EPTYour Clothes, Give them to me. [mafia] - Page 7
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
I'm also thinking that tomorrow is going to be pretty much like day1 because anybody could be scum. Even if someone did something very townie on day1 we have to forget all that and get new reads. Of course we have one more tool at our disposal which is posting analysis and two flips, at least one of them mafia. | ||
|
ghost_403
United States1825 Posts
Alan Schaefer Alex Hesse Alex Hesse Ben Richards John Matrix Harry Tasker Not voting: Alan Schaefer Douglas Quaid John Matrix Jack Slater also, prplhz is a baws. | ||
|
Jack Slater
46 Posts
I don't think that Alex is scum, he has vehemently argued against lynching an easy lynch candidate. I don't recall too many times that scum pushed that hard AWAY from lynching a lurker. I mean, even if John flipped scum after the NK, Alex would be the top of the lynch list d2. Harry in all likelyhood is not scum either. He has provided way more paranoid reasoning than necessary to push this lynch. This leaves Alan, Doug, John, and Ben as possible scum candidates for my initial reads right now. Alan has still yet to talk about anything but the setup and how it affects play. Doug has been scummy to me since the start of the game John needs to fucking post. Ben has basically only mentioned alex and setup, he could get my vote right now if I was voting. ##FOS Ben | ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
Jack Slater | ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
I'd also like you to explain this post and be as wordy as you can. | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 17 2012 12:29 Jack Slater wrote: I do not support a lynching of a lurker. I do however think that this is extremely suspicious of Douglas Quaid to suggest this. Lynching lurkers on this day 1 is basically an auto-loss for town. In all likelyhood scum will be amongst the most active on this day1 because there are no meta reads and the amount of setup discussion about the unique aspects of this game will provide plenty to discuss without having to scumhunt while being active. Douglas Quaid should realize how reckless it is to lynch anyone based on just activity. Activity should always be accounted for but any plan involving a policy lynch is a plan most likely to fail for town. I feel that in a lot of past games there is always people suggesting the lurker lynch as both town and scum. For this game it would make a really easy way to blend in as scum, while only having to be active with one teammate and forcing a mislynch into lylo. ##FOS Douglas Quaid Also, voting has to be done extremely carefully. We have to remember that if we are 1 vote from a mislynch a scum can jump on it immediately and then replace their smurf with whomever they kills. This means that interactions and player to player connection theories should be much less accounted for than normal, if at all. Here you're suspicious of Dougy for suggesting lynching a lurker. Is the difference between him and me purely that I've provided so much "paranoid reasoning"? If you find my reasoning paranoid, could you explain why you find it incorrect? (I believe that's implied with 'paranoid'). You also say that John is an 'easy' target, but I'm finding it quite the opposite atm ^_^ | ||
|
Jack Slater
46 Posts
On October 19 2012 00:01 Alex Hesse wrote: Why are you afraid to be the first vote on someone? Are you afraid that the three scum will hammer? I'd also like you to explain this post and be as wordy as you can. As you can see from my previous posts, I am trying to enact a plan of voting. I am not afraid of 3 scum hammering, I am afraid not not being around when 3 other people vote. There is a huge difference, because I want the ability to see who else is voting as I am before a lynch occurs with me voting it On October 19 2012 00:03 Harry Tasker wrote: Jack, I'd like some clarification on this post, please: Here you're suspicious of Dougy for suggesting lynching a lurker. Is the difference between him and me purely that I've provided so much "paranoid reasoning"? If you find my reasoning paranoid, could you explain why you find it incorrect? (I believe that's implied with 'paranoid'). You also say that John is an 'easy' target, but I'm finding it quite the opposite atm ^_^ I am suspicious of DQ pushing the general policy of lynching a lurker because of the lack of reasoning behind it. Your reasoning of it being optimal play is a true statement which is why I have not called him town. DQ's reasoning was just the general offering of the policy, an easy way to start discussion and pushing a scum agenda without looking scummy because of previous starts to games | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
