes absolutely no effort to understand. He doesn't ask questions, he doesn't apply pressure, nothing. He doesn't care about the lynch. The biggest thing is that he doesn't actually unvote but leaves his vote on kingjames the whole time On October 02 2012 13:14 BlackMamba24 wrote: Deadline Reached, Votes for Day 1 Done. Final Vote Count: kingjames01 (2): keirathi, It is clear cut that Mattchew is making sure that he isn't labeled a lurker with "contributions" when in reality he doesn't care about the lynch at all. He is Scum. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 03 2012 07:05 Mattchew wrote: Sloosh seems to be struggling to post, and seems like he is struggling to type out his thoughts. I think this is because he is scum. I was easy to make a case on because I played like shit day 1. He skews the truth in his case about me when he mentions my stop voting shady sands point. I was clearly saying this to the people that at that moment were voting shady which there were still a lot of at that time (in this thread and +2 to the voting thread). I was also not saying what alignment Shady was, I was just saying that at that time votes on him were stupid. Admitting poor play doesn't excuse it. You cherry picked my case on a tangential point, being that you don't have an actual stance on Shady despite slapping many hands from voting, and you aren't even addressing the main point, that you just didn't care about day 1 lynch. Who do you think tomorrow's lynch should be? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Mattchew still shows he has no intention of caring about anything. I've been waiting to see if he has a proper defense or any meaningful contribution but it seems like he is happy to lurk away. Annul is kush still your lynch of choice going into tomorrow? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Risen can I follow you up on this post? On October 02 2012 01:26 Risen wrote: To sum: I want to see how Shady flips because... 1) He's my top scum read (we'll see how kj responds, and a red Shady doesn't make him green at all) 2) It will tell me more about Z-Boson and ShiaoPi. More so the second part since it seems like you think kj is town. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Probably can't stay up for post so that's it for me for now. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
##Vote: marvellosity Mementoss and Mattchew do you have actual questions for me or are you just gonna keep pointing out how I'm not as active as I usually am, and then go lurk? As for the VE suspicions, I don't see how being wrong is used as a strong indicator of alignment for him when basically everyone else made the same mistakes. Is that the case or did I miss something? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 04 2012 09:04 mkfuba07 wrote: @SloOsh What do you think about my post regarding VE (linked above)? I see it as a reason to see VE as scum that doesn't simply revolve around him being incorrect. Yea, I see your point. I guess it didn't stick out to me because VE is a very social player and he just says stuff all the time and I've learn to dismiss these kind of stuff. While his treatment of 60-75% scum is different from what I would do, I don't think it's a certain tell by itself. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 04 2012 04:56 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Also, after looking through marv's filter and gazing at the people he was fine with lynching and those he defended / tried to suggest were bad options for lynches were Risk.nuke Kush Sharrant. Of these 3 I think it is highly likely that at least 1 is scum. Of the people he accused I think mattchew is most likely to flip red as well. Like, I don't understand how he picked the pool (people marv was fine with lynching and defended from lynching seems to cover the whole pool) and saying that at least 1 is scum seems so prone to a string of mislynches (lynch A, flips town, oh B and C must be more likely to be scum). I'm agreeing with the mattchew read though and can understand the players he picked objectively, but yea it's scary. Anyone you want to talk about? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Then let's talk about the list. I think kush is town based on his demeanor (throwing up thoughts onto thread without the scummy tendency to double check / review). Your turn. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 04 2012 11:54 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Er? Its scummy thing to recheck / review? I don't do that ever unless I am town making some epic post by post analysis. I think he could easily be mafia given his interactions with people, his odd post that he just made This may just be the living up in a household with a mother who is an english major, but using the word "so" as he did seems weird to me. However throwing ones thoughts into the thread mean near jackshit when you look at the last three pages of his filter have been basically none useful. I don't see solid reasoning for reads, I see summarizing of other peoples shit, spam, and the same. I honestly believe if someone is active like he has been this game there should be real content in his filter, and honestly I am not seeing it. It's a general heuristic that town post more freely than scum, who have inherent guilt and are scared of making scumslips etc. That's how you caught goodkarma last game no? I agree that there isn't much substance in his filter, but it's feels different from the typical trying-to-blend-in-with-town lack of substance. Worth a vig shot, not a lynch kinda thing. Thoughts on Sharrant's more recent posts? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 04 2012 13:53 BloodyC0bbler wrote: I will keep a better eye on kush to see if my view of him is off but hes still suspect to me. Sharrant needs to post more. Looks too much like feigned activity and given that he hasn't even posted once since the day post went up I will keep him on my possible scum list. What is your view on him? Yea I'd go further and put him at probable scum given his latest post. His comments on players are more summaries and recaps of thread sentiments, he shies away from making any concrete stances, and does a good job spreading suspicions over a large pool even on his not-scum reads. He hasn't bothered to comment / vote on marv so it shows that he isn't actually reading the thread, but wants to make sure he is seen with contribution, probably in light his name being brought up for discussion by us. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 02 2012 12:33 slOosh wrote: Guh didn't realize how much time I actually take to read. Between Node and Shady Sands I'm leaning Shady. With a total lack of follow through after his troll antics, he has disrupted early day discussion and dropped off. Not lynching him today on the basis of a potential modkill is stupid - he could easily trade his life for hurting day 2 discussion as well and he might not even be lynched. The nature of the Node lynch is really strange. Reason enough to lean the former. ##Vote: Shady Sands | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
ToutEstChaos you seem smart - if kush were no more would he be your #1 lynch pick? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Cool let's talk about something more substantive. Out of the pool of "vets" who is most scummy? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
So you don't think this means anything? On October 06 2012 03:44 ToutEstChaos wrote: Well, I'd have believed it better if you'd divulged these reads immediately rather than waiting 20 minutes (enough time to, say, make up for not reading the thread), but this is infinitely better than before. I recognize that I've been somewhat strident with you. Thank you. Or his read on DP means anything? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 06 2012 07:00 Promethelax wrote: hey SloOsh what are your reads on anyone? You seem to think Kush is town and that is all i can find in your filter. I also see a call out of my previous incarnation, still think I'm scum? If not who is? My initial Mattchew case still stands - he hasn't properly addressed it and is compounded by his continuous inactivity / contribution-less posting. Furthermore the only times he pops into the thread is when his name is mentioned. Along those lines I'm kind of wary of BC. I engaged in his 3 of 1 must be scum idea to get better reads off the people and him, but he dropped off and hasn't really followed up on the thought, which suggests that what I initially thought of the post: On October 04 2012 10:58 slOosh wrote: Yea I know what you mean. Like, a post that scares me is Like, I don't understand how he picked the pool (people marv was fine with lynching and defended from lynching seems to cover the whole pool) and saying that at least 1 is scum seems so prone to a string of mislynches (lynch A, flips town, oh B and C must be more likely to be scum). I'm agreeing with the mattchew read though and can understand the players he picked objectively, but yea it's scary. might be the correct interpretation. But this might just be wariness of a feared scum player, if he posted follow up my suspicions would probably subside. I had a slight townread on kush, as one of those (unintentionally) disruptive town players. The gut feel is still there. You just started posting so I'll have a better idea soon enough. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 06 2012 06:54 VisceraEyes wrote: *raises hand* Err ... do you want to talk about the people going against you? