| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 28 2012 16:50 Sylencia wrote: ... 1. FC, Chrom then Orange, the difference between my suspicions of Chrom and Orange are very very slim. Honestly, they both look super shady to me. ... Besides the end of day three, what about Chromatic's play strikes you as shady? | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
First, I'll just make this clear: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:59 Aquanim wrote: AAAAND my other scumread jumps in GUYS THIS IS TOO OBVIOUS If I'd had more than 15 seconds to make this post, it would have read "THIS IS TOO OBVIOUSLY A SCUM PLOY FOR ANYONE ELSE TO CONSIDER VOTING SHZ". @Corazon: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 18:26 cDgCorazon wrote: I've been looking or the events and posts surrounding Shz's almost-lynching, and I've come up with a few things I'd like to share. I think it's ok to vote for Shz. His play has still been sub-par this game, and I'm not saying that anyone is scum or not just because of how they voted. Cake (Voted for FC)- He already stated his reasoning, and I think that his points have merit. We shouldn’t look too much into Cake’s decision to vote FC. Chrom- While he was not the first one to vote for Shz, he started the whole bandwagon with: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:18 Chromatically wrote: In fact, you can ignore the thing I posted. There's no reason for a townie to not care at all about the d2 lynch. No pushing, no voting, nothing at all. Not town behavior. Voteswitch time, everyone. His reasons for Shz are solid, and I feel the same way. When he says that Shz did not vote on D2, he really meant it. His D2 vote for Chrom was really just a useless vote, and could have been used somewhere else. The OMGUS vote, along with the lurking and lack of contribution, shows that Chrom's vote for Shz was justified and reasonable. Unfortunately, I have to give Chrom the title of shepherd, because what came next became a clusterf**k of sheeping. Kick-Obviously, this is one of the more puzzling votes, but figuring out his motives could help us greatly in the scumhunt ahead. The most curious thing about his vote was the timing. His vote for Shz was 10 minutes before the deadline. -Why would he time it that late if he wanted to make a move to save himself? -Wouldn’t a better way to save himself be to defend himself a few hours before? -Had Kick given up, and was just exploiting a possible way to escape lynching, or was he trying to create some last minute chaos to rock everyone right before the votes were final? This is a very likely possibility, if Kick acted alone, it was more likely because of this cause. More on how we should find out at the end of the post. For now, let’s move on to the other two. Orange: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:55 Orangeremi wrote: Since that train seems to be going somewhere and scum seems fine with us voting Kick. ##Vote: shz Chrom, if shz turns town I'm looking at you. Hopping off of FC wagon when it seemed to gain momentum was something I was looking for. This is sheep #1. His whole post says, “I’m a sheep, I’m voting for Shz. The shepherd is supposed to be in charge of me, so if things go wrong with this vote, I can just dump the blame on him”. That is basically how his vote played out. This is textbook scum play. What is one way scum stays out of the spotlight? Joining the bandwagon of someone who has a strong town read from many other players in the game. This does one of two things: Gets rid of someone that scum knows is town, which puts the town in an even worse position. Giving Orange a way out if the vote goes wrong. If Shz flipped town, Orange can just point the finger at Chrom and stay in the shadows while another townie gets lynched. He even admits that is what he wants to do: Sheeping and not scumhunting are two tell-tale signs of scum. He doesn’t even try to defend himself when I directly call him out, he just ignores it and posts. We need to pressure him. He’s gotten away with this behavior so far because everyone else’s behavior was just so bad. FatChunk His original vote post: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 08:58 FatChunk wrote: okay well I think that either of the two people are scum: sHz and kickstart, and to be honest the last post of shz on the 27th was really scummy to me. I hope we're right. ##unvote ##Vote: sHz His post explaining his vote: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 10:52 FatChunk wrote: Okay so here is/was my thought process. Chrom made some interesting observations about sHz, enough to cause me to make my read slightly stronger about sHz than Kick. After all, kick was a lurker more than anything, and scum lynch > lurker lynch. I was pretty confident in following someone with town rep like chrom, especially someone who is willing to risk his town rep on a scum read. but at this point I think that sHz is cleared, right? if shz was scum, Kickstart, a player with some experience, would not accuse sHz of scum that early in the game: it is just bad play. Unless kick was making bad cases to be shot down and appear to be scumhunting. Distancing himself from fellow scum? I don't know. Orangeremi, kickstart's scum partner, chooses