EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
 | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
2) While I don't want to be trying to lynch more active townies, I feel that lynching lurkers has a negative impact for us, as it really gives up a day where we could be cleaning up the town, and also reduces the number of days we have to live. 3) Pie, cheesecake is disgusting (most of the time)  Favourite colour is orange, though a good yellow has always had a special place in my heart too  | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I don't want to reveal which of the members I feel most suspicious of yet, though I do have a gut feeling about it, and as for the 2nd bad guy, this is pure speculation, but I do feel like they are lurking in the shadows a bit, since there's so much going on already, it'd be the perfect time to just sit back a bit and let the townies destroy themselves. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 04 2012 11:13 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: @Anyone In your opinion, what differentiates bad(newbie) town play from scum play? This one? I feel like one of the major things that differentiate newbie play with scum play is the explanation that comes behind an accusation. I feel that newer players, when accusing others of being scum, will have a lot weaker arguments that are not particularly well thought out. Reasoning would mainly be either lack of experience, or just going on gut feeling that what someone has said in the past seems suspicious. On the other hand, being scum means that you have to have a certain amount of thought behind what you say, as making a contradictory or just a random off-the-cuff statement could shine a light of suspicion on them, which obviously they want to avoid. If a new player is scum, I also found from my real life experience from the game, they do prefer to wait for others to make motions against someone before being sheeping behind them and just agreeing with what others have said. This may not be true all the time, as a lot of new players do get warned about being too obvious about it, but it can happen when they cannot formulate their own attack in time. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 04 2012 10:57 Sylencia wrote: 1) This is my first game of Mafia on TL, I've played it a bit offline, so I'm interested to see how different it is in comparison. 2) While I don't want to be trying to lynch more active townies, I feel that lynching lurkers has a negative impact for us, as it really gives up a day where we could be cleaning up the town, and also reduces the number of days we have to live. 3) Pie, cheesecake is disgusting (most of the time) Favourite colour is orange, though a good yellow has always had a special place in my heart too | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 04 2012 19:50 AxleGreaser wrote: 'No more Pity' Just an anecdote here, I have tried the pity play before, and people find it more annoying than anything and it does get you lynched, so it's a wise decision you've made (In the case I was in, I was bemoaning the fact I had gotten a vanilla with a vanilla power twice in one night - as this version gave everyone an extra power, but one of those powers was to gain no extra powers. The chance of getting that power was about 1/50 as well lol) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Sure, so my theory is this (and I guess the amount of activity kind of makes me feel more strongly about it): When people talk, they will generally give off some sort of tell as to whether they're more likely to be good or not. Even if they don't, they have provided you with information. After time has passed, if everyone has read what everyone else has said, they should have plenty of information to go off. If we have 2 lurkers, those guys we have no information on. In addition, the chance they are a townie is so much higher than they would be mafia. Lynching a lurker on day 1 or maybe day 2 is essentially saying "I don't know, the information given too me is too confusing, let's just take a stab in the dark" - which is the easy way out, and also means that the mafia have already won by that point (not really, but they have a big advantage because they now know that they're in the clear for now). Also, unless the mafia team is some genius combination/afk, I highly doubt both mafia will remain silent during the discussions, meaning that you will be hearing an active mafia member talking and swaying people. The tricky part is catching them in the act. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 05 2012 09:46 Rad wrote: @Sylencia You seem seem to have a lot of insightful things to say, but are holding back. You do realize that you're not just here to solve everything on your own, you need to help us determine if you're town or not, and if you're town, you could help a lot by talking more. Maybe jump in and give some reads? Sure thing, I wasn't planning on holding back for much longer, since I just wanted to get a few more posts in the thread before seeing if anything useful came from it. However, I'm going to have to make a longer post later since my lunch hour is about done and I only just managed to catch up with the thread. For now, all I want to say is that I'm pretty sure Kickstart is with the town here. Firstly, he brings up good, valid points with his posts, there's justification behind what he says and he also has an attitude. This attitude that he is bringing into the game doesn't help him whatsoever, and really only promotes him to be voted. Why would you bring so much negative attention to yourself when you want others to feel like you should still hang around? As I said before, more later but I am only going to be able to lurk around for the next 5 or so hours. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Axle: Originally, I thought his acts of 'treat me nicely, I'm new' were actually quite suspicious, followed by really confusing posts which initially I believed were just posts to clog up the conversation and keep things disjointed. However, seems like as time goes on I understand what Axle is talking about less and less and now I don't even read the posts because it actually hurts my brain to try and understand the concepts he is talking about. Based off the responses you guys make to what he says, seems to be hard on you too. Basically, if I had no better read, I'd be picking Axle simply because I don't want to have to deal with working with an incomprehensible teammate. Jidolboy: From what I have seen, all that has happened from him are a few answers and then a sudden vote. If I was to guess the way this game was going to go down, it would have the one person who is more active do the swaying, while the other lurks a bit more. As far as I can tell, Jidol has been the biggest lurker in the game so far, and then makes no effort in justifying what he has said. However, does that mean he's piggybacking onto CC, making him scum (assuming that Jidol is too)? Possibly, but probably not, if they were both scum, they wouldn't be picking out Oats I think, and instead piggyback onto the Kick vote. Kick: This afternoon, I said that Kick is a townie because of his obnoxious behaviour. Rad and Oats continue the attack, and bring up rather relevant points, most of which I didn't consider (and also some points due to a past game which I didn't observe). However, at this point in time, I still believe that Kick is a townie, and so at this point in time I will not be voting for him. yamato: More active than jidol, but still seems like lurking, and goes with the easy way out by voting Axle. Also noticed the disappearance after heat being applied on him but whether or not that's due to time zone, I'm not sure. Now, between Rad and Oats, I feel like one is supporting the other, but at the same time, I also feel like one of them is doing so with the intention of swaying the other into believing they are on the same team. This round, I feel like I have to be voting for one or the other here. (Also, while I think that one or the other is scum, I do not think that both would be scum. They stand out far too much and have already essentially said "We are together in this fight", and that'd be some sick psychological tactics or some really newbie play if they were to be double scum) In this case, I will be voting for Oats for two reasons: No lynch doesn't help us get any information. Worst case scenario means if we pick all townies to be lynched, we lose at the same rate as if we didn't lynch Day 1. Between the two, Oats feels a lot more scummy to me. The main point in the end is the suspicion on yamato, followed by the 'scum read' on yamato, followed by a complete drop of the case against him, and then a complete dodge on answering why yamato was even suspected by him in the first place. Also, to me it seems like the case made when explaining why there was a vote for kickstart in the first place could also be applied to him. 1. At the time, yamato was still a suspect, so claims possible read 2. Notices no support for yamato's suspicion, backs out, and goes straight for Kickstart. Naturally, I could be completely off track here, but I feel like the person who I should vote is for Oats. ##Vote Oatsmaster | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I was able to post right now as I just got to work, and everything was still loading up. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
As for the death of CC, I was suspecting it would either be Kick, him or myself, but it actually sucks that he was a blue | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I guess you could say the reason why I would suspect me to be killed off is because I simply don't believe I am as suspicious as you're making me out to be. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
The presence of a named VT would be pretty useful information at this point. If there is one, I'd request them to come out at this point in time. Having taken out one of the scum in the game, the momentum is in our favour if most of the things in this game come clear. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##Vote AxleGreaser | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 08 2012 13:39 yamato77 wrote: You haven't really searched for scum the whole game so why would this be any different? Seems like a blendy scum excuse to park your vote on the easiest mislynch. Incorrect, I actually made a plan last night but then it seems like 10 Axle posts completely drowned out anything that was said previous before it. And considering the fact that during day 1 I had to give a whole explanation on why I chose between Rad and Oats - why I thought one of those two were scum, and why I had chosen to ignore the majority of the other people doesn't qualify as doing anything? In any case, I'll restate what I said. If there is a named townie, they should come forth as the more clear we are on the situation, the better off we are. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