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 07 2012 03:34 VisceraEyes wrote: Coagulation My main issue with coag's play hasn't been his inactivity. It's the fact that when asked for his scumreads, he invariably chooses people for reasons he himself is guilty of. Most recently he threw out myself and BC as scumreads, citing activity. Ok that's a flat out misinterpretation. On October 06 2012 05:58 Coagulation wrote: Ve is scummy cause of his activity levels in comparison to other games and he gives up after his butt buddy marv gets lynched is very telling. BC is scummy because he basically has no problem ignoring anything outside of the town spotlight. very un BC like. Coag cites two reasons for VE and one for BC. For VE it is a meta-activity read, and giving up. For BC it is where his attention is directed (also meta-enforced read). At most 1 of three are activity based, and that itself means nothing because he is comparing town VE's activity to this game's VE. For it to be hypocrisy is for town Coag's activity to vary from this game's Coag. Additionally VE chooses to focus on the could-be scumslip instead of fleshing out his main issue, Coag's supposed hypocrisy. Inactivity is a coin-toss for alignment. Direct misinterpretation is not. Also, ##Vote Hapahauli | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 07 2012 06:07 Promethelax wrote: I believe it is very scummy, but my reads on VE tend to be less reliable than those on other players (cf. my day 1 case against him in LIII, where he flipped jailkeeper), so I'm taking this one slowly.slOosh, just so I can be sure: you think that VE is scum based on his case on Coag. Is this true? Yes or no? Do you agree with my analysis / have input on VE himself? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
To all concerned that I'm not playing like I usually do - you are all using meta terribly. My playstyle is reactive. I poke and prod and gather information and then bust out a case. If people are lurking and give 1 line responses I can't do my thing. Now that we finally have an open lynch tomorrow and people are actually posting you can expect my "regular" play. Excusing BC because the benefits of an SK is ridiculous - we don't know the nature of the 3rd party role, and people are forgetting that it has some higher order win condition that ends the game. BC is the best lynch for tomorrow. We have mementoss' claim, and you can see even how he reacted to the claim by discrediting him ("horribly bad townie or mafia") instead of trying to come to mutual understanding. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
##Vote BloodyC0bbler | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
It's pointless speculation as to what his name or his role function is. All we know is that if mementoss is telling the truth then scum goon node alone visited BC on N1 and he didn't die. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 09 2012 13:28 Keirathi wrote: I already said I think that there is just as likely a chance that BC is vet as there is that he's third party. Neither option makes more sense than the other. You have no problem with the fact that his initial response to the accusation is to cast doubt on mementoss and discredit him even if he were town? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 09 2012 22:41 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Lets look at your first post of the game mr Sloosh Now lets really look at the bolded part there. He clearly says if you think someone is scum you should be backing it up. This is important as it shows he really cares about analysis and wants to avoid miss lynches. Its also something a townie sloosh would be doing all game. This is pure fluff plain and simple. Is it an accusation? How is this relevant to the case? If you read this objectively you can see that all it does is set up this figure of a "townie sloosh", something vague and subjective, and because I'm not playing like "townie sloosh" would, I must be scum. On October 09 2012 22:41 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Note these two posts. A townie sloosh would have discussed his personal views of node originally rather than having to be pushed for them. On top of that given that we know node flipped red, and that shady and austin (who pushed the node case first) were both town. Whats worse is sloosh also discredits the "case" in a sense against node by saying austin just threw out some names and node was latched onto. If there had been no case no one would have taken it, so obviously the case had to be compelling. It is a very subtle defense of node. The only connection to the previous quote is the figure of a "townie sloosh". The first quote talks about my desire that players back up their lynch with analysis. Which I did. I wanted to lynch Shady Sands and I gave my reasoning. There is no contradiction here, but BC is making it look like there is. The context of D1 was that it wasn't really clear where the lynch was going to, the main lynch candidates were afk most of the time and that it was marv who lead the lynch onto Node. It is not "obvious that the case had to be compelling" but BC is twisting the nature of D1 to make it look like this. Furthermore, BC is criticizing me for finding strange someone he himself found weird / suspicious. On October 02 2012 08:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Austin did what I think is insanely weird play and jumped out at me as scummy whereas annul has only done things that leap out and scream annul. He is one of the few people I find extremely hard to read and always have. On October 09 2012 22:41 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Now, these posts from day 2 are almost all in order. I skipped one as it was quoted in a response of a response he had to me that I had quoted his post. He starts off by asking for opinions on me. Now, remember the first post of