Is that because you find what he's posted sufficiently scummy to warrant this, or is it because you believe the chance that John is simply AFK is too high to bet on? Ben at the moment is my second choice. He comes across as pretty angry/emotional in this post, but subsequently doesn't really get involved at all. There seems to be a disconnect between that level of apparent emotion and subsequent lack of investment in the thread. | ||
|
Ben Richards
11 Posts
That's fucking nice. In other news, Johnny Matrix still hasn't posted. ##Unvote ##Vote: John Matrix @Harry Yeah, I agree about Alex. I misunderstood when he said "pushing a scum agenda" - took it to mean that he thought I was deliberately pushing a scum agenda, then turning around in the same post and saying he disagreed with a scum read on me. Since he's told me what he meant, and because he's brought the fight to your cheeky ass (  ) I agree that he's looking much better.@Alex Elaborate on your read of Alan - I'm not seeing what you're seeing in Alan's posting. I tend to agree with Harry when he says that lurking is absolutely viable as a scum strategy, and presently I think John is our best bet for scum. To a lesser degree, Jack is fitting the bill of lurking, disinterested scum too. Why is Alan scummier than both of these guys? | ||
|
Jack Slater
46 Posts
@Harry I think that John's alignment is a complete toss up which is why I am not willing to lynch him today. Unless people can make a super compelling counter argument to every other player in the thread being town I don't think that he is the smart lynch today. Since someone else has to be scum other than him I would rather try and sniff out that person first. Ben's voting John makes me not want to lynch him even more | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 19 2012 01:42 Ben Richards wrote: Elaborate on your read of Alan - I'm not seeing what you're seeing in Alan's posting. I tend to agree with Harry when he says that lurking is absolutely viable as a scum strategy, and presently I think John is our best bet for scum. To a lesser degree, Jack is fitting the bill of lurking, disinterested scum too. Why is Alan scummier than both of these guys? You can't just drop this, you have to explain it. He has 10 posts, you have 6. Lurking, disinterested... ? | ||
|
Ben Richards
11 Posts
How about how he's suspicious of DQ for "pushing a policy of lynching lurkers", yet is buddy buddy with you in spite of you being the one who took the initiative and actually VOTED for John Matrix? How about he's using your suspicion of me to further excuse not voting for his scumbuddy? Like, I'm interested in this game. My views on posting in this game are DOCUMENTED in my very first post. Indeed, you took issue with it yourself. Yet, I don't give a fuck and am continuing to attempt to consolidate my posts and attempting to keep the thread tidy. Unfortunately, it's all for naught because we have so many people just waiting for something to happen, and OH HEY LOOKIE THERE BEN IS MAKING THINGS HAPPEN IN SPITE OF HAVING THE SECOND LOWEST POST COUNT IN THE GAME! Take your bias elsewhere Harry. Not fucking interested. If you want to get me lynched, that's fine - but don't be surprised if you're not who you think you are tomorrow. Your style is exceedingly easy to emulate, dear. | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 19 2012 02:10 Ben Richards wrote: Yes, but obviously I know my own alignment. How about how he's suspicious of DQ for "pushing a policy of lynching lurkers", yet is buddy buddy with you in spite of you being the one who took the initiative and actually VOTED for John Matrix? How about he's using your suspicion of me to further excuse not voting for his scumbuddy? Like, I'm interested in this game. My views on posting in this game are DOCUMENTED in my very first post. Indeed, you took issue with it yourself. Yet, I don't give a fuck and am continuing to attempt to consolidate my posts and attempting to keep the thread tidy. Unfortunately, it's all for naught because we have so many people just waiting for something to happen, and OH HEY LOOKIE THERE BEN IS MAKING THINGS HAPPEN IN SPITE OF HAVING THE SECOND LOWEST POST COUNT IN THE GAME! Take your bias elsewhere Harry. Not fucking interested. If you want to get me lynched, that's fine - but don't be surprised if you're not who you think you are tomorrow. Your style is exceedingly easy to emulate, dear. Red 1 - I questioned him on this and was satisfied with his answer. Are you not? Why have you ignored his response on it? Blue - This is just stupid. Green - What are you making happen? Red 2 - How am I biased? You're just saying random stuff now. What's me possibly wanting to get you lynched got to do with me perhaps getting nightkilled?! | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