to try and swing the vote toward sHz as a last minute attempt. His explanation is that he didn't think kickstart was scum, and that he voted me to judge my reaction. The part that interested me most was the line: Which contrasts with this post (this isn’t the whole post, but I made sure not to take him out of context): + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2012 04:03 FatChunk wrote: chromatically - I have noticed that he pressures too hard to the point of almost lying and skewing my words and overanalyzing small reactions in order to further his agenda. Faint vibe that I think should be looked into. Also, he seems like an experienced player which is scary if hes mafia. And this post: + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 03:03 FatChunk wrote: Regarding his[OE's] FoS on me: All I ever said was that I had a suspicion of chrom, something that needed to be examined after a lynch of omni, who is the most suspicious right now in my eyes. I also simply mentioned that Mocsta's case should be considered as we move forward. Well, isn’t that a complete 180 from D1 and D2? What gave you such a change of heart? Maybe it was the mislynch of Omni. FC could have figured out that if he says that he believes that Chrom is town, it could be to just keep Chrom around to be the shepherd to get all the townies to lynch themselves (which happened on D2, and possibly almost happened on D3). He could also reading Chrom as town because if the town decide to lynch Chrom off (in the case that Shz got lynched and flipped town), he can defend Chrom and therefore get some town cred if Chrom flips town. While it is not as open as Orange, FC’s sheeping needs to be looked into. He also needs to explain his change of heart on Chrom, and start naming off some suspects if he wants to prove he is not scum. So the question is: Where do we go from here? It seems like the next lynch could shape up to be a lynch for information. In normal circumstances, it is a bad thing, but with all the chaos that finished up Day 3, lynching for answers could be the way to root out the last 2 scum. Now that we have some more breathing room, and LYLO is again just a bad dream for now, a lynch for information here might be very beneficial to the town. Do we lynch Shz, and figure out if his almost-lynch today was a bunch of sheeps, or a mafia clusterf**k? Do we lynch someone who jumped on the bandwagon, and figure out from there if the bandwagon on Shz was an attempt to bus, or a case with some merit, which would put Shz back under suspicion? We're not so far from LYLO that we're not going to lynch the scummiest player. Shz is not the scummiest player, by a long shot. Some possibilities about Kick's vote + Show Spoiler + Why Orangeremi is scum + Show Spoiler + All the reasons I said at the end of Night Two still hold true. Orange has completely failed to give any information unless directly asked (except for the bare minimum reasons required with his votes) and this got worse, if anything, day 3. Neither has he tried to elicit any further information from the thread - which is certainly not what I'd do if I was as unsure of my reads as Orange purports to be. + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 10:23 Orangeremi wrote: At this point I'm entirely uncommitted. Of all players nominated for lynching, FatChunk, Threesr, and cDgCorazon are the ones I'm considering. Otherwise, I have a slight suspicion of Sylencia that is based solely on a hunch and little to no evidence. On December 20 2012 10:06 Orangeremi wrote: Your read on FatChunk is very convincing. His reaction to you mentioning Corazon earlier definitely made me question what was going on, but I didn't look into it nearly as much. To be completely honest regarding Corazon's slip up (accidentally claiming mafia), I read it completely normally thinking he did anything wrong and didn't notice until Threesr pointed out that he had. I don't know what that says about me, but if he read it right and I read it right, he could possibly be telling the truth. I do agree with you that they're both acting incredibly defensive. On December 20 2012 20:35 Orangeremi wrote: I'm not fond of how Kickstart is currently playing. He's the #1 lurker right now and I'd put him near the top of my list of suspicion. I want to see more of what he has to contribute, so far I'm not impressed. Corazon has done a lot more than expected in an attempt to redeeming himself. I'm not convinced he is scum anymore but I'd still keep my eye out. The other two players have yet to post anything since they've become top reads, I'm waiting on that. The case for Spag is huge, I'm leaning towards that. It's really the only case so far that has actually made me consider voting something other than no lynch (my previous top choice). I'd currently rate my voting choices at 1. Spag 2. Kickstar 3. FatChunk with a possibility of no lynch if they have sufficient evidence to the contrary. Day One, Orageremi does a lot of sitting on the fence and watching how the day's going to pan out before committing a vote himself. He does NO searching for scum of his own. Townies may be unsure about their reads but then they have NO excuse for not trying to clarify their reads by pressuring, asking questions, etc. He