EPTLooney Lynching Mini Mafia - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 09:39 thrawn2112 wrote: austin was there a point to that other than asking for reads? Yeah. A couple (1) ON on D1 and D2 got ALL the votes in his matchups. Nobody voted me. Nobody voted HiroPro. It's one part of the bracket where we've got very little information, and I'm worried that there's been NO pushback against him. It even worries me that nobody's really saying that, if he's scum and he's uncommunicative so they're cutting him loose, at least scum should be saying "Hey guys, nobody is voting against him, maybe he's not scum?" Or...that's what I'm thinking. Based on that, I want to push Hopeless1der just on principle, to see what happens and because it feels unlikely ON is scum if you look PURELY at the voting on D1 and D2. But when I look through his filter...I don't get a scumread off of it. I'm not working with much, but the constant asking about who will be around at deadline feels like an actual concern, rather than an act. Hopeless asks mementoss for mementoss's read on Hopeless's D1 unvotes, mildly townie (Calling attention to it, having someone scrutinize you voluntarily). The unvote in part to not throw away votes I'm mildly townie on as well. So...I actually don't really like that matchup at all. I'll send ON through because I'm more worried about him based on votes and speculation rather than what he's done. Hopeless1der's whole look scummy to catch scum thing is ... null to me, but some of his other stuff is mildly townie to me. I don't want to just leave it at that and not interact with the matchup though, so I figure I'll ask Hopeless1der about some people he hasn't mentioned too much. See how quick and thoroughly he answers, see who he picks and why. It's a variety of answers and reasons - no vote, vote kush even though I think he's town because x, vote prplhz because I think he's scum. I like that. (2) We're too complacent with the matchups. This is a 96 hour day, but...we're not playing this right if we talk ONLY about the matchups. We ought to all be scumhunting EVERYWHERE. There's a chance there are no scum in the final 4, no scum on one side of the bracket, etc. I realized that we're not making good use of our 96 hour D1 if we focus only on the people who can still be lynched. The more we discuss and the more we scrutinize everyone D1, the better our future reads will be. It's like...I don't want this to be GSL Open 2, waiting and waiting and waiting. So, specifically, I chose some matchups of people that have been safe since the first 24 hours. Don't neglect to look em over just because we can't lynch them D1. Mementoss, me, HiroPro, we all sort of got by easily and so I wanted to see what he thought about that set of people. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Sandroba...I guess he goes through to the finals? I just can't shake the feeling that ON doesn't feel like he's got a scum team behind him. But none of the other players are flashing SCUM SCUM SCUM to me. One reason I think we need to look back at people who are already safe. We may not know the lynch mechanic for D2, but everyone will be back on the table (probably?). | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 10:05 kushm4sta wrote: @austin will you let me push 1der through with like 5 votes? or will you outvote me? What do you think about his response to those matchup questions? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 10:10 thrawn2112 wrote: austin to your point about ON going though the bracket uncontested, the same goes for hopeless. so following the logic you used for ON, that would suggest that hopeless is also town right? I want to draw a distinction based on hopeless having more posts/activity, more to be held accountable for, but . . . I'm not sure that's a meaningful distinction between the two? For some reason I'm only thinking about ON that way, because whereas hopeless has been pushed somewhat for being scummy, ON has been heavily pushed for being absent. I'm like searching for other tools to try and get a read on ON, even if they're just speculation. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 10:13 kushm4sta wrote: honestly I think they are dumb questions that he could answer however he wants because they have no significance. Also I think we should focus on who is actually getting lynched... it's an important decision not to be taken lightly. Having a discussion with real ramifications will help our scumhunt tomorrow, because we will have more material to go on. I think it's very possible that there is no scum amongst the 4 left, but I'm going to wait until today is over to pursue other people. Please answer my question. You threatened this yesterday with ET also. I want a concrete answer. Will you outvote me if I vote bomb lder? I just wanted your answer to that question before I answered you. No, I'm not going to outvote someone on that matchup. A couple people have bombed votes on that matchup, I'm not confident enough in either to want to push and sway that matchup. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
You and your hypothetical scumbuddies are hanging out in QT, discussing how to play out the matchups and how you want to vote and do scummy stuff and whatnot. The following questions come up, as to how each of you wants to do things. How do you respond? Do you guys make sure to sometimes be on opposite sides of a matchup? Or do you not care if 2 scum players vote together the entire way through D1? Say in round 1 or round 2 there's a matchup that you want to influence, one of your scumbuddies is neck and neck with a townie. Do you just vote that matchup? Or do you vote that matchup + 1 or 2 that you don't care about, in order to hide the vote you actually want to make in with some that don't make a difference to you? Is there any particular player you think is a likely D1 mislynch, just looking at player list and like...the first couple pages of the game. If so, who? ET, I'd like to see your answers to those questions as well. You had some setup talk at the beginning that I liked, but I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about the setup from the perspective of you playing as ET. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 10:20 HiroPro wrote: austin bro, how come you're not asking any llama questions? I think there are some good targets for llama questions here. I gotta expand my horizons. I've been kicking around some other interested questions that I'm asking, but I haven't yet felt the need to go back to the toaster/sherpa/llama well this game. (AMG HE DIDN'T DO THAT IN APERTURE AND HE'S NOT DOING THAT HERE, MUST BE SCUMZZZZZZZZZ). | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 10:13 kushm4sta wrote: honestly I think they are dumb questions that he could answer however he wants because they have no significance. Also I think we should focus on who is actually getting lynched... it's an important decision not to be taken lightly. Having a discussion with real ramifications will help our scumhunt tomorrow, because we will have more material to go on. I think it's very possible that there is no scum amongst the 4 left, but I'm going to wait until today is over to pursue other people. I think he can, for the most part, answer them how he wants. But some ways of answering those questions are going to look townier or scummier, and I want to see his thoughts on some of those players regardless of how he'd play the matchups, as well as dumb minor stuff like the speed at which he answers. I'm not ready to pursue others yet, but it's something we should all be thinking about. Keep noticing that themed games sometimes get too wrapped up in the theme and not in the basic scumhunting that should be happening regardless of the themed stuff around it. If we spent these 24 hours looking at only 4 players, and then next 24 hours looking at only 2 players, that's a whole day in a normal mafia game that we wouldn't have even been filtering 2/3 the playerbase. The lynch isn't to be taken lightly, sure, but it's getting too complacent in scumhunting to only think of today's lynch. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
If nothing else, it also keeps scum active. With the lynch, they know who they need to push or not push, how to play out the bracket. But they probably don't have any kind of plan in place to deal with non-lynch scumhunting right now. I think it's a good area to shake something loose, catch someone off guard. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
You and your hypothetical scumbuddies are hanging out in QT, discussing how to play out the matchups and how you want to vote and do scummy stuff and whatnot. The following questions come up, as to how each of you wants to do things. How do you respond? Do you guys make sure to sometimes be on opposite sides of a matchup? Or do you not care if 2 scum players vote together the entire way through D1? Say in round 1 or round 2 there's a matchup that you want to influence, one of your scumbuddies is neck and neck with a townie. Do you just vote that matchup? Or do you vote that matchup + 1 or 2 that you don't care about, in order to hide the vote you actually want to make in with some that don't make a difference to you? Is there any particular player you think is a likely D1 mislynch, just looking at player list and like...the first couple pages of the game. If so, who? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:45 EchelonTee wrote: EBWOP: I'm not interested in talking about this stuff. Scum play varies wildly from player to play. While good town play is very similar across the scum (you should catch scum), different scum players play differently. Most scum players would play safe and try and stay distant from their scumbuddies, but try and protect them lightly. I don't care about that at all. I bus, I soft defend, I hard defend, I do whatever if I think it'll let me win. The best scum players are unpredictable. If you want to ask me what is most likely for mafia to do, it should be pretty obvious, but that's not what I would do. I don't want to ask what is most likely for mafia to do, just yourself if you were/are mafia this game. Interested in your personal thought process and answers. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 22:51 sandroba wrote: Sandroba, while I can see that asking you to explain yourself is immediately going to be followed by judging your explanation and whether it's townie or scummy, there's still value in explaining yourself period.What is even there to talk about? Over the time I've been playing mafia I grew more and more away from hard analysis and began to use apparent integrity and sincerity of people's post as a way to tell scum and town appart. That means that the way I do it is completely subjective to what I consider to be a post (from the particular person I'm looking at) to be honest. Of course the method is not flawless and is completely dependant on my ability to make that judgement, but it served me right in the past and I see no reason to change it. From that place you can see clearly that any explanation I provide you with for my reasoning wouldn't apply to everyone and is not verifyable. What you can do is check for the same things I do. The motives and truthfulness behind my posts and see if you think I'm trying to put on a show or I'm speaking my mind without the fear of consequence. If you can make that distinction then you will have a good idea of my alignment. The stupid exercise of breaking posts apart and endelessly saying things are "scummy" without even defining and not even knowing what scummy means is what brings this tiresome conversation that I refuse to take part of where everyone indulges each other and strikes each other's dicks. Especially, and if you're town then I'm oversimplifying here, if you look for honesty in posts and want us to gauge whether you're speaking your mind. We can't know if you're speaking your mind or being honest about your reads unless there's something beneath them and we know what that is. Saying "I think x is scum, check for what I check for to find out why" doesn't feel like speaking your mind. Then while I was typing this out you responded to a few of the reads, so...thanks, maybe. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 22:52 Mementoss wrote: Why is apathetic voting horseshit? Is horseshit just horseshit, or do you find it to come from a town or scum horse?prp: 8 Remain ON: 8 Remain da0: 9 Remain Austin: 9 Remain This^^ this right here is horseshit. Apathetic voting up towards the last round is unacceptable. I think everyone should only be using 5 of there votes 3 of these players alone trump the rest of the players in the game. Sandroba doesn't even have anyvotes to defend himself while ON has 9. Actually, everyone should only be using 1 vote, and we can get some sort of real full out majority going where everyone is involved. For the people with 0 votes left. ##Mementoss vote "Player Name" and I will use one of my votes towards giving you a voice in this lynch. I have a feeling scum has WAY too much control right now. But there is a possibility its too late anyways, this method should give more information to where people are at in their thought process. Why should everyone only be using one vote? Why are you giving out votes to anyone with 0 votes left? I had planned to give away either blocks of 3 or blocks of 4 votes to people I strongly feel are town, but not to ANYONE, and not based on the number of votes they have left. How is having no votes a good criteria for who you want to give more control over the lynch to, instead of using a criteria like your townreads? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 13 2012 23:57 Mementoss wrote: Is apathetic voting just horseshit, or townie/scummy horseshit? You think everyone who hasn't voted much is scummy? Cuz that's probably the whole scumteam if so.what how much info are we gunna get when half the people cant vote on the lynch, and the other half have no say in the final decision. The lynch is left up to those 4 players, and since one of them is in the hot seat. He can use 9 votes to save himself. I guess playing as passive as you and not putting any reads on anyone to too late so you don't have to vote and can sheep and holding all your votes is your strategy. I guess thats cool >_>. If you want info, why should everyone only use 1 vote? Wouldn't you get more from people choosing the number of votes they want to use? And again, why are you choosing the criteria of "people with 0 votes" as those to give votes to this round? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 14 2012 00:31 Mementoss wrote: I will be putting all my votes on ON unless he returns then Because of sandroba's comments? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
My current stance is that the voting is being blown out of proportion, lol. Nobody standing up for ON in the earlier rounds. Even a wee bit. That gives me a gut feeling that he's town. I would have expected SOME attempt to try and keep him from passing on. So I'm a wee bit townie on him. Sandroba ... blech. I hate the idea of lynching more veteran players D1. Some of his comments this morning looked townie though, although some looked misguided. Like his stuff on how anyone who cares about town should be using all their votes...that says NOTHING. Anyone who cares about scum is probably using all THEIR votes too. I haven't played with him enough though to know whether he's super careful about choosing his words and what thoughts he puts into thread. He's making it sound like he doesn't allow the thread to see much of his thoughts/thought process, and if that's true, then throwaway statements like that are a little odd. Between then two, I'm not STRONGLY scummy on either. I'm probably voting ON? IF he hangs on doing nearly nothing, it's difficult to get a read on him. Getting a read on a replacement player can sometimes be iffy, and in this case, we've had such a long first day that it's ... probably tougher? Instead of replacing in after 48 or 72 hours or whatever, replacement would come in 96 hours after this game started. I don't want to add a new player into the mix at that point, so unless I'm very convinced of Sandroba's scumminess, I'm dropping like...3 votes on ON or something. You, thrawn, are welcome to three of my votes. As is kush, who is either town or is doing a great job of adopting a completely different style of play for this game. Plus, GZA > RZA. 3 of my votes are for each of you two to use, so long as, in the post in which you tell me how to use them, you give thread a scumread and a townread (and a tiny bit of reasoning) on someone who was safe after the first or second round. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 14 2012 00:10 sandroba wrote: I'm not sure how one trusts one's judgment when voting, but NOT when deciding who to gives votes to. I can understand the statement in terms of something like "urrbody who has 0 votes can get one of mine," but as long as there's reasoning and judgment behind who you give the votes to...then you're still trusting your judgment. I dunno, maybe this IS a dumb idea, but I kind of like it.Giving your votes to other people is horrible. You either don't trust your judgement, in which case you have no business giving your votes away cuz you might be giving them up to mafia, or you do trust your judgement in which case you better use your votes yourself. Please stop with the nonsense. On October 14 2012 00:11 sandroba wrote: Also you should definitely use all the votes available to you in this last round if you care about town at all. This post is air. I'd think that those who DON'T care about town this game should also use all the votes available to them. If town and anti-town should be using all their votes, then ... there's nothing that means anything about whether or not someone uses all their votes. I may be taking too much issue with these posts because I like the idea of giving away votes, but they strike me as either "I want to save my own skin, and I'm worried that you support me but will give away votes to those who don't" (null, either townsand or scumsand would want to not get lynched) or something else. Blerg. I don't fully know what to make of them, but for some reason they struck me as less reasoned than some of his other posts. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:09 Mementoss wrote: Yes, I should have used my votes in a different way early on. Some of this is due to changing my mind on Djodref. Some is due to focusing on Aperture. Some is due to early laziness.THIS is what bugs me, your not strongly scummy on either YET you have 9 votes left? HMMM, I guess you shoulda used your votes to get who you thought was scum to the finals. You don't even give a shit. Do you actually believe I don't give a shit? Or do you only think that THIS particular thing points towards me giving a shit? | ||
| ||
