EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXIX - Page 13
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
| ||
|
Inigmaticalism
United States103 Posts
It seems you've both explained what you meant fairly well, and Im especially glad to see this post from you Rad cause I was getting slightly worried. On October 25 2012 14:11 Rad wrote: EBWOP - I also agree that there's no point in lynching a lurker over a clear scum read. That's not what I said originally but is what he's trying to make it seem like I said. Ha just saw you summed up my analysis for me: You're pushing for "have confidence, the scum will show" while I'm pushing for "find the scum, if you're confident push it, otherwise we should lynch lurker". That stance seems completely reasonable to me. Does it not to you? @ sylver You seem fairly energetic. Also, don't really think "What's your favorite role to play in mafia?" keeps us all that focused on scum hunting, but as it may be some clever scheme of yours Ill bite. ......Well actually I won't because I realized I was typing how I play the game. How clever. Loaded question indeed. | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
On October 25 2012 13:15 Rad wrote: I'm really not getting this whole confidence theme going on and not really sure what confidence has to do with lynching a scum on d1. Confidence should be a result of being sure of something, not just being confident for the sake of being confident. If we're confident on a scum lynch d1, great, we lynch them, but really that confidence should come naturally from knowing we're right on a lynch vote. Even as a complete newbie, I'm not looking at this as "newbie vs newbie", I'm just looking at it as myself vs a bunch of unknown people. I'm certainly not counting on someone screwing up, which is how you're suggesting we approach this. The only way that it would be easy to find a scum d1 is if they slip up, and there's no guarantee that they'll slip up, newbie or not. For all we know, they could all lurk, which means they cannot slip up, and your "confidence" would only lead to lynching someone who's not lurking because you've forced yourself to be "confident". I'm not saying that you should be overconfident in your reads, I'm saying that you should be confident in your ability to find scum. To answer to daoud, I have faith in the town to find the scum and we should play this game with this mentality. Regarding the lurking, it is a bad strategy for the mafia to lurk (even worse for the town by the way) because we can use a policy lynch against a lurker. But It's a possibility I would like to consider later in the day. | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
Sylve could be doing some role fishing with his question. I really would like him to explain what was his motivation for it. | ||
|
Inigmaticalism
United States103 Posts
| ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
I've re-read the thread and I think that dandel and Rad are strong supporters of policy lynches for lurking. It's not a scumtell for me. I understand that you could be strongly against policy lynches given our experience ^^ The problem I see with this is people getting lazy and rely on a policy lynch for today. That's why I personally think it would be better to bring up the possibility for a policy lynch when we can tell for sure that lurking is plaguing us. | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
On October 25 2012 15:30 Djodref wrote: I'm not saying that you should be overconfident in your reads, I'm saying that you should be confident in your ability to find scum. To answer to daoud, I have faith in the town to find the scum and we should play this game with this mentality. Regarding the lurking, it is a bad strategy for the mafia to lurk (even worse for the town by the way) because we can use a policy lynch against a lurker. But It's a possibility I would like to consider later in the day. Djo, I'm just not following your argument here. You still haven't replied to my original questions for you. Here's what you originally said: On October 25 2012 12:58 Djodref wrote: I don't think it's going to be difficult to find a scum D1. It's better for us to be confident about this because I think it's quite easy to reveal scum newbies when you put pressure on them. Plus, if you are town and you are not confident, people are going to feel it through your posts and are going to become suspicious about you. We have to be assertive and for this, we have to be confident in our ability to find scum. I know it looks difficult at first but don't forget that scum players are likely to be as inexperienced as you in this game. Now you're saying that we should have confidence in our ability to find scum, but that has never been an issue on the table. I don't remember anyone saying "onoes d1 is too hard we should just lynch a lurker" or anything even close to that. That's when you should say "have confidence, we can do it!" Instead, someone pointed out that we probably won't find a scum unless they slip (which is probably true) but he never said we shouldn't try, and I haven't said that either. All of town has faith that we'll find the scum. Why play the game if you don't? Not sure why you threw that in there except to look like town... | ||
|
Rad
United States935 Posts
| ||
|
debears