The reason why I say that Rad wouldn't do such a move is because ganging up on one person is a very risky move which really only happens if the mafia have an overwhelming advantage. Doing it on day one means if one gets caught, the other gets dragged down with them (in general), whether they were scum or not. Sooner or later, once there are less reads you will be voting Rad off, but I think there's still too many other potential targets that you can pick off before it reaches that point where the association with Oats should be looked at. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Instead, all I see is "Hey guys, you make good points, I was thinking the same thing too, I'll go for rad". No points ever suggesting you had the same thoughts as others, only you saying that what everyone else said covered what you would have. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##vote jidolboy Doing this to show who I suspect, still seems suspicious as hell to me, Arn just looks like he is afk. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 09 2012 10:18 yamato77 wrote: Syl and Arn need to explain why they rejected the idea of consolidating. Axle, too, needs to explain why he didnt vote for the Rad lynch. Just woke up, got to go in about 10 minutes, so I'll just quickly say: I already mentioned how Rad is not scum (in my eyes). I am not going to vote for someone who I can see as town, just because others are voting for them. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Going into day 3, if I'm still around, I will have to re-evaluate what I have been thinking, but at this current point in time (I've only read the last few posts) my gut still says it's between Jidol and Arn. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Honestly, I thought that Kick was a cop, and was hoping to get some sort of weird lure play during the last day, when I kept pressing for the named VT. Since at this point we know there is either still a cop or a named VT, if there was a cop, I would hope they found the final scum member by now (unless they got unlucky and chose all the killed targets). If instead there's a named VT, still think we have the advantage by calling it out now. It's currently 5 vs 1. Knowing who is named now means that we can focus the hunting on one of the other 5 players. As everyone has some sort of suspicion placed on them, this should also help reduce the amount of split votes we had in Day 2. Though this may be unnecessary if there has already been a jump on Arn. Downside to revealing of course is that you're prime target to be killed off tonight, so it might be better to wait until tomorrow if it lasts that long. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
The way you've done this each day disturbs me quite a bit, and makes me feel like you're a lot more hostile than I first thought. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Just keep it as a note, and act on it when you feel the need to. Otherwise things get out of hand if you decide to continuously change votes again and again. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
A lot of posts made by Oats always ask about people's opinion on yamato. Why is he so intent on getting that information? On December 04 2012 13:37 Oatsmaster wrote: What do you think about yamato voting you? On December 04 2012 13:58 Oatsmaster wrote: So you are gonna ignore yamato's vote? Do you have a town/scum read on yamato? On December 04 2012 14:31 Oatsmaster wrote: IMO Opinions help a lot in determining reads, so when Axle answered the question obliquely or not at all, it doesnt help yamato determine a read so yamato pressure votes Axle. its a pressure vote kickstart. (Why does he feel the need to explain what yamato does when he is clearly capable of doing it himself) On December 04 2012 20:38 Oatsmaster wrote: k cool. What do you think about kickstarts suspicion towards yamato? Also what do you think about yamato? The following posts after that are the ones where people begin to wonder - why did he say yamato was suspicious, then complete 180 and say he was town? Naturally, Oats also did mention Kickstart a lot, but that's because he was pushing for a mislynch to happen so that is only natural that the majority of the time Kick was being talked about by him. So here I wonder, was the plan on day 1 something like this, or did it eventually lead to this: - Everyone starts the game, and off the bat people are suspicious of yamato. - To help draw attention away, yamato stops posting and oats gets to work on a case against Kickstart instead, while also defending people suspecting yamato. - During all this, opinions on yamato are given when asked as this obviously helps the scum work out who they should take out first. - Oats continues his case against Kickstart, but at this point does the 180, and it really seems like he's now subtly putting it out there that yamato is innocent. - Case goes against oats now and he is lynched. In each of the days including the first, yamato has never changed his vote. A smart move, if he was scum because on the first