EPTLooney Lynching Mini Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 07 2012 02:07 marvellosity wrote: ET signs up and he's the last one, typical don't worry, I'm here to play  | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 08 2012 07:40 marvellosity wrote: eh, i meant i wanted to play with you ^^ oh I thought you were signed up already lol | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
I agree with what Sandroba has been saying thus far. While I see the sensibility of HiroPro's plan (everyone votes on each matchup, 1 vote max), there are a few issues with it (which sandroba has stated somewhat). 1. It gives "credibility" to people who are knocked out early, while not forcing them to do anything significant. A good good good example of this problem was in Liar Game 1. Basically half of the people were immune to the lynch depending on a Yes or No vote; while town tried to make the immune people accountable for their actions, because they have no fear of the lynch they really have no pressure on them to do anything at all. A hilarious example is sandroba himself; despite being widely called scum since D1, because he was immune to lynch through flukes, he stayed alive for days manipulating people here and there. If we force everyone to vote on everything, the knocked out people can make random reasons for their votes and look active. However, if we don't force everyone to vote on everything, knocked out people will have to talk about things on their own prerogative, exposing their true intentions. 2. It will lead to a bunch of laundry lists of "analysis" which doesn't help anything. If people have to vote on 7+ matchups, while it will put a bunch of content into the thread, it gives an easy out for mafia to look "active". All they have to do is say something like "I like persons X, Y, and Z because of yada yada yada. I don't like person M because he only voted for 4 matchups! What's he hiding??". Basically, this plan would put a huge flood of info without much actual substance. 3. This diffuses the town's vote, making it easier for scum to do as they please. Remember, the vote is the town's strongest tool; we out number mafia's votes 9x. However if townsfolk are forced to only have one vote per matchup, then if they see someone they really think is scummy, they won't be "allowed" to stack more votes on them because of this limitation. Overall, while I do like the initiative to give structure to the voting process, ultimately I think it does more harm than good. What should happen is standard, good old fashioned scum-hunting; people should just up and state who they think is scum and put their votes to back it up. Speaking of which: On October 10 2012 11:07 Hopeless1der wrote: I am unfamiliar with this policy. Please elaborate. Please feel free to pay more attention when reading. Thanks. Please feel free to post things of substance. You're being needlessly dismissive, which is strange because 1. it's very early in the game, people ask questions 2. you haven't done anything, so to put down someone else just feels off. It's been a decent amount of time in the game and you've shown that you're available; why not comment on the setup at all? I don't want you having a free pass for the rest of this tourny; I want to see you talk more. Hopeless1der 2x | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 10 2012 12:18 austinmcc wrote: Gonna drop in to start being a good little paranoid townie. I could easily see there being a role in the game that can influence lynches. Vote stealing, doublevoting, or a mechanic that interacts with lynches in some other way. I don't want to go with any kind of plan that relies on the slimmest possible margin, and would rather us have a little wiggle room to ensure that things proceed as we want them to. Please talk more, you are good player, which makes this floater post suspect; I expect substance from you ^^ | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Is the ratio of town:mafia known, or unknown? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 10 2012 13:12 sandroba wrote: k, then we can do one vote per match up. Or I could suggest even better, so you are more accountable for each vote you cast. You don't have to vote for each match up, but you may only cast ONE vote in each match up. What do you think about that? I think this way is harder to blend in, because you can't justify your vote as "I have to decide between these 2". Each vote you cast you must have a reasoning behind it, but you can't cast multiple votes in one round and manipulate the results too much. That way we can observe who is interested in the lynch and give more weight to the reasons behind each vote. Elaborate why only one vote per matchup is better than variable votes? I definitely agree with not forcing everyone to vote for every matchup, but I don't exactly see why not allowing people to use all their votes is beneficial. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 10 2012 20:21 thrawn2112 wrote: I think he was saying that he's not going to actually vote until he's figured out exactly how he wants to spend all of his votes. The reasoning being that it'll make it easier on the cohosts. That's a nice sentiment and all and no offense to the mods, but that statement did sound a little scummy. But did you think it looked scummy? I'm not changing my 2 votes from 1der unless something absolutely crazy happens (which it won't); I'm only not putting my votes down now for formatting reasons, nothing more. I do admit it looks strange, if you want to call me scum for that then whatever; the following things I'm going to mention is complete bullcrap in comparison. On October 10 2012 20:54 thrawn2112 wrote: That's the only part of it that makes me suspicious of ET. Asking for a specific scum/town ratio is stupid because a mod will never give you the answer so it doesn't seem like a question someone would ask unless they have ulterior motives behind asking the question. Asking for a scum/town ratio is not stupid, tyvm. It's common even in closed setups for the specific ratio to be known; I've only played in one game where this isn't the case. On October 10 2012 20:30 Mementoss wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 10 2012 14:27 EchelonTee wrote: Hey guys, been a while. I agree with what Sandroba has been saying thus far. While I see the sensibility of HiroPro's plan (everyone votes on each matchup, 1 vote max), there are a few issues with it (which sandroba has stated somewhat). 1. It gives "credibility" to people who are knocked out early, while not forcing them to do anything significant. A good good good example of this problem was in Liar Game 1. Basically half of the people were immune to the lynch depending on a Yes or No vote; while town tried to make the immune people accountable for their actions, because they have no fear of the lynch they really have no pressure on them to do anything at all. A hilarious example is sandroba himself; despite being widely called scum since D1, because he was immune to lynch through flukes, he stayed alive for days manipulating people here and there. If we force everyone to vote on everything, the knocked out people can make random reasons for their votes and look active. However, if we don't force everyone to vote on everything, knocked out people will have to talk about things on their own prerogative, exposing their true intentions. 2. It will lead to a bunch of laundry lists of "analysis" which doesn't help anything. If people have to vote on 7+ matchups, while it will put a bunch of content into the thread, it gives an easy out for mafia to look "active". All they have to do is say something like "I like persons X, Y, and Z because of yada yada yada. I don't like person M because he only voted for 4 matchups! What's he hiding??". Basically, this plan would put a huge flood of info without much actual substance. 