his, and his first post of the game I have up at the top of this post? It comes off as odd as before he shares his own view, he opts to wait until he gets a response. He then tosses up a post that shows why he finds me suspicious yet openly states with the words "I don't understand how he picked the pool" yet then in the next sentence states "I agree with his read on mattchew and can understand the players he picked objectively" He OPENLY STATES HE DOESNT UNDERSTAND. Then states that he does? and that he agrees with one of those reads? He casts doubt via 1 post while agreeing with it and being contradictory in his own post. This is not something someone who was honestly suspicious of me being scum would do. If he believed I was scum for this he would not be this contradictory. Town Sloosh is very careful with his posting, and this is incredibly poor for a post. Don't worry, he then backed off when I explained how I did so, then asked why I thought kush was scum, and when I give a general reason he instantly defends him. Keep in mind this is sloosh' best read to this point. He is damn near certain mattchew is scum, and that kush is town. Again, BC is making out contradictions that don't exist. It is clear that my problem is not in the people themselves (I didn't have town reads on them) but the way he picked them. I'll quote myself to make it clear. On October 04 2012 10:58 slOosh wrote: Yea I know what you mean. Like, a post that scares me is Like, I don't understand how he picked the pool (people marv was fine with lynching and defended from lynching seems to cover the whole pool) and saying that at least 1 is scum seems so prone to a string of mislynches (lynch A, flips town, oh B and C must be more likely to be scum). I'm agreeing with the mattchew read though and can understand the players he picked objectively, but yea it's scary. It's clear my problem is how he picked the pool and how it is "prone to a string of mislynches". If you look at my line of questioning with BC, not only is it to get a read of the three players but it's also to see if he believes what he writes. I ask about kush, then sharrant (replaced by Prom). If he really believes this then his focus should be centered around risk / kush, which it isn't. Even when he throws out his multiple scum reads, he doesn't mention marv at all when talking about risk. Which shows that he doesn't actually believe it but did it to set up strings of mislynches. The latter part again shows this "townie sloosh" and what he would and would not do. Look carefully what he is doing. He isn't calling me scum. He is calling me not "townie sloosh". This is basically a case of meta, but in a way that people won't check for themselves. He is making unsubstantiated claims and trying to get me lynched off a figure that he made up. On October 09 2012 22:41 BloodyC0bbler wrote: His final case that is him justifying his vote on me. Note the lack of case. He wants to lynch me because we as a town "dont know the nature of the 3rd party role, and people are forgetting that it has some higher order win condition that ends the game." He doesn't make a case as to why I am third party, he makes a case that the third party role could end the game. He then states mementoss' claim (which I already responded to) is justification along with how I reacted. Given that mementoss was on my scum read list, given that scum have been trying to get me shanked all game, it is pretty obvious I would be wary of said player. However this is all he has. He hasn't made a single case since day 1 and just seeds doubt. He doesn't state through example posts why he believes he is right, or even attempt to solidly push me, he instead opts to do a 1 post with 0 analysis and seed doubt. A townie sloosh builds cases. The only case sloosh has made this entire game is This has not changed in anything he has said for his strongest scumread. He isn't pushing his scum read. Instead he is pushing a player he has not analyzed and has been seeding doubt on for days for being third party. You know who currently is more scared of me being third party? Scum. Sloosh has done absolutely nothing to help this town, and has sat back in the sidelines. He has stated as a reason for not contributing solid reads is that he is a reactive player, yet he was able to get enough information to build a case day 1 on mattchew (one he never pushed forward to have him lynched btw but was fine defending scum node and killing shady) and has not even touched on him since aside to say "i still think hes scum". Vote sloosh More misinterpretation and lies. The context is clear why I voted BC yet he making out a side point that I'm addressing as the main reason of my vote. He is victimizing himself saying that scum have been trying to kill him all game. I never seeded doubt for days for him being third party. The whole third party thing was only recently brought up with mementoss' claim, which shows that he has inherent guilt - people suspected him as scum but he interprets it as suspect for third party. BloodyC0bbler is backed off into a corner because of mementoss' claim, makes the convenient claim, and then decides to forgo