day, going with the crowd would leave him with explaining to do, day 2 ended up with a no lynch, meaning there was a free kill for the scum in any case, and then finally we have day 3 - where him, Arn and I are the most suspicious ones of the group. Within the first few hours of the day he decides to target Arn, and we're left where we are. The majority of this case is based behind the actions of Oats, and I think that he has left enough clues to find the other member of the mafia team. This is the way I decided to look at it this time, and it is the way I am going to vote today. ##vote Yamato | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I mean, sure, my interpretations of Oat's posts may not be completely correct, but it's a hell of a lot more trustworthy than what anyone alive says. Knowing he was scum, you have to think what he was trying to achieve by posting what he did, who he was trying to protect and cover for, and how he did so. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##vote Arnarnion Can't afford to have no lynch, and if Arnarnion is afk, it's as good as not being in this game. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 12 2012 10:14 Rad wrote: Sigh, arn. Based on your previous thoughts, or did this flip add to it? Considering you're the only confirmed town, being less cryptic would be great. Mainly still based on my previous thoughts, but remember that before that I was thinking it was either Arn or Jidol. Now that both are town, and the information I have, it seems like it's yam. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
In any case, there will be 4 people left. If in any case we cannot decide who is the final member - consider having no lynch. 3v1 turns into 2v1 in which you then have improved odds in hitting the last member, otherwise it will be 2v1 for a mislynch turning into 1v1 after the night meaning they win. At the moment I'm still saying it's yamato, but this is just another way to keep the chances high. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Anyways, here is the situation that is probably going to transpire if it is a no lynch: I die, you're left with unreadable player Axle, considered suspicious by the other 2 Rad and considered suspicious by Rad yamato. Rad gets lynched and the scum win. However, if there is no solid read for anyone, then doing this is better than mislynching someone as that would end the game immediately. I'm still fully prepared to vote yamato though I think, as between the four of us he is most definitely the one who stands out most as possibly being scum. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
You say if we no lynch, we get into the same situation, that's mostly true, but with a 1/3 shot of finding the scum rather than a 1/4. With 1 less person in the game, the person responsible for the second vote (probably to choose between Rad and yamato) would actually be inclined to check everything about the two players left. So why are you so against having better odds? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Having 3 people in the game forces Axle to choose someone, he can't avoid it like he can with 4 players left in the game. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Of course, at this point I do wish I was scum because as you said convincing everyone that I'm going to get NK'd then somehow make it out alive would make for a hilarious situation where no one would know what was going on but alas that's really not the case here. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
You know I won't vote Rad, so you decide to tell everyone to vote for Axle instead, knowing that I've voted for him in the past, you have too and Rad would probably oblige. However, why are you 'chancing' it all on Axle being scum after you already declared him to be town On December 08 2012 15:39 yamato77 wrote: Yeah all my reads on the lurkers are town, even though they all show very little interest in the game. Pressure on them goes basically nowhere, either, because they don't seem dodgy or uncooperative. Axle, although sometimes incomprehensible, seems to be trying to solve the game and give us information to work with so he's probably town. You're basically confirmed town. So I guess Rad is definitely the scummiest. ##Vote Rad And you've called both me and Rad scummy in the meantime? Your desperate move was too obvious this time yamato, and it's pretty clear to me that you're scum. ##Vote yamato | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 08 2012 16:02 yamato77 wrote: Then who do you think is scum? You can't honestly think Axle is scum this game, can you? There you go. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
When we see it, we can then answer it. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Now you say that you could potentially swing me over to vote for Rad, sure I might have had you actually stayed anywhere near consistent. You say you can convince me tomorrow, and yet you said you didn't vote for Rad because you knew I wouldn't switch. Now your final chance at winning this game lies solely with Axle, who you simply have to convince that Rad is the scum to win. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Since Oats was mafia - Rad has a much higher chance of not being mafia and was just being played by Oats. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
| ||