3. This diffuses the town's vote, making it easier for scum to do as they please. Remember, the vote is the town's strongest tool; we out number mafia's votes 9x. However if townsfolk are forced to only have one vote per matchup, then if they see someone they really think is scummy, they won't be "allowed" to stack more votes on them because of this limitation. Overall, while I do like the initiative to give structure to the voting process, ultimately I think it does more harm than good. What should happen is standard, good old fashioned scum-hunting; people should just up and state who they think is scum and put their votes to back it up. Speaking of which: Please feel free to post things of substance. You're being needlessly dismissive, which is strange because 1. it's very early in the game, people ask questions 2. you haven't done anything, so to put down someone else just feels off. It's been a decent amount of time in the game and you've shown that you're available; why not comment on the setup at all? I don't want you having a free pass for the rest of this tourny; I want to see you talk more. Hopeless1der 2x On October 10 2012 14:32 EchelonTee wrote: Not going to put my vote into voting thread just yet, until I'm sure of all votes for this round, to make things easier for kita. Is the ratio of town:mafia known, or unknown? Guy, I wanted you to be town, why did you have to scum slip. For those that didn't catch it, ET implies he knows that how much more votes town has compared to mafia, implying he knows how many mafia there is. Minutes later, he asks if mafia count is known. Where did he get this number in the first place? I don't think he would just make it up out of thin air. EchelonTee x1 Heh, living up to my town meta yet again I suppose. (always get accused when I'm town D1, never get accused when I'm scum). While cute that you would accuse me for appearing to "know more about the setup", there is almost no way that the ratio of votes is actually 9x, as you yourself pointed out. No number is even close to that (either 1:11 or 2:10 doesn't work with normal voting mechanics). Therefore, you are making the assumption that I have to be either blue or red without even considering that maybe, just maybe I put down that 9x number randomly? Unless you really think that I am such a poor player that I would either 1. reveal my roles knowledge of votes, or 2. blatantly reveal mafia's knowledge of votes. Excuse the language, but that is completely fracking stupid; that 9x number is completely numerically impossible, and the fact that you are using the random number I threw out as reason to be suspicious is absolutely terrible. And you can't even vote for me this round! You are literally misdirecting town on a terrible lead with the reasoning that "shucks this is as good a reason to vote R1 as anything". No, it's a terrible reason, multiplied by the fact that you are wasting our limited 24 hour time on a person you can't vote on. Care to talk about the people we actually need to vote on? IDGAF if you want to tunnel me as long as you also talk about the stuff that actually matters, which you have failed to do. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
As it stands da0ud, OriginalName (ON), 1der, and kush are advancing. You best put votes down if you want to change this in anyway. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
If you don't, I'm going to put 1x votes on prplhz, austin, and 1der. For 1der, I've already stated why. For prplhz/austin, they are being way too floaty/neutral atm, I need a better read on you guys, AKA I don't want you having immunity. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 00:06 kushm4sta wrote: metaread on momentoss: he is this dumb as town I know that from liquid city. also he will afk for long periods of time so we have that to look forward to. Refrain from flamebait. Ok? Ok. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 00:13 austinmcc wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 10 2012 14:27 EchelonTee wrote: 1. It gives "credibility" to people who are knocked out early, while not forcing them to do anything significant. A good good good example of this problem was in Liar Game 1. Basically half of the people were immune to the lynch depending on a Yes or No vote; while town tried to make the immune people accountable for their actions, because they have no fear of the lynch they really have no pressure on them to do anything at all. A hilarious example is sandroba himself; despite being widely called scum since D1, because he was immune to lynch through flukes, he stayed alive for days manipulating people here and there. If we force everyone to vote on everything, the knocked out people can make random reasons for their votes and look active. However, if we don't force everyone to vote on everything, knocked out people will have to talk about things on their own prerogative, exposing their true intentions. ET I mostly like the points you made, but I get hung up on this one. Yes, the people who are safe as of Round 1 are immune to lynch for 72 more hours. However, On October 10 2012 11:00 kitaman27 wrote: You are not required to vote. If we don't force everyone to vote on everything, nobody is actually forced to vote. Nobody should be checking out for 72 hours once they're safe in Round 1, but the voting rules wouldn't require anyone to make reasoned choices later on that we could hold them accountable to. Moreover, while 1-vote-per-matchup removes some of what town can learn by how everyone votes (by limiting their options), people can also throw around blocks of votes with very little reasoning. 5 single votes with poor reasoning doesn't help us, but neither does a block of 5 votes on a single person with poor reasoning. Another point is that I can see the similarities between this and liar game, but the lynching mechanic here is ... almost unknown? Whereas in Liar Game people were going to be safe every day by chance, we don't know what future lynches will look like. It removes some of the ability to plot long-term, like in Liar Game how answers and votes were planned in advance, because we don't know what the lynching scheme is long-term. As long as mafia doesn't know either, I actually think not knowing future lynches favors town just because it negates some of mafia's ability coordinate actions in a way they KNOW will be beneficial to them. More reason, in my mind, for them to have some sort of lynch-affecting role or mechanic. If we don't "force" people to vote, but rather have the normal stipulation that you best be scumhunting, then we are treating the game as a normal mini. People who active lurk without contributing are bad, people who scum hunt are good. I've found that with themed games that aren't too crazy, the more you try and make the setup normal, the better it is for town; at the end of the day we hold people accountable for their actions without giving them an easy framework to look fine. Someone puts 5 votes on someone for shitty reason to save them? Don't let that slide. Someone puts 0 votes on people while posting little snide tidbits here and there? Don't let that slide. Don't have issue with your 2nd paragraph, though I would say that my analogy was focused primarily on the fact that a plan made an unknown mechanic (who going to be immune?) into a manipulable tool for mafia. I don't want that. On October 11 2012 00:13 prplhz wrote: Hey EchelonTee Why do you want austinmcc to advance over a guy who hasn't posted even once? I don't even care what austinmcc said so far, OrignalName isn't even around and that gets my vote among those two right now. How about da0ud/Djodref? Active lurking. I feel worse about a person who has posted 1-2 low content tidbits than someone who has posted literally nothing. I don't have a strong opinion either way about that matchup; austin was more on my radar, but now that he's talking more I don't really care. I think both da0ud and Djodref look bad. In fact, it's almost comical because both of their first posts look quite similar. If you forced me to take a stand I would lean Djodref more scummy because my instincts tell me that da0ud is a noob-bait. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Hopeless1der x1 Djodref x1 | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
It's good to be suspicious of such things when people are being unclear. I think it is quite clear who I am suspicious of. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 01:06 Mementoss wrote: If you think pointing out one thing and placing 1 vote (that didn't even count btw) is tunneling, well, I dont even know what to say. I don't know why everyone is getting so pissy about it. First read it came across scummy and read to me 9 townies, then afterwards I even said the 9x thing. It's not like I tried to force this vote on anyone, with attitude like this your sure to shut out discussion. This is the biggest over reaction I ever seen. In my experience, if I don't react strongly to accusations, no matter how inane or small, it just bogs down town because people are wasting time talking about me. I'm not mad; I just want to shut down your weak accusations now so that if you are town, we can work together without lingering misconceptions. I'm not seeking to shut down discussion, but I will be extremely dismissive towards cases on me as they are wrong, and in this case bad. This methodology works for me, and my mislynch rate is extremely low; I'll overract if it gets the job down. You'll notice I didn't vote for you. I'm not saying "YOURE DUMB AND YOURE SCUM", I'm saying you're case was misguided and it's time to drop it, now. On October 11 2012 01:21 kushm4sta wrote: I'm not trying to get into a flame war here. Good. If you want people to not see you as a policy lynch this is a good start. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Austin - 0 ON - 3 prplhz - 1 kush - 0 da0ud - 2 djodref - 2 1der - 2 Mementoss 1 | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 02:21 EchelonTee wrote: Unofficial vote count 1der(+) - 2 Mementoss 1 Austin - 0 ON(+) - 3 prplhz - 1 kush(+) - 0 da0ud(+) - 2 djodref - 2 | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 06:15 prplhz wrote: I was confused about what EchelonTee was trying because it wasn't in regular voting format and I hadn't seen the explanation of the non-standard vote formatting. I have no idea how to respond to the rest because it's crazy talking. You are interpreting a simple question as an evil scum plan of manipulation. Also, I wanted to ask you about kushm4sta because it seemed that you had a pretty good read on him in that last newbie game he just played. What's going to be fun about this game? This sounds constructed to me so I'd like you to explain what you meant. 1der and Djodref both look scummy to me, but they are in opposition; namely at the time, Djodref voted for 1der. Since Djodref really does not seem like the bussing type, it's unlikely both are scum in my eyes. Game will be fun because it seems that scum is running good interference. Also, it just seems fun because we have good activity from good players. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 12:48 da0ud wrote: I totally don't agree with you. YES this is a disadvantage. You have more chance to get lynched. You want my to do the maths ? Even people with a BYE on first round can vote for other matchups and read people on the first round. Being present at the first round from scums is too me on more opportunity to escape the lynch rather that getting more read on him. What if he says no word at all during the all round. People will have to put votes on him on each of them while him giving no piece of information on what he could be, hence more probability to survive the day. 100% a disadvantage. Hence this post puts you on top of my list of scums. On sandroba: You seem to be confused about what kush is saying. He doesn't disagree that having a bye is a disadvantage, he is saying that the way you talked about it is scummy. I tend to agree. Worrying about byes really isn't something that should be anyone's concern; I know I don't give a crap that I had a bye. And you use this post from him to call him scum? You have no reasoning to say this; you're arguing that da0ud is being scummy for... what? For calling you scum? I immediately regret leaving my vote on djoref. On October 11 2012 18:33 da0ud wrote: About Sandroba : + Show Spoiler + On October 10 2012 20:40 sandroba wrote: @prpl You are my best scum read so far, how do you feel about that <3 @mementoss Don't be stupid. Town# > Mafia# by default. That's the dumbest shit I've read so far and let me tell you there is plenty dumb shit about. First statement coming from nowhere and second one just insulting Mementoss freely. Sure Town>Mafia, but someone who would worry about the number of Mafia people sounds townie to me. Getting accused of stupid on this topic would show me a mafia bullying a townie. On October 10 2012 20:46 sandroba wrote: You don't have to vote anyone right now. You have however many votes you want (max 10). You misrepresented ET impossible ratio quote so somehow he knew the mafia number which we don't know yet so you can vote ET. Yes, that's dumb. insulting On October 10 2012 21:07 sandroba wrote: I'm mad when I can't distiguish between someone being crazy or trying to make a fake contribution. You can vote for whoever you like as long as your explanation doesn't stink. And as long as the person can even get votes, which ET can't even get this round. Better luck reading the game and the thread next time. insulting On October 11 2012 10:31 sandroba wrote: Djoref dude looks town to me. Da0ud could go either way, leaning scum atm. I'm actually surprised he was winning, anyone care to explain it to me? austin? How could Djodref look town ? He doesn't look 100% mafia but he does at least look like 70% of it. On October 11 2012 10:36 sandroba wrote: Yo. I want da0ud to go to the next round. I have a hunch and those have been pretty good historically. Coming from nowhere trying to protect Djodref. On October 11 2012 11:22 sandroba wrote: ON why the votes on djoref? Another post to back up someone. Not a post like "why don't you vote against Da0ud he looks suspicious/ you should follow my "HuncH" ". Instead the post should be read why do you vote against my matey Djodref. This post is absolutely ludicrous. You take the fact that sandroba is being blunt and harsh as scummy behavior? Each of those quotes you posted do have him calling something stupid, but he backs up every statement with sound logic. This isn't sandroba being a needless asshole, this is him spitting truth. Yes, I'm discounting your accusations on sandroba; by your logic, we must be scumbuddies right? Everyone who disagrees with you is in a league against you? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 11:30 OriginalName wrote: Echelon: Truthfully speaking, started out fine even with that completely irrelievent "Scumslip" (Once again reiterating- it's not a slip) however after those nice starting posts he moves towards really low content uninteresting posts that are completely meaningless "IM HELPING TOWN" posts that show hes posting but adds nothing to discussion vote counts. This on the other hand REALLY irks me, he says he reacts strongly to accusations and then right after we decided he wasnt as worth it and moved on he completely drops off the map again. THAT friends unlike my complete absence is scumlurk, throwing of heat and then ignoring us. You have got to be fricking kidding me. Look at my filter. Then yours. I am being low content???? Are you freaking serious? No seriously, coming from THE #1 lurker of Round 1? I don't even understand how you can possibly argue this. This is plain old terrible disruption. You could at least try to look townie. You have done literally nothing to try and help town, and are easily my top pick for champion. This isn't your first game by any respect, you have no newbie excuse. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Not entirely concerned about this matchup because 1. I'm town and 2. I don't want Djoref to be champion either. He's been quite open with his thoughts and a way that seems quite genuine. Sandroba vs. Kush I have a strong feeling that sandroba is town, which unfortunately is a feeling that is 75% meta and only 25% in thread. Sandroba is one of those super strong town players who is comparatively abysmal as a mafia player. When he's mafia, his lack of effort and interest becomes abundantly clear very quickly, sort of like Palmar but even moreso, IMO. Therefore, when he plays mafia I find that he runs active disruption to try and make as much chaos as possible until he inevitably gets shot/lynched. His posts have been been both interested in setup discussion (a common sandroba town tell) and reasonable tempered, compared to how belligerent he can be. I do not want sandroba killed today, but if his activity/interest/track record take a nose dive he should be murdered. Quote me on this if sandroba begins derping. Kush is a tough read for me and I'm pretty much null on him, but I don't want sandroba to advance. ON vs. HiroPro Already put words on this, ON is advancing easily so no need to vote. 1der vs. thrawn Same story. @prplhz, why are you not talking at all? You have a free pass where you don't have to prove your innocence, which you are taking quite happily. This is disconcerting, to say the least. ##Vote kushm4ster x2 | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Uh I just did right there? When there is suspicion on two parties and we assume that at least one is town, then it means that mafia are pushing a townie successfully? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 12 2012 02:47 kushm4sta wrote: I'm still not totally clear. You are saying that either djodref or daoud are scum and mafia is pushing which ever is town? 1. I was talking about 1der and djodref in that post, not da0ud. 2. I am not assuming that one of djodref/1der has to be scum; I am assuming that at least one is town. 3. If one of them is town, then that means town is in some way being lead in the wrong direction by scum. 3b. In any game ever, a good scum team will run disruption. Since this game isn't running like a whistle, it's clear scum are doing something. inb4 he's fearmongering | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 11 2012 20:49 sandroba wrote: Yes I'm was not explaining anything because nothing was solid yet. I rather let people talk then to post a ton. da0ud and thrawn are flooding the thread a lot, so I'm pretty pleased with how it turned out, even if he didn't make it through. That is because I would expect him to post way less had him gotten a pass as scum. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