his three main scum reads to deflect the lynch onto someone who has some suspicions pointed toward him, while accusing me of what he is culpable of. There is misinterpretation and lies throughout his case, and it is clear he has a guilty mindset of a third party. Lynch BloodyC0bbler | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 09 2012 23:29 kushm4sta wrote: I don't want to lynch BC tomorrow. He is either 3rd party or vet but I haven't seen compelling evidence favoring one or the other. BC's sloosh case - I think a lot of the points BC brings up can be explained by sloosh's afking/disinterest. Basically not reading the thread, which I can't blame him for. I am still undecided whether or not I could bring myself to vote for sloosh. @sloosh how are you so sure that BC is 3rd party and not vet? I'm pretty damn sure. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 09 2012 23:49 risk.nuke wrote: Sloosh, why do you want to lynch into third party rather then scum? My third party read is much much stronger than my scum reads. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 10 2012 12:02 Z-BosoN wrote: Regarding the VE claim Right now, I find it's legit. I find it odd that he would waste an investigation on kush, of all people, but I find it even harder to believe that someone would bother framing him. Someone also said there were no longer any miller roles (correct me if I'm wrong), so this makes it a ton more likely that kush is scum. The only other possibility is that this is a baller play from VE bussing his scum friend, but that's just... dumb. Going to check some other filters in a sec. For now, ##Vote kush4masta A terrible way of trying to blend in but at the same time trying to make VE look bad by questioning his check. Why bring up possibilities that are "just dumb" at all? It's pointless fluff trying to blend in. The 3rd party business is misinterpretation. Where did I ever say I wanted to lynch 3rd party over scum? I never did and its a bogus made up reason to lynch me. ##Unvote: BloodyC0bbler ##Vote: kush4masta | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 10 2012 13:12 Z-BosoN wrote: Because they exist. I've explained that in the same post you have quoted. Here, let me quote it for you: There you go see? I think it's odd --> I raise the possibility of it existing. I then make the remark that it's just more likely that he's straight up telling the truth. I've also seen VE do crazy shit as scum, so I'm just leaving that there so people don't ignore every single case against him and go "omg omg VE is town!". I still have my suspicions, and I want to make that clear. I don't see what you gloating about Where did you ever say you wanted to lynch 3rd party over scum? Really? That's when you said "Vote BC". You'd rather him die than actually try to find another scum. Are you so doubtful on your own ability to scumhunt? Perhaps that was force of habit - all my giant cases tend to end with a call to lynch. Are you seriously trying to suggest that I was shutting down all other discussion? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 10 2012 13:42 VisceraEyes wrote: He claimed vanilla town, and then later claimed "concerned citizen" after I, like a dumbass, revealed the name of Coag's role. It's ok it was already in the OP (since D1 flip). | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Z-BosoN looks much better when he handled the pressure last night. Guy looks town. So as we wait for MMT, ##Vote: Mattchew | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
MMT how do you figure for the other KP? Or do you think there is only 1 anti-town KP? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 12 2012 23:47 Mementoss wrote: ya what I said is almost definitely wrong lol, I thought after mafia enforcer was killed there was only 1 anti town kp, guess not. Hapa flipped enforcer like 2 cycles ago ... Also, do you still prefer ShiaoPi over Mattchew? What do you make of him jumping on DP's "scumslip"? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 13 2012 01:12 VisceraEyes wrote: Now. What does everyone think of Kreb? The guy has been on my case for days...it occurs to me that scum wouldn't be so willing to "come at me bro" when so many people believe (on some level) my claim. Too risky. Anyone else wanna weigh in on this guy? Initially thought Kreb was just someone who likes to setup spec, but there's mafia agenda in his play. Namely working things for a VE lynch. Regardless of what you may think of VE's alignment the way he goes about it is scummy. Here gives his opinion of Z-BosoN when he starts getting pressured (primarily by VE), and starts by saying his defense is terrible but by the end decides that he doesn't look that bad. After the kush flip he agrees with Z-BosoN against VE: On October 11 2012 19:09 Kreb wrote: Thats actually a very good point. Its really about time we lynch him. He flips from "suspecting" ZB to agreeing with him in lynching VE, the guy whom ZB's defense was against. On October 11 2012 21:25 Kreb wrote: Theres strange things going on with these claims. There a seemingly massive amount of Blues in the game (does mafia have something else