voted for FatChunk in the end, but at a time when it made exactly no difference - he didn't try to push his FatChunk read AT ALL, before or after the day one lynch. + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 13:26 Orangeremi wrote: I don't like how Threesr is playing if he's town. He's helping very little and I could see him playing a reverse psychological scum the way he is acting. I've got my eye on FC, but want to hold off on further judgements until I see him post this Day I'm also waiting on more from Kickstart, I'm wary of how he's playing this game as opposed to his last one. On December 23 2012 02:02 Orangeremi wrote: I didn't vote for Spag. I'm not sure what else there is to say about this. I'd like to argue that the arguments are indeed mine, because I come to the conclusions on my own (as did other players, seeing as they're the same) although I agree they are brief and weak. In your original accusation you said that my lack of names implied either me being afraid of being put in the spotlight or I have not seen anything suspicious (which you doubted). While I'll say I don't like the spotlight, avoiding it hasn't been completely on purpose. But that isn't why. I wouldn't honestly say I don't have any suspicions, but that I don't have any convicting suspicions. That's why my 'reads' are the same as everyone else's and not in depth. I had actually typed up my post (as 'jokey' as it is) before I saw you had posted yours. Day Two, Orange is still sitting on the fence. He puts a safe vote on Omni with little to no reasoning, and doesn't pressure anyone else. Day Three, Orange wanders into the thread with a promise of more content: On December 26 2012 18:51 Orangeremi wrote: Apparently I've been roleblocked. I'm gonna read up on the thread, be back soon. He doesn't come back for another 14 hours. This smells to me like a scum who wanders into the thread, sees wagons on all his buddies and panicks. Given that Orangeremi said he had scum reads on FC and Kick day one, and FC and Kick contributed basically nothing day two and early day three, why would Orange not be entirely happy to vote for one of them now? Orange doesn't vote for either of them for MORE THAN 24 HOURS, in which time he did in fact post a little. All you townies out there, ask yourself this: given the activity in this game, would you have chosen to ask NO QUESTIONS and deliver NO PRESSURE for the last three days? Because that's what Orange has done. This is the pivotal point here, the day three lynch is just icing on the cake. Lynching not particularly scummy players for perfectly good reasons was what killed Omni. Orange has NOT been searching for scum by asking questions, etc. He has been finding a justification for his vote in the material already in the thread and not questioning it - and that is not town. I wasn't convinced Shz was scum. My reasoning is based on Kick not being scum. His lynch was clear and nobody tried to intervene and take votes off of him. Why not? If he was scum, his scumbuddies would be trying to vote someone else. But that wasn't happening. Since it wasn't happening, I was convinced he was town. Which begs the question, why wasn't it happening? Chrom switched just as I did, I'd want to know why he didn't push it earlier either. I wanted to push for whichever vote had the better chance of winning that wasn't Kick, since I was under the impression that Kick wasn't scum. If Orange believed Kick wasn't scum for this reason, why didn't he mention this earlier? In fact: On December 28 2012 05:08 Orangeremi wrote: Now a voting trend like this is going to give us a lot more information when the lynch turns and we see who voted (and didn't vote) for it. So much better than us having ganged up on a single player both days before. Please, those of us who have not voted, VOTE! And do it for the player you think will benefit us most. It is crucial. We need to be productive today or else this game is over. His lynch was clear and nobody tried to intervene and take votes off of him. Why not? If he was scum, his scumbuddies would be trying to vote someone else. So was the Kick wagon good or bad? Make up your mind. This is a piss-poor justification for a last-minute switch. Were we all on Kick or not? Also, this: On December 28 2012 02:06 Orangeremi wrote: Well we've just fucked ourselves by not finding any scum thus far and at this point we don't have many options. We cannot afford another townie loss. We need to be certain or very close to certain that our next vote is mafia. I wasn't convinced Shz was scum. My reasoning is based on Kick not being scum. ... So... many... contradictions. Orange's reasons for voting Shz rather than Kick are COMPLETELY INCONSISTENT with what he said just before the lynch, which is entirely characteristic of a scum casting about for some reason why he just did something daft. On December 28 2012 23:17 Orangeremi wrote: Why haven't they been night killed yet? I'm trying to figure it out. I suppose mocsta and yamato weren't bad nightkills, but I think these players (maybe aqua more than syl) should be up there. If they aren't nk'd tonight I'm going to think 1) The mafia doesn't see these guys as a threat. They're on the wrong track or have some other misdirection 2) They