As austin said, TL LVI is a pretty terrible example because I stopped playing D2, while my D1 was just me being a dumbass. Scum Games and Town Games if you're interested in reading my past. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
@EchelonTee So sandroba kept up his appearance for the first couple of hours and since then he's had a "hunch" post and one measly contribution. Do you really think this looks like townie sandroba? Last sandroba townie game I remember was Space Station where he ruled the town with an iron fist and nailed like 5 out of 6 scum in the first two days. Fucking ridiculous. I don't think that this looks like townie sandroba at all. QUOTE] No, he doesn't like look like townie sandroba at time of your post (reading from p15). Might need to eat my words on him. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 12 2012 04:05 prplhz wrote: @EchelonTee So sandroba kept up his appearance for the first couple of hours and since then he's had a "hunch" post and one measly contribution. Do you really think this looks like townie sandroba? Last sandroba townie game I remember was Space Station where he ruled the town with an iron fist and nailed like 5 out of 6 scum in the first two days. Fucking ridiculous. I don't think that this looks like townie sandroba at all. No, he doesn't like look like townie sandroba at time of your post (reading from p15). Might need to eat my words on him. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 12 2012 04:37 Mementoss wrote: 4. ET: Everything about his filter makes me think hes mafia. But maybe Im just reading him completely wrong. He dismisses any comments towards him at all times, hard defends sandroba twice, without real reason or logic to, and is being very sarcastic in the says things to the fact to not get called out on them later. + Show Spoiler + On October 12 2012 02:45 EchelonTee wrote: Uh I just did right there? When there is suspicion on two parties and we assume that at least one is town, then it means that mafia are pushing a townie successfully? + Show Spoiler + On October 12 2012 02:53 EchelonTee wrote: Getting lunch and going to classes. Apparently I have to announce my absences or else I'm "lurking away". His posting is pushing a bad town atmosphere and that is scum agenda. As well as some lines in his posts just seem off, like prplhz pointed out. I think hes scummy but I'm not entirely sure this could just be his meta. Im going to put a vote on him. How exactly are those posts promoting bad town atmosphere? The first one was an explanation post to prplhz; I'm trying to make my words clear. The second one I admit is negative, but that's because I take offense at being called a lurker, by a lurker. You say that I am being dismissive towards comments on me because I address them and turn them away. What would you like me to do instead? I have been snippy I admit, but you calling me scummy for directly confronting accusations is a bit unreasonable. However, I can tone down my language as I've been promoting a bad atmosphere. Never my intention. The majority of your suspicion seems to be centered around my negativity and my association with sandroba. The former I can address, and the latter is uncertain. We have no idea of sandroba is town or scum. I had an early town tell on sandroba because his ideas lined up with mine; this is what I always do to try and figure out towniness. If I find myself coming to the same conclusion as someone independently, then I feel more comfortable with that player. I might be wrong on sandroba, but I am far more comfortable leaving him for a Day 2 read. However, it's simply not right for people to say "EchelonTee supports sandroba. Since I think sandroba is scum, EchelonTee is also scum". That's making an associative tell before full information is available. Will I get a ton of heat if sandroba flips scum? Yes, and I'd deserve it for making a wrong read. But since we don't have that information yet, I'd appreciate it if people laid off. Condemn me if you see deception in my words, but not for simply stating my opinion on things. I'm trying to make it as open as possible why I had a town tell on sandroba, and that I should be held accountable if he flips scum. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 12 2012 05:17 sandroba wrote: That's pretty ridiculous comment prpl. And I known for my manners or my detailed explanation of my actions? No. Have there been any flips so far? No. Look at the cases people posted, which is the strongest? Definetely the case on ON. How can you ever say that I'm not trying to get scum lynched or that my play has been uninspired? You can't. Do you still think prplhz is scum? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 12 2012 08:07 kushm4sta wrote: ET. He has been posting plenty but it's mostly defensive. There is a real lack of scumhunt to his play, especially for someone of his reputation. Me analyzing and scumhunting. I have been addressing nearly every matchup; I disagree that there is a lack of scumhunt. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
??? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 12 2012 18:06 da0ud wrote: + Show Spoiler + Trying to get some reads/assocation of people from previous votes. 1) Only ET has been twice voting for someone he would face in the next round. Djo in the first round when he had a BYE and kush in second. If he was a scum, I would them believe Djo and kush are not. Because at first glance it doesnt seem logic to vote for your mate so that one of you for sure would advance to the next round. He is the only one who has ever voted on the next potential opponent. 2) on Mementoss : he seems to be throwing away votes on as many people as possible and of oppisite logic. Already voted for 4 people which is the most of all of us. First round he votes for Djo and kush to make them move to the next round on their respective matches. But when they move on he decides to now vote on none of them but even worse voting for their opponents in the matchups hence actually totally changing his mind on them and now backing them up. Should have voted again for them to follow his initial logic. 3) Austin looks too unconcerned after being saved on the first round, He hasn't voted anyone in the second round. Looks to me more like a scum who now hides to get us to forget about him. To me a townie, even saved should continue to be implicated in the votes in order to gather as much information as possible on other players. Please let me know your thoughts.... 1.) I don't disagree with your logic, but an example like that shouldn't be a hard association. Remember those were early rounds; a scum putting votes on his buddies in those rounds allows him to distance himself from them (a good scum tactic) while not endangering them too much. 2.) I disagree; people can change their mind as the game develops, and Mementoss has been fairly open, and clearly posted why he changed his logic. 3.) I think the fact that Austin didn't vote in the 2nd round is a bit strange. Not a huge tell, but IMO townies should be involved in at least a few of the matchups per round, for the reason you stated. On October 12 2012 16:59 da0ud wrote: H1 vs ON : It bothers me as well that ON doesnt seem to care very much and has posted only a few messages. Most of them being useless (like his phone being dead for 24hrs, the panic votes). Since then nothing has been posted and I agree that it seems odd for someone from town not to participate in the lynching process as it is its only real way of finding scum. 1. I would expect even more a townie to participate if he is still on for lynching. It makes sense for mafia not to worry about advancing if his accomplices do manage to save him at any future round. H1 posts seems pretty coherent i am maybe too newbie to have a good read out of it. 2. I haven't played no game with any of you in the past, and i actually don't really want to because i want to make myself an opinion out of your posts and not ur behaviour in other games. This post is pretty strange from you. You spent a fairly long post (listed above) detailing your opinions on 3 players, in an organized listed manner. But when it comes to 1der vs ON, a matchup that actually is in play right now, you are much more unclear and hesitant. 1. This point doesn't really hold; you say that a townie who is still in the running for a lynch would probably be more active, which is true. But a scum who is up for lynch would also probably be more active, compared to if he wasn't up for lynch. While I have my own reasons for being suspicious of ON, your logic here is a lot less laid out then your previous points. 2. It's not ok to put down an opinion, then say "well I'm not so sure because I'm a newbie". It seems like you're trying to shy away from responsibility for your actions. Especially because you are more assertive in other posts. If you could make a more definitive stance on 1der/ON, that would be nice. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 00:21 Hopeless1der wrote: Just woke up. I'm too scummy, so no one wants to touch me with a 10 foot pole. Going to explain why I'm voting sandroba shortly, then address djodref's case on me. I'll also start going through the rest of the playerbase and lay out my thoughts and suspicions more clearly (i.e. at all). Do you need me to re-visit my unvote explanation ET? No. You unvoted to preserve votes, but the manner in which you did it is shady. If you don't enjoy policy lynches, you shouldn't pull stunts like that. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 12 2012 20:50 Djodref wrote: yeah, I'm assuming that I'm not going to be able to use my votes the next round... Why do you assume that you're advancing over sandroba? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