to balance the possible town advantage of plenty of blues then? if so, what?) while still being 4 unclaimed roles (hitman, coroner, detective, arsonist). Thats one 3rd party, but could be another blue among the rest. Cant really put my finger on what it could be though. All claims seem somewhat valid, but that doesnt feel right either. Along with a string of similar quotes, he pushes forth the idea that there are inordinate blues - but he does it in a way that casts doubt on the living blue claims VE and MMT. Notice how VE isn't suspicious because of his behavior now, but because of his claim (which seems "somewhat valid"). On October 11 2012 23:13 Kreb wrote: Or wait a second again. If VEs role is a cop+rolecop, that means there must be a alignment+role Framer for Kush to have been Framed. Thats seems quite unlikely. Had Kush flipper Coroner it would have all made sense, but he flipped Vanilla Townie. It seems really unlikely theres a alignment+role Framer.... Stuff like this is indirect doubt on VE without actually saying it. 'if VE is rolecop+cop then there must be a alignment + role framer, but an alignment + role framer is really unlikely to exist, so ... (VE is a liar but I'm not gonna say it up front)' - kinda thing. It's only much later he finally commits to a vote even though it's the thing he has been talking about the whole time, and when grilled by risk, his reasoning is based on the premise that VE is scum and justifying / doing setup spec around this, opposed to drawing conclusions from the events. I'd be down with a Kreb lynch. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 13 2012 03:12 Z-BosoN wrote: Can someone please be explain to me this KP mechanic? You sacrifice 1-2 KP so that someone's flip changes, is that right? Why is that so costly? The only advantage I can think of is that town thinks the scumteam is bigger then it actually is... Are there any other KP saving mechanics you guys are aware of? Kush's meta seemed like he was indeed town, which made me think that, but that could have been fabricated if he was scum with the knowledge that he would pop town. It's setup speculation, and no one really knows because affecting flips like this is really rare. Like the controversial Death Millers from LIII, but reverse. The idea is that scum "spend their KP" for other effects, in this case to make kush flip town. Wanna flesh out the reads you have? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 13 2012 05:35 VisceraEyes wrote: I mean, when you dumb it down and generalize it like that... You know what I mean though? Am I wrong in thinking that? Almost no one is hip to lynch me today, WITH a wrong flip and "bad" check last night. The check last night was wholly self-serving, no one in town should think it's a GOOD check...but no one seems interested in lynching me today. So why would scum attack me? It just seems like unnecessary attention - there are better ways to "blend in" ya know? I know what you mean - with 2 (or 3 if you think kush scum) lynched in a row, naturally you would think scum try to lay low and just avoid modkill threshold, and trying to start something with you would be counter intuitive. That said 2 KP just went missing last night instead of the straight forward roleblock/shoot-the-blues plan, so I don't consider weird / extreme play that improbable. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 13 2012 08:13 Kreb wrote: First bolded part: Im not sure why you say Im suspecting ZB. I never said that, dotn put words in my mouth please. And quite frankly, even if I said towards the end "ZB look really scummy because of this and I have strong suspicions of him", what makes it so that I cant agree on points he make anyway? Second bolded part: LOL? Is your argument that Im trying to shift suspicions VEs way without committing myself? If anything, I've been pretty damn clear of my suspicions of VE whole game. If you want to hold that against me, fine (I've been questioning my own tunneling a fair bit tbh, so if you do the same thats natural). But you accuse me of doing the opposite? "indirect doubt on VE without actually saying it"? The fuck? Oh, and you're pretty damn right Im trying to cast doubts on VE. Thats because I have pretty big doubts of him and I want him lynched. If that wasnt clear Im not sure how I could make it clear. And how exactly has are my conclusions not based on events? Meanwhile, this is the second time you strangely try to start suspicions of people. First time on BC where you backed off very soon. This time your whole post seem to have been provoked by VE asking a broad question of what people think of me. Is that really the best you can do, cant you initiate any reads at all rather than jumping on other possibilities opening up? Oh, and you still havent said a word about why you voted Matt. Im waiting. First part: There is no point of calling someone's defense incredibly weak if you think they are town - it only serves to cast doubt on said player's alignment. If you truly suspect someone as scum you would put less trust in what they say because of scum agenda influencing their posts. On October 10 2012 17:25 Kreb wrote: That is