are the mafia I'm using they as a term for either one of them here, please excuse me. So, what, now he's trying to set up some grounds for a lynch on his town reads? Why FatChunk is scum + Show Spoiler + All the reasons I said at the end of Night Two still hold true. FatChunk has completely failed to give any information unless directly asked (except for the bare minimum reasons required with his votes) and this got worse, if anything, day 3. Neither has he tried to elicit any further information from the thread - which is certainly not what I'd do if I was as unsure of my reads as FatChunk purports to be. (Dat copy-paste.) Seriously, look through FatChunk's filter (it's small, it won't take long) and try to find all the posts which aren't direct responses to questions/pressure. + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 14:06 FatChunk wrote: Hey guys sorry for my late post, have caught up though. This is my first mafia game on TL, all my experience, as with shz, is with the UMS game. Policy on LAL is fine with me. Lying can only hurt town and I see no situations how this could be beneficial. Regarding lurkers, I think that it shouldn't be set in stone. From my point of view as a newbie, lurking isn't a quality of either mafia or town. It is equally as likely that a mafia/sk will actively post, lead discussions, blend in with town as it is that a townie will, and the same goes for lurkers. Ultimately its a judgement call based on quality of posts, and hopefully the majority will make the right call in that situation. Cakepie, I really liked your post regarding not being afraid to make mistakes as a townie. In this game of newbies, we will learn while asking questions and participating in discussion. I will be fearless. That being said I think at this point in the game, there is very little information available, but I see value in scoping out a possible lynch on the first day. I think we should be looking for players who promote environments where Mafia thrive. Meaningless start-of-game stuff. + Show Spoiler + On December 19 2012 22:44 FatChunk wrote: I see your point regarding the reason for lurking. Upon reflection, I agree that lurking should be discouraged and if apparent, you will be questioned and proded. I think its very simple, as Mocsta said: lurking is not a free pas to fly under the radar. I also agree with Kickstart regarding lynching scum leads of randomly lynching lurkers. This, I feel, is obvious. As far as I understand an environment where mafia thrive is that of uncertainty, confusion. An environment which contains people who have split views, people that are not confident in their stance and can be swayed by logic, reason, should the situation call for it. Threesr did a good job of contradicting views regarding lurking, diverting town chat paths, and the town seems to be talking a little bit but we are dancing around constructive discussion (not to mention the fact that Threesr has been quite inactive recently). Perhaps this is scum behaviour. I understand policies on LAL and lurking needs to be discussed, and most of the tough thinking will come when it`s time to vote by ultimately making a read. This makes it really important to present strong arguments when it comes to FoS because others will base their arguments upon the information you present. I think we should be asking ourselves a few questions (whether to find scum or to eliminate uselss town), who is contributing constructively to discussion and who is simply causing the town to get hung up on lesser-than-top-priority thoughts and ideas. Top priorities, to me, are: establishing a wagon using a strong argument, reading into feedback and responses after suspicion has been vocalized, and developing an opinion (certainties are non-existen in this game, right?). The town atmosphere seems to be good so far and this is good for finding scum: perhaps we should start prodding the lurkers and advocates of lurking. I say this because inactivity seems to be common, and as we have all agreed, uncontributing town is useless and detrimental to town goals, whether they are mafia or town. My read is currently for Threesr, but am open to discussion. Would liek to hear more from him regarding lurking and why HE thinks it can be benificial for town to allow. ##Vote: theesr Votes for Threesr (who we now know is town) without any real committment. + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2012 09:02 FatChunk wrote: Spag's rebuttle to Aqua's argument was in my opinion, satisfactory. Mocsta your post does not provide any evidence in my eyes, it is all speculation. Your first arguments that spag acuses corazon to be scum, then changes to town, is quite possible. People can probably change their minds in this game, thats the idea behind pressuring right? Thus, inconclusive Part 2. Thus part 3 is a little redundant if you dont value part 2. Also, RE: 3-(4) he does not manipulate town for survival, he manipulates town openly and in the right direction by sacrificing his own survival because he risks coming off as too agressive. Also, if he were mafia why would he openly protect his 2 other mafia mates. Anyway your argument does not sway me, neither did Aquas'. Everyone keeps mentioning that spag is appearing useful while