The issue I have with this is that this says nothing about djodref's alignment. You say that because he say scumminess in you, he must be townie. Do you not understand that both town and scum want to make cases on scummy people? Towns people want to kill scum, while scum want to kill bad townies who make themselves look scummy. Like you. You basically ensured your demise to get >>1<< town read. You haven't thought this through. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
What would you have done if I had put a big fat case on you? I've had my eye on you for ages; maybe if you had advanced me instead I would've done that case. What that make me townie? What you yourself acknowledge is that you look scummy and that you have played bad; how the hell are we supposed to know if you're town? Usually I lynch scummy people because by definition of the adjective, they are most likely to be scum. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:28 Hopeless1der wrote: Basically hoping to lure scum out either latching onto my case with poor justification, just sheeping or trying to defend me for towncred, knowing I'd flip town. Quite frankly I think it failed pretty hard, so yeah...I won't be trying stunts like this again. I'm currently going through filters for proper scumreads. K. I'll put 2 onto ON. It would be a policy lynch, sad to say, but lurking in a mini is extremely bad for town. Can't stand for it. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
How would sandroba be a policy lynch? He's been around. Lynching him would be an old-fashioned regular lynch. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
gooby please | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:46 thrawn2112 wrote: were you talking about my post? the policy lynch part referred to ON, not sandroba Oh ok. I was confused because you said "I think it's going to be a policy lynch", and then you said you preferred sandroba to be lynched. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
I'm curious why you're not pushing djodref then? He IS up for voting after all. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 09:13 kushm4sta wrote: 1.He seems more casual/carefree in that scum game. 2.This game the tone of his posts are stern and the posts themselves are relatively long and focused. If you compare both filters they read quite differently. I do think it's interesting that ET said one of his town tells this game was discussing set up, but he did that also quite a bit in that scum game. 1. I disagree. In context of that game, sandroba was widely (and correctly) considered scum D1. Any carefree-ness you see is him on D2-4 just completely not giving a crap because he was completely and utterly doomed. What is similar in the two games is in Liar Game, sandroba got extremely busy and fell off the face of the planet (I was on his team), and he made very little effort to try and defend himself. AKA, his effort dropped off preciptiously from D1. You can say that it's because he is busy, but heuristically this looks very similar to me. 2. His C9++ is important to look at, if you're going to look at filters. That is an average town sandroba game; he is aggresive, speaks plainly, and most importantly discusses topics with people that he trusts. He seems completely disinterested in discussing things with anyone which is weird considering how he usually does things. He likes to take control and build power blocs, which he hasn't even tried to do since the first 12 hours of the game. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:35 EchelonTee wrote: K. I'll put 2 onto ON. It would be a policy lynch, sad to say, but lurking in a mini is extremely bad for town. Can't stand for it. On October 13 2012 07:09 EchelonTee wrote: Prplhz, would you care to weight in on the ON vs 1der matter? I don't want to vote dump but I will if I have to. Me showing that I supported 1der over ON, and was willing to vote dump if I had to. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:05 thrawn2112 wrote: echelon why would you opt for last minute sneaky maneuvers to keep hopeless safe instead of discussing it in the thread? so what do you give a fuck about? who is your top scumread? You misinterpret me; I'm not saying IDGAF as in I don't think either of them are worthy of the lynch. I'm saying I consider them both bad enough to lynch and don't care who dies today. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
I have a scumread on sandroba. But since lynching vets with a meta like his is not the best, it makes put his lynch on par with ON in worthiness. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
da0ud. We're killing sandroba. I'm 99% sure 1der is a townie. | ||
|
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 09:48 kushm4sta wrote: Why is ET voting for ON when he himself pointed out: You keep on requoting this without context. This is what happened. 1. HiroPro stated that his top scumread is djodref. He had no votes on him. 2. I write that statement; specifically calling out why would he not vote his scum read if he is not freely available? 3. I vote for ON because I don't want 1der to die because I think he is townie. My top scumread is not available for the lynch. I am unable to vote for my scumread. I am unable to push him because of my own earlier mistake and because of the lynch mechanics. However you were able to push me, your top scumread, and you did nothing. You have also written 0 posts about why you think I'm scummy, yet you continuously seek to jab at me and aggravate me. Either out and state why you think I am scummy, or lay off. All you are doing is trying to start a shit show, and I'm not interested in that. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
1. I voted ON because I didn't want 1der to die. This is the original reason why I posted that statement. 2. I stated IDGAF between ON and sandroba because I think both are likely enough to be scum. 2b. The reason why I stated IDGAF is because I have no votes now, so I have no direct influence. By vote bombing, it means that I am giving up my ability to choose between ON and sandroba, and I am ok with that. 3. As I stated before and you ignored, I have a scumread on sandroba, but he's someone who will be very obvious come N1/D2/N2, and lynching a strong vet is no the best if you aren't very sure. Therefore I rate his lynch equally between ON in terms of viability, hence "IDGAF" I would appreciate it if you didn't ignore my posts. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:24 kushm4sta wrote: I gave you 3 votes. Austin said he would outvote. I backed off (i figured you would lose to sandroba next round anyway so no reason to get into a voting war with austin) false. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=372945¤tpage=15#295 In that post you said I didn't scumhunt. I responded to you that I did scumhunt. In my post, I said you put 0 posts on me. You respond to me that you did. You see a pattern? We're arguing about nothing. Just stop. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Barring a miracle change in ON's play, he has to die. He will yield extremely little information so wasting the lynch on him today is definitely not the best move, now that I think about it more. But he has to die. A super lurker at endgame is an almost un-winnable proposition for scum. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:33 kushm4sta wrote: What is the pattern? That you are wrong? You said I put 0 posts on you. I linked you one. 1>0 That you responded to it does not cancel out its existence. What is so scummy about ON? Just his 2 ninja votes at the end of r1? Or his afking? Hypothetically if he does not post at all d1, rules state that he will be modkilled or replaced. What is wrong with letting that happen? I said you put 0 posts on me, but you did, 1>0 You said I didn't scum hunt, but I showed 4 examples of me doing so, 4>0 We both are saying incorrect things about each other, that is going nowhere. We should be talking about the lynch. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