actually an incredibly weak defense when I read through it again though lol (might have ro re-evaluate my 10min old claim of VE/Boson exhange being less scummy.....). Second part: I don't know which one but it's from Ace's mafia strategy guide. Scum plant ideas into town so they present it as their own, making it difficult to trace back the origin. Doesn't matter if you claim your stance on him was clear from the start. If you really thought him scum through and through you don't concede that the claims seem valid. Scum can't make valid claims. On October 11 2012 21:25 Kreb wrote: Theres strange things going on with these claims. There a seemingly massive amount of Blues in the game (does mafia have something else to balance the possible town advantage of plenty of blues then? if so, what?) while still being 4 unclaimed roles (hitman, coroner, detective, arsonist). Thats one 3rd party, but could be another blue among the rest. Cant really put my finger on what it could be though. All claims seem somewhat valid, but that doesnt feel right either. I backed off BC when I cooled off and realized that we should be hunting scum specifically. How was that strangely started suspicions? It was based off a blue claim. As for voting Matt, he hadn't done anything at time of vote (and still hasn't delivered what he promised on iamperf or whoever). Pressure vote / policy vote / lurker scum vote, call it what you want. People respond to votes. ##vote Kreb As for peeps who still can't see BC as 3rd party should read more carefully. On October 13 2012 09:25 BloodyC0bbler wrote: In any exchange I would always be offed first given the massive suspicion on me and it would confirm your theory while removing what everyone believes an anti town influence from the game. Yet instead you opted to check SOMEONE WHO HAS ALREADY CLAIMED. Who no one has doubted the claim of. Unlike any other player in the game, it has been proven I cannot be scum, thus if you are mafia and believe I am third party you would have to guess at my role. If you are town you would receive my role. On October 13 2012 09:52 BloodyC0bbler wrote: There are 13 players alive by my count. Removing 4 of those from a pool of suspects? you have 9 players that could combine the remaining scum. Not just that based on the amount of shots on average per night, it looks like top kp is 2 atm by scum. IE of 3 remaining players from the situation I outlined, at least 1 would still be alive or two depending on the situation. It also allows everyone to begin analyzing on the only people in the game that matter as they would be the only remaining players that could be scum. Any player who gives a shit as town would at least attempt to prove them self not scum in some manner, while scum would be eventually fucked quite quickly. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
##Vote: Mattchew | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 14 2012 10:43 Keirathi wrote: Where did the KP go? It had to go somewhere. If they had an ability they could trade KP for, then it would probably activate today. Although I guess it could be something like Delay too. I don't buy that mafia didn't send in kills or roleblock. Someone is gonna get lynched this cycle. Put your vote somewhere. On September 25 2012 03:01 BlackMamba24 wrote: 5. In the event of a tie the person with the most votes first wins (or loses). 6. Voting is mandatory. You may (NOT) abstain. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Guy is also considering voting for the guy his top top scum read is voting for. Scum think weird things. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
DP's got a couple of weird moments in his filter where he seems ... edgy? I dunno how to explain it. Like, he's got some double standards for himself and everyone else and doesn't realize the logic he is using is different. At the same time his in-your-face is really gutsy and indiscriminate, which is a town tell. In any case he has said enough this past cycle so that any contradictions in his actions (opposed to words) will be evident enough and will be easy enough to catch him if scum. I still think Kreb is most likely to flip scum. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
##Vote: Kreb | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
His case boils down to meta and me thinking VE is town. Meta is terrible, as no one is reading the context of the LVII: I knew strongandbig was scum because he was hinting at Toad (the other assassin) that I could be scum. Everything else was fabricated in the sense of I could have done it as scum and town ate it up because they had no clue what they were doing. It's the same crap BC did. slOosh isn't playing as well as "town slOosh". Abuse of meta - if it's obvious I'm scum you should be able to point it out this game, not cherry pick what I was able to do in previous games in different contexts. And why defend VE when he has no votes? It's a nonsense point. Kreb's blue claim is bogus. On October 13 2012 22:35 Kreb wrote: On a different note: Im starting to think 3rd party on sloosh. His play doesnt seem...... "aligned" with the scum and what I'd expect the scum to do. He's sticking his head out expressing wierd opinions a bit too much. I'm third party -> Kreb believes we have 2 medics and 2 veterans this game. Yea right. Kreb is just bsing a convenient role that's already been flipped that doesn't require him to make up night actions. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Once again I'm reminded how much I dislike playing scum. Give me that independent I-do-what-I-want VT (or 3rd party :D)! Any advice on how to improve as scum team? I know I expressed it in the QT, that I felt like toward the end we had absolutely no thread control, and just hoped / got lucky when town initiated things that worked to our agenda. Also, how do I fight meta (aside from trashing my town game which I don't want to do)? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 18 2012 15:50 Risen wrote: Probably because it was said clearly in the OP that we knew the names of all the roles in the game. Which means they are in the game. Which means at least one person is each role (but more than one can be said role, a misunderstanding made by me in the obsQT) That's like every single open setup excluding the few that explicitly say "not all roles may be in game". If there was more room to fake claim town would have (and I think should have) been punished so hard. I mean it wasn't even like, talking about stuff from a balance perspective, e.g. "oh we had 2 town vigs, so a 3rd is improbable", but straight up "oh no one counter claim I guess he town". | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 18 2012 19:23 marvellosity wrote: slOosh - not sure why you're even asking. Why would you need to fuck with your town meta to play scum? It makes no sense. You were just *so* goddamn far off your town meta, and actually you're a good enough / clever enough dude for this not to be the case. Post more, push more cases, etc. - it's very simple... No, I'm asking what does that look like? Am I striving to play like town that is having a really bad game (all wrong reads etc.)? Am I expecting to get caught in the early - midgame and center my play around that? Like for this quote by Incognito from general mafia guide On January 09 2012 15:49 Incognito wrote: As mafia, you may often see that townies who are generally accepted as “pro-town” early in the game can hold a disproportional influence over the town. You might think to yourself, “We need to prevent that from happening, or at least, become that person”. The first part of that statement is correct; the second is not. Although the temptation of appearing to be the most “pro-town” player may be great, you often cannot hold this status for long enough as mafia for it to truly benefit you. Town players who gain the “pro-town” status usually are able to hold onto it because their motives are consistent throughout the game. However, as a mafia, the longer the game goes, the harder it will be to keep your story straight, and the easier it will be for you to lose your status. That's basically all my town games (majority of games I'm shot D1) - if it is my meta to always become that person, and it's disadvantageous to become that person as mafia, what do I do? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 19 2012 03:10 marvellosity wrote: It's disadvantageous to become that person as mafia if you cannot keep your story straight. In LV I was considered townie town town, and I managed to maintain that facade for 8 (!) cycles for the win. Ugh, it's kinda hard to explain for you, because that was also before I acquired your knack of being NKed early, but this also means I should be able to help you here :x Like, I try to emulate my town play as much as I can, but I just make tiny little adjustments; like I might not pursue a scumread who is my team-mate quite as aggressively as I might otherwise, or perhaps I'll bring up a candidate at just a slightly different time from when I normally might to try to achieve something in-thread. Or perhaps there's a body of evidence on someone and you take one conclusion that looks logical, even though as town you may have reached another, also logical conclusion. Things like that that can't really be caught externally (i.e. by town) but are very subtly pushing your agenda. Yea this is really helpful. I think it might just be a practice thing for me then. What's your view on bussing? Like for Node D1 I felt it was stupid to let him just die, which is in a sense sacrificing credibility for pushing your agenda with more force. As a "vet" or "usually dead by N3 or something is up" player, do you always play to survive to endgame, or do you actively make the most of these scum-agenda purchases to your eventual lynch? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On October 19 2012 06:16 talismania wrote: This is a thing I struggle with. I don't want to have to play worse as town in order to disguise my scum play. Because playing with as much effort as I give to town as scum simply isn't possible. Maybe it is, but just less natural. I mean I would think untangling a problem / riddle is more natural (not necessarily easier) than obfuscating it. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
| ||