United States2516 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:05 da0ud wrote: I do agree with you on this one. That makes no point lynching a lurker over a clear scum read. Even though I am not sure we will have very clear reads on day1. I am not sure about this point. It makes sense for scum to hide among lurkers: - If the attention is not put on lurkers the scummy lurker moves on undetected. - If the attention is put on the scummy lurker, then it is easy for the other scums to bully him and gain town credit. The problem with this assumption is that you think scum will take a route that will lead them to a center of controversy come lynch. time. Lurker policy lynch is a standard in pretty much any mafia game. Lurkers are in no way beneficial to town. On the other hand, a group that tends to get by as mafia is the semi active lurkers. These are the guys that chime in with worthless posts that appear useful on the surface. Look at Ver's Mafia XXX analysis. It makes sense. Semi active lurkers can look like they are contributing without actually putting themselves at real risk. Straight up lurking is something that will put you in the spotlight as mafia. Thus, mafia, most likely being semi active lurkers, are going to go for easy lynches, since they don't have to stick their head out with any game breaking analysis. See my logic (not really mine actually, more of general logic)? | ||
|
Roco69
Burkina Faso5 Posts
2/ I don't get the confidence stuff as well, for the moment 3/ what about killing guys who speak too much, can it be a strategie ? just to think out of the box | ||
|
debears
United States2516 Posts
On October 25 2012 13:54 sylverfyre wrote: Whoa what? I don't follow your line of reasoning that he's pushing for policy lynching lurkers over a scumread. When he said, early on: FOS: debears. Explain more clearly where your scum tell is? Ok now I'm actually going to bed. Here's the post below that I was talking about witht the scum tell On October 25 2012 13:27 Rad wrote: Why even think about artificial confidence though? Why is the concept of confidence even something to be considered beyond "if you're confident, push your case!" That's all confidence is good for. Artificial confidence does nothing. I get the point of "try to be more confident in your reads" or something to that extent, but I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker. We should do whatever we think is best at that point, not necessarily 1 thing or the other. Read the line in red again "I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker......How in the fuck is that not a scum tell. Why in the hell would a townie say that???????? And Rad, the sentence after has no affect on the scumminess of that statement at all. You just said that you did no see reason in pushing a d1 scum lynch over a lurker. Now, if the following sentence had said "If there is no good candidate for a scum lynch, then we should lynch a lurker", it would make sense...You didn't bring up that scenario. You just said whatever is best for town in that scenario. Well, the best thing for town in that scenario is a scum lynch....duh. Obvious contradiction? Let's think of the benefits of pushing a d1 scum lynch 1) We lynch a scum 2) refer to 1) 3) We scramble the scum team and make them make a decision on who to vote Case coming up on rad | ||
|
debears
United States2516 Posts
On October 25 2012 09:33 Rad wrote: Lurkers policy, well, I guess lynch lurkers if there's no better option? Can you explain what what the noob card is? Here Rad comes into the thread, unsure on something like lurker policy, which is pretty obvious if you've seen a TL mafia game, which he stated he has. On October 25 2012 12:00 Rad wrote: You're being especially confusing right now, at least for me. Dan basically said sure, if we have a confirmed mafia d1 (which he claims would be difficult without a major slip), lynch, otherwise it might be necessary to policy lynch. This seems reasonable. Your statement, however, is extremely confusing. Without knowing your previous game in depth, none of what I quoted above means anything. Can you please explain more briefly/clearly "where your confidence got you"? Also, what does your previous confidence have to do with any potential scenario for a d1 lynch? He goes and defends another player over a simple question that I asked that player when that player hasn't responded first. Mafia tend to due this since they KNOW someone is town. What's a better way to get townie points? Then the part on what confidence has to do with any d1 lynch scenario. WHAT D1 LYNCH IS BASED ON SUCH HARD EVIDENCE THAT YOU CAN BE COMPLETELY CONFIDENT ON IT AS TOWN? None. It takes fucking balls to stand up with your accusations, even in the chance that they might be wrong. On October 25 2012 13:15 Rad wrote: I'm really not getting this whole confidence theme going on and not really sure what confidence has to do with lynching a scum on d1. Confidence should be a result of being sure of something, not just being confident for the sake of being confident. If we're confident on a scum lynch d1, great, we lynch them, but really that confidence should come naturally from knowing we're right on a lynch vote. Even as a complete newbie, I'm not looking at this as "newbie vs newbie", I'm just looking at it as myself vs a bunch of unknown people. I'm certainly not counting on someone screwing up, which is how you're suggesting we approach this. The only way that it would be easy to find a scum d1 is if they slip up, and there's no guarantee that they'll slip up, newbie or not. For all we know, they could all lurk, which means they cannot slip up, and your "confidence" would only lead to lynching someone who's not lurking because you've forced yourself to be "confident". Yet again, he talks of scum reads like they are 100% foolproof. That is wrong. The best townies on TL are wrong on cases all the time. Don't give me that, we must make sure he's 100% scum before voting, bullshit. No way. Cases don't start that way. Lynches don't start that way. On October 25 2012 13:21 Rad wrote: It wasn't your confidence, it was your reasoning. Confidence had nothing to do with it. I completely agree that we should push cases, but we shouldn't become unnecessarily confident and make lynch decisions based on it. Confidence based on nothing makes no sense. Confidence based on something is what will come naturally. No one has said that we should necessarily lynch lurkers on d1. Analyze, make a case