To make it 100% clear. SANDROBA That's why I wrote his name first. A bullet into ON by defintion means N1 or beyond, aka not now. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:12 EchelonTee wrote: da0ud. We're killing sandroba. I'm 99% sure 1der is a townie. I mean, I posted this. I realize the thread is moving fast but am I really being that unclear? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:38 thrawn2112 wrote: sorry to nitpick further but is that choice out of everyone in the entire game, assuming normal lynch mechanics? No it is not that choice out of anyone in the entire game. That choice would be da0ud, which I said in thread. I don't want to be a bitch, but seriously. Read my posts before you question me over and over and over. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
My previous words on him. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 10:24 austinmcc wrote: + Show Spoiler + Mementoss. Pretend for a moment that you're Mementoss this game. (Or, if you don't have to pretend, please let us know). 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.[ 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. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
UGH INB4 MOD KILL I JUST DID IT TO REFORMAT  | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Nice to come back to this.Not that it really matters anymore, but I wanted ON lynched primarily as a policy lynch, which is not as bad a reason as people seem to think. Letting a lurker live without any measures taken, especially in a mini is absolutely terrible for town. I don't know how many games towns have lost because they reached LYLO with a lurker. Imagine if ON had been replaced, in this case it might've been VE. It's so easy for a replaced scum to float by with the excuse "Don't judge me for my predecessor's actions. Here are 1 or 2 fake cases that will keep you off me until LYLO". Examples: Marv in TL Mafia LV, cccalf in Sum of All Fears, X in Y mafia x1000 | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:06 sandroba wrote: "this can't be town sandroba, where is his day1 magic?" Thanks for coming back. You lucked out that it was a 9135703809580 hour day lol | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:16 kushm4sta wrote: @ET you have a very fishy schedule I had no need to vote dump ON last round. It attracted a lot of attention and was simply not necessary from a scum perspective. I suggest you get off my case. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:24 austinmcc wrote: You dropped 6 votes right at deadline. 4 would have put him through. The extra 2 votes, if you've got a 3 man scumteam, represent you and your other scumbuddy's anger at ON for not being around. gg, ET scum. I concede u caught me | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:30 thrawn2112 wrote: there's also djo i think... he didn't have an votes but said he wanted to vote for sandroba right? anyways we don't know how long the night cycle will be so might as well get our "if i die before I wake" posts out of the way if I were to hazard a guess at a scum team off the top of my head it would be ET and hopeless. I haven't gone back and looked at anything yet but that's just my gut feeling Man I guess it was a bad idea when I pressured 1der on day 1. I'm bad at scum | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:20 thrawn2112 wrote: so this means there is likely scum among ET, da0ud, hopeless correct? The switch to sandroba happened pretty late so I don't it's likley that all the remaining mafia would be been bussing. imo the only possible busser candidates are kush and prp... hiro maybe too but his switch was pretty early on and a buss was not needed at that point. da0ud is scum you heard it here first | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:39 thrawn2112 wrote: ET is that a serious acusation? I'd kinda like all the people who voted for sand (or didn't vote at all including you and djo) to say who they think is scum just off the top of their head you realize you've asked me 3 different questions for which I've answered every time that I think da0ud is scum? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 12:11 kushm4sta wrote: forum time: 10:50 I tell austin to put votes on ON. My votes and his would be enough to lynch ON. 10:51 prpls change his votes to ON. Then he makes a big deal about it like it proves his innocence. ding ding ding we have a winner | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Here's hoping for WIFOM or blues or whatever | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 12:22 sandroba wrote: I'm not quite sure on him being town, but there is no things that jump about him being scum either. He is quite active and apparently concerned about the game, so I wouldn't worry about him yet. Agreed. Just weirded out how he continuously asks people for their top scumreads lol | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 22:51 sandroba wrote: 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. This deserves to be put into a guide or something The emotional method of scumhunting, as opposed to the hard analysis method | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:49 thrawn2112 wrote: originalname x1 sandroba x1 then On October 13 2012 07:15 thrawn2112 wrote: sandroba x1 | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 12:46 JingleHell wrote: Austin gets a large barrel of Acme Angry Host Glare delivered to his door for interrupting my viewing of the LoL finals to frantically make sure he was wrong. Unfortunately, it works about as well as Acme products ever do, which is to say, not at all. + Show Spoiler + GO TPA FCK YEAH | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 13 2012 23:57 Mementoss wrote: 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 >_>. This is such a strange post. You are presenting the lack of votes used as bad, but you don't go so far to say it is scummy. So therefore you spending a significant time talking about something that isn't meant to find scum. First strange part. Second strange part is that you are saying that austin is playing very passive and not putting any reads on people, where his filter shows him sharing thoughts quite easily. It doesn't matter that austin's filter is 10 pages long with 1000 word posts; it's a mispresentation to present him like this. However, misrepresentation isn't alone bad; people make mistakes. Exhibit A is myself and kush having a cock fight for no reason. The difference is in the confidence and tone displayed. Kush had (or has) a strong feeling that I was scum and fought me directly, making strong moves stating that he thought I was scum. On the other hand, in this post Mementoss seems extremely floating because he tries to discredit austin and make him seem scummy, while not ever saying that directly. It's very non-confrontational, which is strange compared to his early play. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
I swear I'm a native english speaker | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=160747 Shouldn't talk more about it though, it's derailing. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:02 prplhz wrote: well at least i don't have to bother with defending myself now What exactly is this post supposed to mean? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 01:34 thrawn2112 wrote: yes sand is right we lynch da0 then prp don't forget mmt if needed This should work out, but you never know, might be one hard busser on the team. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 03:23 kushm4sta wrote: I don't think I get this potato mechanic. Whoever has the potato when the mods randomly decide that the round is over gets lynched? Prpl and douad pass it back between yourselves I guess? I feel bad for the mods who have thought up all these crazy lynch mechanics that won't get to be used. On the contrary this mechanic is rly painful for town. The scum can hide so they won't get the bomb some round. If da0ud is actually scum then he'll just pass the potato to anyone without a care, and if we don't get lucky with timing, then a townie might blow up out of pure dumb luck. This lynch mechanic is extremely bad for town and I guess all we can do is hope for the best. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
It would be nice if da0ud and prplhz bounced the bomb between themselves but I don't see them cooperating. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