not contributing. Spag has argued that he has been lighting fires under lurkers to gain information. Is this not considered scumhunting, whether direct or indirect? He seems to be contributing in ways that are very obviously pro-town. I do not really see conclusive evidence. But who knows, maybe thats what town's supposed to do on day1. Anyway, we would have stood much more benefit and less to lose by lynching theesr - we would have confirmed theesr as town/scum and in turn shed some light on spag's innocence. Now hes gone. I will do my best D2 to be more useful, as it seems nobody values my posts. Trying to make town points from the Spag mislynch. + Show Spoiler + On December 23 2012 06:15 FatChunk wrote: I'm just curious, why would you assume it's scum RB? Mocsta has some great points, I find it very hard to provide new insight when cases are well-fabricated and I agree with them. While I do not think the evidence is inconclusive against Chromatically (while I always shared a suspicion of him) Omni is a real issue. My stance on OmniEulogy: -I find it very hard to believe that he claimed VT as proper strategy. -His 100% scum read on corazone is very interesting, as he is very easy to sway off that vote when pressure on corazone is removed. This smells of scum trying to mis-lynch, and he is appearing to be useful by presenting his case against corazone. Before I vote OE I will provide more explanation for my vote. Here's what I think happened: Scum omni knows spag will turn town, and pre-claims VT innocent in an attempt to avoid defending against spag's challenges. Otherwise, town omni would genuinely expect spag to turn scum, and then would have no reason to claim VT. This is because scum spag's scum read on omni would be discarded immediately upon spag turning red. @Omni Your reason for claiming VT is that you knew they would question you if spag turns town. Are you claiming that your scum read on spag was insufficient to base your vote on, realized that you sheeped the vote, and began to prepare for spag to turn town? This is the only explanation IMO that can come from a townie. This being said, I would like to hear from sHz and Sylencia, two players who have been posting infrequently and pretty much agreeeing or disagreeing with others without providing reasons. I honestly don't know why these players have been given a free pass, with nobody prodding them during their time afk. sHz: -Basically he's a lurking sheep. Agreees with any arguments that multiple people have approved. He switches his vote from corazon to spag juts because spag defended him. -He does not provide any new information when he posts, and does not participate in very much scum-hunting. -A list of people he has been suspicious at one point or another: Mocsta, Corazone, Spagetticus, me, threesr. His arguments for suspicion against these players are not very well presented, and are based on things like "the case against X is convincing to me". Votes based on desire to lynch anyone. -He appears to be useful when not actually being useful. I would like to hear what he has to say about Mocsta's case, he has been active for too long. I would like to see him actually scumhunt, ask questions that reveal important information. Sylencia: -Lurks, comes out with opinions out of the blue that, quite frankly, nobody takes seriously. -One page filter can serve one purpose: provide as little information as possible so that nobody can make a read. ---Ironic. Unless I see increase in useful posting from him he goes up in my scum suspicion. -away excuse gives him free ride for 1-2 days? -Has less attention put on him for these reasons -Votes corazone D1 because he's the easy target (has the most votes) and tries to appear like he is emotionally torn apart by making this choice. Attempt for sympathy can only be scummy to me. Does anyone agree with any of these points? What are your opinions of shz and sylencia? Aqua, I thought there was a relationship between theesr and spag, as spag was advocating theesr as town. If we lynched threesr and he turned town, you can probably expect spag to be town too. However if we lynched spag, and he turned town, we would be stuck with the non-useful townie. A list of reads - condemning Shz and Sylencia for lurking, but not Kick or Orange. + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 03:03 FatChunk wrote: Well so far I'm going to have to vote for Omni tonight because lynching omni gives us the most amount of information. Also I pin him as someone trying to cover up a slip, especially because he puts the FoS on me when it was not only me who shares suspicion on him and chrom. I guess I am an easy lynch-target? Then he proceeds to vote orangeremi because he is the only alternative, and then posts 1 sentence on his justification for his vote. I also did not like his defense of his scum slip. Cakepie in his case post on Omni identified that I strongly agree with this, as I have presented in earlier posts. Regarding his FoS on me: All I ever said was that I had a suspicion of chrom, something that needed to be examined after a lynch of omni, who is the most suspicious right now in my eyes. I also simply mentioned that Mocsta's case should be considered as we move forward. + Show Spoiler + you are