IF you're confident, and then we can push for a scum lynch or push for a lurker lunch depending on how confident we all are. Now he makes up some bullshit statement that my lynch of SDM had nothing to do with confidence. Really? I was at threat of being lynched. And instead of fighting for not being lynched, I sacked myself and went all out on the most townie looking player at that point (at least in my eyes). Do you really think that doesn't take any confidence? And how are you suddenly an expert on last game when you didn't even know what I was refering to with my SDM case before??????? On October 25 2012 13:38 Rad wrote: Please point out where I've said that we should lynch a lurker over a scum read. I'm all for helping newbies be more confident in pursuing their cases, but it has nothing to do with "we can get a scum read d1!". That's "artificial confidence" and doesn't make sense. I'm completely open to a reasonable argument where it does make sense though. So here he wants newbies to suddenly hide in their holes, citing what has been previously said on confidence as "artificial". This is a forced argument. He ignores the fact that confidence = increased posting and scumhunting. On October 25 2012 14:00 Rad wrote: So you FOS dan for no reason, and when I try to make sense of your reasoning giving you plenty of chances to clear it up, you fos me, and then claim I scumslipped and vote me? FOS debears Wow. Isn't this OMGUS? I've tried explaining how confidence = increased posting and scumreads. And then how increased posting = less room for mafia to hide. He doesn't get simple logic like that????? Then he tries to play it off like I'm doing something wrong. "I give you plenty of chances to clear it up". Last time I checked, I'm the one wanting you to clear your view up. And a weak FOS to back it. On October 25 2012 14:10 Rad wrote: Please re-read the post he's quoting me on there. When you put it all in context, it should make sense to you what I meant (along with my other posts before it). Let me know if my point isn't clear there and I'll try to make it more understandable. To me it seems like he's trying to push out an obvious statement that people will agree with in order to cover up what I really meant. So now you're trying to discredit my statements instead of accurately explaining your own. "he's trying to put up an obvious statement to cover up what I really meant". I'm not covering up anything. I'm showing everyone an obvious scumslip that you said. It's a contradicting statment in a mafia-oriented way. See my post to da0ud about it. Your defense of my scumread on you is that "the context backs it up". Bullshit. bullshit. bullshit. On October 25 2012 14:11 Rad wrote: EBWOP - I also agree that there's no point in lynching a lurker over a clear scum read. That's not what I said originally but is what he's trying to make it seem like I said. Ah. Now you're restating what you said. Your best defense is that I'm trying to make it seem like you said "I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker" Finally, my final part of my case is the lack of scumhunting that Rad has actually done. His sole focus is on me and "artificail confidence". His only scumhunting is a weak FOS on me. And he is more concerned on defending himself than finding scum. Rad you are pretty damn scummy in my eyes. My vote will stand with you unless I see a person who is more scummy. | ||
|
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
|
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
| ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
On October 25 2012 16:21 Roco69 wrote: 1/ It is my first game 2/ I don't get the confidence stuff as well, for the moment 3/ what about killing guys who speak too much, can it be a strategie ? just to think out of the box @Roco You should ask this kind of questions to your coach. If you have a strategy to propose, please back it up with serious arguments. Why do you think that mafia players would be among the most active posters ? | ||
|
Inigmaticalism
United States103 Posts
Also, I found Mr. Cheesecakes to be interesting. No town or scum tell; I just want to read more of your posts. | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
On October 25 2012 15:55 Rad wrote: Djo, I'm just not following your argument here. You still haven't replied to my original questions for you. Here's what you originally said: Now you're saying that we should have confidence in our ability to find scum, but that has never been an issue on the table. I don't remember anyone saying "onoes d1 is too hard we should just lynch a lurker" or anything even close to that. That's when you should say "have confidence, we can do it!" Instead, someone pointed out that we probably won't find a scum unless they slip (which is probably true) but he never said we shouldn't try, and I haven't said that either. All of town has faith that we'll find the scum. Why play the game if you don't? Not sure why you threw that in there except to look like town... Well, dandel and you have been saying that we need a major scumslip to find a scum D1. For me, it is close to say that it is too difficult to find a scum D1, because you are even saying that it is probably not going to happen. I disagree with the major scumslip, you can build good cases on D1 summing up the litlle scumtells in one's player post. You can totally catch scum this way. I'm insisting on this because it was not my mentality at all at the beginning of NMMXVIII, you case see this in my quotes in debear previous posts. I want the "scared" newbies (like daoud) to boost their confidence and go scumhunt. | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
what do you think of Roco post ? | ||
|
Roco69
Burkina Faso5 Posts
To keep it simple, "lurker policy on D1" seems to be a well known and basic strategy so I will do the exact opposite,=>so I will never be suspected. | ||
| ||