you can concede if your scum team has already been revealed... | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 06:12 HiroPro wrote: Because I find it extremely unlikely that prplhz as town would ever try to lynch sandroba like that on day 1. And the fact that he tries to act as if his vote switch onto ON after kush had already declared he was going to put his votes and the votes he got from austin on ON makes him town. He is smart and knows better than that. ^ i'm just going to leave this right here On October 14 2012 10:18 prplhz wrote: You know what, I just don't think that OriginalName is scum. I can't see anything scummy in his posting and his complete absense from the thread is a lot more townie than it is scum. And I just can't make myself lynch someone I think is probably town. On the other hand I keep thinking that sandroba is scum. So it's pretty simple. I'm voting a guy I think is scum over a guy I don't think is scum. (I already voted too I think). Okay thrawn2112 experience doesn't matter or anything, you lynch who is scum. If sandroba is scum then we will just spend tomorrow doing the exact same thing and if he is town we might just end up doing that too. OriginalName is town because it's town like to be completely absent. Scum feel more of a responsibility to their team and that makes them show up and do something, anything, not showing up is more townie like. Of course he could just be out of interwebs but then he's going to die anyway. sandroba is a good lynch because he is scummy. You are saying it yourself so I don't even have to convince you of this. And you lynch scummy people over people who aren't scummy. Imagine you lynch OriginalName and he flips town like you think he might just do, then we find out sandroba is scum. Why didn't you lynch sandroba? That's why you have to lynch who you think is scum. So gogogo lynch sandroba. this is after sandroba came back and made his non-defense | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
OriginalName is town because it's town like to be completely absent. ![[image loading]](http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/8/86382/2125600-are_you_serious_1_.jpg) | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 06:44 thrawn2112 wrote: i'm very confident on da0 being scum, and i think it's somewhat likely prplhz is too so that doesn't leave much room for other scumreads. Also ON voted djo so there's that... That's a good point. I brought it up because he was one of the vote dumpers on 1der, but if ON wanted to panic vote anyone, he didn't have to pick a teammate. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:02 prplhz wrote: well at least i don't have to bother with defending myself now What exactly is this post supposed to mean? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 07:17 prplhz wrote: was pretty sure i moved lynch from sand to ON but apparently austin promised some votes to whoever the fuck or something like that prplhz. really. On October 14 2012 09:28 austinmcc wrote: It's more just ... if we're going to kill one, and I don't really think either is super scummy, I'd rather take the safer lynch. I want a townsand around more, and I want a scumON around less, so ... I'm more willing to lynch ON. On October 14 2012 09:52 HiroPro wrote: im here. We should lynch ON. On October 14 2012 10:28 thrawn2112 wrote: I still don't understand/agree with your rationale for doing this but lay 'em onto ON On October 14 2012 10:50 kushm4sta wrote: austin vote ON for me please. im changing my mind about sandroba lynch Look at all of these players putting votes onto ON before you. and you have the gall to say that you changed the lynch? As late as 10:45 you were saying this stuff: On October 14 2012 10:45 prplhz wrote: questionable skill is doing nothing for an entire day and then coming back and acting all indignant about it. On October 14 2012 10:46 prplhz wrote: dude, if you were town you wouldn't be in this situation. do you ever get votes as town? You're not stupid. I've played enough games with you to know that. Do you actually believe that you helped move the lynch off of sandroba? Honestly? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 07:59 prplhz wrote: i was the final votes so get the fuck out You know as well as I do that that only matters if the final votes are the tipping point. Let's look at the voting record a bit. thrawn - sand 5 - 5-0 hope - sand 6 - 11-0 da0ud - sand 9 - 20-0 MMt - ON 5 - 20-5 kush - sand 1 - 21-5 austin - ON 3 - 21-8 thrawn - sand 0 - 16-8 prplhz - sand 8 - 24-8 HiroPro - ON 5 - 24-13 thrawn - ON 5 - 24-18 austin - ON 6 - 24-21 10:30 kush - ON 1 - 23-22 10:50 Let's take stock of the situation here. Sandroba is leading by 1 vote, but Austin still has 3 votes remaining. If Austin used his final 3 votes on ON (which it was pretty clear he was going to do), then the final score would be 23-25. Sandroba was going to live whether or not you did anything; in fact if you did nothing, it would leave you terribly exposed. Therefore when you did this: prplhz - ON 8 - 15-30 10:52 austin ON 9 - 15-33 10:56 You weren't saving sandroba from anything; austin had him covered already. You were merely trying to cover your tracks at the very last second possible. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
I wasn't around for the round either and had left a scumread on sandroba as my send-off, but you don't see me trying to take credit where it clearly isn't due. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
In this case, you did the last minute vote switch that isn't actually a hammer. I don't think you're going to win this game. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 08:21 prplhz wrote: okay can you freak hiro out some more then so he'll give me the god damn potato What are you going to do with it? You already said your scumreads are da0ud and hiro; if we want da0ud dead we'll just give it to him, and killing hiro is out of the question. The only reason why I can see you asking for it is you have some wonky role that will fuck us over. No thanks. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
i don't know if austin is town | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 03:23 kushm4sta wrote: I don't think I get this potato mechanic. Whoever has the potato when the mods randomly decide that the round is over gets lynched? Prpl and douad pass it back between yourselves I guess? I feel bad for the mods who have thought up all these crazy lynch mechanics that won't get to be used. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
1. If you're town and you hide, then the scum will just give the bomb to a different townie then you, no benefit to hiding. 2. If you're scum and you hide, then we will lynch you in the future (if we can lol). | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 11:07 kushm4sta wrote: this is ridiculous that the conversation about it is even this exhaustive... dao and prpl back and forth. let scum dig their own graves. Why the fuck is hiro still holding it.. just give it to purpl there is no downside. ^ Hiro please pass unless you have a better reason not to. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
I do find it amusing that you're trying to threaten me or something? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 16:10 da0ud wrote: This case is a prty good summary of my feelings on mmt. Especially the part where he gives slight deference to ON. That's one of those more subtle things that's actually quite important; he didn't out and out defend ON, sure, but his language in saying "brings up pretty good pts", "looking forward to what he has to say" is just strange as opposed to his dismissive attitude toward other player.+ Show Spoiler + Let me put some of my thoughts on Mementoss down : 1) My first scum read on him was by looking at the way he could have tried to hide his action by being the one voting on the most people after round one and two. 4 different people including Sand who was town (two votes) and kush as well who is the one is consider the towniest currently. He has been changing his attitude : voting kush in the first round and then not following it by voting sand in second round. Or voting Djo in first round and then switching it up by going for ET in round two. 2) in the finals he did probably hide his votes by putting them on ON when San was leading 20-0. Changing his mind later on and putting votes on Sand when ON was catching up would have looked too very odd. 3) He has never been attacking directly ON, kind of defending him on posts and saying San is scummier. On October 11 2012 02:24 Mementoss wrote: 1. Mementoss: Town 2. OriginalName: Has been active after the game has started and chose not to participate in any discussion. Other than that nothing. Seems pretty scummy. Already ahead by 3 votes, I have no reason to use a vote on him right now. On October 12 2012 04:37 Mementoss wrote: 2. OriginalName Lurking pretty hard as well. Only has one post with content so far. But it brings up some pretty decent points. Still he needs more activity into the game, looking forward to what his thoughts are on the other players/matchups. Null. Not voting either. 