misunderstanding pretty badly. Or intentionally trying to twist what I am saying. I did not say that I claimed to give more information. I said that it makes sense to claim VT even if I thought he was scum because if he isn't I would be put into this position one way or the other. You argued how I'd know he is town, I replied by saying I didn't, I was pretty confident AND when he flipped scum the information we would gain would be far greater than scum learning my role. I'm not changing any story I'm just giving you more information behind my thought process because you've asked the same question in different ways about 3 times. I have to go into more detail. Nowhere in there do I say I claim to give town information. ##FoS: Chromatically This is twice you've tried to either twist my words or intentionally misunderstand to try and get your own agenda out. In the first sentence again no less. followed by: I think this could have been handled better. He places FoS too hastily on someone he has a town read on. I dont think his justification for FoS is valid. He is quite defensive as a general posting theme. All this seems to give me a scum vibe. My stance on threesr is: vote him out on a day that we have weak scumreads, or have a vigilante take him out. Orangeremi: -Claims he has suspicions but no scum reads, is reluctant to accuse anyone. When he does vote, he votes to bandwagon and gives no justification for his choice other than that person X presented the case before me. Sounds like he's trying to free-ride. -"take this with a grain of salt", "I'm not convinced of anyone being scum D1", "although I agree they [OR's arguments] are brief and weak" - quotes like these (not exact) make him appear to contribute without doing so. He is playing VERY safe and gives alot of uncertain reads, or reads that require more information before they can be justified. -IMO: lazy bad town, or bad scum. ##Vote:OmniEulogy And an unconvincing vote for Omni, who's flipped town. In short, the only posts FatChunk has made when not directly asked to do so have clear scum motivation. This is the pivotal point here, the day three lynch is just icing on the cake. Lynching not particularly scummy players for perfectly good reasons was what killed Omni. FatChunk has NOT been searching for scum by asking questions, etc. He has been finding a justification for his vote in the material already in the thread and not questioning it - and that is not town. Let's examine his reasons for switching to Shz: On December 28 2012 08:58 FatChunk wrote: okay well I think that either of the two people are scum: sHz and kickstart, and to be honest the last post of shz on the 27th was really scummy to me. I hope we're right. ##unvote ##Vote: sHz This... is terribad. Why would he change his mind based on a post from yesterday? This is a complete copout. On December 28 2012 10:52 FatChunk wrote: Okay so here is/was my thought process. Chrom made some interesting observations about sHz, enough to cause me to make my read slightly stronger about sHz than Kick. After all, kick was a lurker more than anything, and scum lynch > lurker lynch. I was pretty confident in following someone with town rep like chrom, especially someone who is willing to risk his town rep on a scum read. but at this point I think that sHz is cleared, right? if shz was scum, Kickstart, a player with some experience, would not accuse sHz of scum that early in the game: it is just bad play. Unless kick was making bad cases to be shot down and appear to be scumhunting. Distancing himself from fellow scum? I don't know. Orangeremi, kickstart's scum partner, chooses to try and swing the vote toward sHz as a last minute attempt. His explanation is that he didn't think kickstart was scum, and that he voted me to judge my reaction. This post STILL feels like a scum trying not to commit to anything. He's calling Orange scum, but at this point the scum have to bus to have even the slightest hope of survival. Their late switch onto Shz and away from Kick wouldn't be enough to damn them on its own, even though it's the only thing they've been decisive about the entire game - but there is simply nothing town-motivated about their play in the entire game. Why FatChunk and Orange are scum with Kick + Show Spoiler + Well, now we've had a red flip I can open the sealed file: In Night Two, Aquanim wrote: While I still don't like association cases before a red flip, here's a couple of things I'll point out in case I die. Call this spoiler a time capsule, and label it "ONLY OPEN IN CASE OF RED FLIP ON KICK/FC/ORANGE" + Show Spoiler +