Regarding the John Matrix lynch - I'm all for a policy lynch on someone who hasn't posted, but there's no point in voting/pressuring him now. We have a lot of time to lynch him (36 hours), and it's best if we not focus on what his rationale could be and simply pressure the players that actually post. Regarding Alex's Defense - Seems calm and reasoned, and he gets some townie points. Though, I would like a more thorough explanation of Ben Richards being his "biggest town read." 2: I am not agreeing with the scum read. I am acquitting him of the bad things while pointing out the good thing. He is probably my biggest town read right now. @Jack Slater I found this post horrendously scummy: On October 18 2012 23:45 Jack Slater wrote: I am starting something new I don't think that Alex is scum, he has vehemently argued against lynching an easy lynch candidate. I don't recall too many times that scum pushed that hard AWAY from lynching a lurker. I mean, even if John flipped scum after the NK, Alex would be the top of the lynch list d2. Harry in all likelyhood is not scum either. He has provided way more paranoid reasoning than necessary to push this lynch. This leaves Alan, Doug, John, and Ben as possible scum candidates for my initial reads right now. Alan has still yet to talk about anything but the setup and how it affects play. Doug has been scummy to me since the start of the game John needs to fucking post. Ben has basically only mentioned alex and setup, he could get my vote right now if I was voting. ##FOS Ben Makes no damn sense. I've been scummy to you since the beginning of the game, and your top suspect is Ben? Also, for someone who's suspicious of me, I haven't seen you push your suspicions at all. You interacted with me a little bit when I was explaining policy and the like, but that's it. You have never posted a single thing about why I'm suspicious after the initial burst of posting - yet you still have a scumread on me. I call bullshit. | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
##Unvote Seriously, there's something fucking not-right about Ben going - "you can try to lynch me, but you'll get night killed." That's all kinds of screwed up. | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
| ||
|
Ben Richards
11 Posts
It was a playful jab intended to make you consider the ramifications of continuing to tunnel me. I'm trying to find scum, whether you believe that or not. Obviously it's my job to MAKE you believe it, regardless of my alignment. Rest assured that I fully intend to do so - but it's hard to do that when there are people in the game who just think I'm scum regardless what I do or say. Call that an excuse, at this point I don't care. I'm keeping my vote on John because honestly, at this point it like HAS to be intentional. And there's no town motivation for joining a game and proceeding to intentionally not post. | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
Whether you're town or scum, the fact I'm pursuing you has *nothing* to do with the nightkills. Your flip is irrelevant to this and I don't get how you tied them together. | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
On October 19 2012 02:47 Ben Richards wrote: I know that Harry's style is easy to emulate and logic would dictate that's one of the requisites for NKs. Add to the fact that I'm town, and I'm going to FLIP town, and the ideal place for a scum to hide would be among the loudest voices in my opposition #1. Why? Because it doesn't make any sense! Because why would scum do that? That's EXACTLY how I play scum, because most people are only interested in searching for the "optimal play"#1 1) How do you know mafia's going to do this? Sure they could, but it's far from set in stone. Also, there's this guy named Jack Slater who has a strong town read on you. What do you think of him? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=374903¤tpage=7#135 2) So you have an active scum meta... but a lurky town one? It was a playful jab intended to make you consider the ramifications of continuing to tunnel me #3. I'm trying to find scum, whether you believe that or not. Obviously it's my job to MAKE you believe it, regardless of my alignment. Rest assured that I fully intend to do so - but it's hard to do that when there are people in the game who just think I'm scum regardless what I do or say. Call that an excuse, at this point I don't care. 3) Playful jab, sure, but you're still treating him like he's town. "Ramifications" only apply if he's town - he could be scum tunneling you no? I'm keeping my vote on John because honestly, at this point it like HAS to be intentional. And there's no town motivation for joining a game and proceeding to intentionally not post #4. 4) Let's focus on people who are actually posting for now. Why should we waste precious time tunneling someone who isn't here? We have ~30 hours of time left in the day, and I'd much rather it be spent pressuring other people. I'm all for lynching John, but our time for now is better spent elsewhere. | ||
| ||