3. Sandropa: I don't like his posting at all this game. As others have said, most of his posting has been here are my thoughts and gives no reasoning. ET defends him with his meta in this statement: "Sandroba is one of those super strong town players who is comparatively abysmal as a mafia player. When he's mafia, his lack of effort and interest becomes abundantly clear very quickly, sort of like Palmar but even moreso, IMO. Therefore, when he plays mafia I find that he runs active disruption to try and make as much chaos as possible until he inevitably gets shot/lynched. " Which I don't know how ET thinks hes following this, is he reading the same game I am? I think if anything he looks like mafia meta this game, lack of effort and interest seem prevelant in this game, and no attempt to find any scum at all. I would really like him to go through and put some pressure on him to persue some reads. Looks scummy to me. 2 votes. On October 13 2012 22:53 Mementoss wrote: Also ET I know you explained it but its still fucking weird that you LAST MINUTE dropped all your votes on ON, after expecting him for a modkill, not having a read on him. And having a scum read on hopeless all of the first 2 cycles, you save him last minute. Not sure which way I will be voting today yet. On October 14 2012 00:31 Mementoss wrote: I will be putting all my votes on ON unless he returns then Sounds like a defaults choice, when ON is afk and lead 20-0. 4) All of mementoss argumentation is otherwise based on saying he is town because he used his votes earlier, he am concerned some people kept some votes and are powerful in the finals. Good way to hide the fact he actually doesn't affect anything in the vote. He is really hiding behind the fact he makes no difference in the voting decisions. On October 11 2012 20:56 Mementoss wrote: It bothers me that these 3 players have the most power in town ON Hopeless Da0 None of them used any votes officially, and all have 10 votes remaining. Coming down to the wire any one of them as scum could sway the results. On October 11 2012 21:00 Mementoss wrote: If they're scum and that's their plan then they're pretty stupid because they'd be put in the spotlight for doing that. Not all 3, but it is very possible for one of them to be scum, gaining 2 extra votes after the first round could prove to be a great advantage. On October 11 2012 23:59 Mementoss wrote: I will not make any deadlines. And hopeless you look fine with the way you unvoted. I still don't like that particular players will have more influence on the final lynch. On October 12 2012 20:50 Mementoss wrote: => this previous post is the climax !I have the least amount of votes left. sheit. Everyone else is "saving" there votes, or voting so late that it doesn't matter so they don't have to vote and have all the power at the end. On October 13 2012 22:52 Mementoss wrote: 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. On October 14 2012 03:09 Mementoss wrote: 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. @1der, any reason why you are refraining from doing anything today? What's your opinion of the potato shenanigans? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 15 2012 22:38 prplhz wrote: @EchelonTee Why do you want to give the potato to da0ud when you like his case? Do you think that a scum da0ud would try to sell out a scum Mementoss at this point? Because I'm not sure who's scum lol | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 16 2012 00:52 Djodref wrote: @ET If you are town and planning to give the potato back to him, why don't you hide ? The result is the same and you don't put yourself at risk at all. I don't understand why you would like to have the potato to give it back to him. I mean, right now, prplhz has the potato and I'm perfectly fine with it. The longer he has it, the happier I am. If I could use a hide to make him carry it longer I would. Because if I hide, he'll pass it to some other random townie, and it might explode on them (same chance of it exploding on me), and I don't know what that townie will do with the bomb, while I know exactly what I will do. This might be OMGUS, but prplhz has absolutely no reason to think that I am scum except for process of eliminiation, which is ludicrous to say the least. The fact that people are implying that they are unsure about prplhz or that they will explode other people boggles my mind a bit because of all of the absurd things prplhz has been saying. I've played with prplhz in a lot of games, and here a few things I've found: 1. he's a smart player: I remember when he N1 vigi shot scum. 2. he likes sheeping. I remember when he sheeped me even when I was a noobie, and when he sheeped everyone in Liar Game because he didn't know what was going on (busy with life I think?) 3. he usually responds to what people says In this game he's said some really outrageously dumb things that just sound so disingenuous. I don't care if people said that ON was null, or that he was just a lurker lynch. But to say that ON looks townie? Insanity. And to call me scum... for no reason? More insanity. And in this game when he had a chance to sheep sandroba and lay off him for just one cycle, he didn't take the opportunity. I don't see prplhz every doing this crap. Finally, when I and others call him out on his shit his response is to "fuck off lol". Are you goddamn serious. Is it risky for me to accept the potato? Obviously. But I'm fine with that to make prplhz completely and without question exposed as scum. If he sends it to me and I explode town, then prplhz should be revoked of his right to talk in thread until he finally gets the noose. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
not explaining your reads at all ok man =/ | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
There's really nothing left to say on the matter, just when will the RNG decide the lynch. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 16 2012 04:14 prplhz wrote: austinmcc probably not because it's just too dumb to be around at deadline and selling your votes if one of your mates is up, he could just claim to be afk and then have sandroba lynched and it's hard to really argue against "oh i was at my grandmother's dog's funeral, sry guise!!!". i still can't get over the HiroPro didn't talk about anything but me/kushm4sta for the first 10 posts but meh, can't lynch everybody. so austin gets deference but I don't for my ON votes ok | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
 | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
On October 16 2012 05:11 Mementoss wrote: I take back thinking prplhz being town. Him trying to kill ET has no town motivation and the fact he can't even explain why is even worse. Only thing I can think of is prplhz trying to kill ET before he is inevitely lynched? Things that still make me think hes town. He's not trying to push the case on me so that the lynch targets extend from him and da0d to him da0d and me. wat he's pushing hiro and myself, not pushing you = you think he's more town? | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
mmt On October 14 2012 12:54 EchelonTee wrote: This is such a strange post. You are presenting the lack of votes used as bad, but you don't go so far to say it is scummy. So therefore you spending a significant time talking about something that isn't meant to find scum. First strange part. Second strange part is that you are saying that austin is playing very passive and not putting any reads on people, where his filter shows him sharing thoughts quite easily. It doesn't matter that austin's filter is 10 pages long with 1000 word posts; it's a mispresentation to present him like this. However, misrepresentation isn't alone bad; people make mistakes. Exhibit A is myself and kush having a cock fight for no reason. The difference is in the confidence and tone displayed. Kush had (or has) a strong feeling that I was scum and fought me directly, making strong moves stating that he thought I was scum. On the other hand, in this post Mementoss seems extremely floating because he tries to discredit austin and make him seem scummy, while not ever saying that directly. It's very non-confrontational, which is strange compared to his early play. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
Just to clarify this; the quoted post is from GSL Open Mini Mafia where prplhz was scum. HiroPro sees a connection between the lack-of-thread-reading scum prplhz in GSL, and the lack-of-thread-reading prplhz here. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
tunneling is not an inherently bad thing. Another way to phrase it is "focusing on someone you think is scum and getting them lynched". Calling kush scummy for tunneling doesn't make sense. Tunneling is an inherent part of playing the game, unless you enjoy being unfocused. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5245 Posts
| ||
| ||