And in the day one lynch: The final votecount: Spaghetticus (7): Aquanim, OmniEulogy, Mocsta, cakepie, Kickstart, Chromatically, shz cDgCorazon (2): threesr, Sylencia threesr (2): FatChunk, cDgCorazon FatChunk (1): Orangeremi OmniEulogy (1): Spaghetticus Scum votes spread all over the place on a day where none of them are under threat. Check. Aaaand the day two lynch: Final Votecount: Orangeremi (1): OmniEulogy OmniEulogy (7): Orangeremi, cakepie, cDgCorazon, Sylencia, FatChunk, Chromatically, Aquanim shz (1): Kickstart Chromatically (1): shz Not voting (1): threesr Scum votes a little more consolidated on the main target, and Orangeremi was under some pressure early on. Check. It's not that I'm saying "these three are scum on the basis of these associations, lynch them" - I think they're scum individually and there's nothing about their association which wouldn't make sense from scum. In particular, there's nothing here which stops there being a single scum elsewhere. All of this still holds true, and the day three lynch is the final piece of the puzzle. We finally have a wagon on scum. Orange and FC were the only other seriously discussed lynch targets for most of Day Three. If one or both of them comes in and tries to start a different wagon it's going to be really, really obvious - it'll be their first real action of the game, with a blindingly clear scum motivation. So, they wait for as long as they dare for another target before posting. When it becomes clear that there's not going to be any alternative (and NOT BEFORE), the scum proceed to bus one another. I don't think the fact that they didn't all bus the same player is relevant. When Chromatic came in with his vote for Shz, all three scum jumped at the opportunity to grab a mislynch. If they hadn't done this, Kick would have been lynched for sure; even though they wouldn't have been in as bad a position as now, they'd still be the scummiest players in the game and needing two mislynches to win. It's difficult to see where those two mislynches would come from (a lynch on myself, Cakepie, Chromatic or Corazon would be very hard to swing). On the other hand, if they'd managed to swing the vote onto Shz then we'd have to find three scum in the five players voting for Shz without making any mislynches AT ALL. The reward outweighed the risk; just because the play looks bad now that it's failed doesn't mean it was a bad idea. Which is why this play isn't too bad to be true. As for why it happened at the last minute? Townies are more likely to make mistakes when time is short. They hoped to panic another townie into switching to Shz (I confess I thought about it for a moment after Kick voted). "Why didn't scum try to direct the lynch away from Kick early on?" is a VERY good question. To my mind, the only reasonable answer is "All of the other wagons and suspicions were on scum too." Oh, and they NKd Yamato because he was on the right track. I was thinking along more-or-less the same lines as Yamato, but didn't make that crystal clear until very near the deadline. Oh, and people are calling the late vote switch too bad to be believed. I disagree, but even so - bad scum plays are generally bad because they have no town motivation. Just because it's a bad scum play and therefore scum are less likely to do it doesn't mean there would be any reason for town to do it. When the impossible is eliminated only the unlikely remains - and I just don't believe that a town Orange or FC would choose this as their first decisive action in the entire game. Why Shz is not scum + Show Spoiler + I agree that Shz's failure to push a scumread of his own day 2 is a scummy thing to do. And his hopping on the Spag wagon wasn't exactly a clearly town move either. But remember, there are reasons WHY these things are scummy. Sheeping, and not pushing your own reads, is scummy because a) it doesn't expose your own thought process and reasoning, which is in mafia's best interests, b) it isn't the best way to pressure and get answers, and c) it takes less responsibility for the lynch. However, I would say that Shz is in fact exposing his own reasoning (at least somewhat) elsewhere, and he is pressuring a little and asking questions. I don't think scum Shz would have played all the little things (his little questions, his list posts, etc) as well as he did but play the big things (his behaviour at lynch) suspiciously. My town read on Shz was mostly a gut read - the above isn't a perfect explanation but I think it's the best I can offer. All this aside, we're left with Kick's vote for Shz, which he set up Night One. Kick didn't even mention the Omni case (which in retrospect was a blindingly obvious tell), and that makes me think the purpose of the Shz vote was just somewhere reasonable but noncommittal to put his vote. However, his points on Shz were reasonable (if brief), and given the sheepiness of day one townies might very easily have sheeped him. Scum almost always only bus as a last resort, and Kick simply had no reason to bus at the start of day two. Why Chromatic is not scum + Show Spoiler + He's active, he's open-minded to new possibilities, he's pushing his reads, his reads make sense (even if they're wrong), he's interested in the lynch, he's pushing for information, he's revealing his thoughts voluntarily, this is nothing like his XXXI play... need I go on? A quick point on everyone else + Show Spoiler + Anyone else could have switched to Shz and saved Kick. For the same reasons as above this would be a good play for them if they were scum. Basically, the message here is "Don't WIFOM your way out of an easy win. Only try convincing yourself that Chromatic, Cakepie, or someone voting for Kick is scum IF Orange or FC, the obvious scum, flip town - not before." I'd prefer to lynch Orange first, if only because both he and Cakepie were roleblocked night two - assuming that there is one town RB and one scum RB, and that scum wouldn't fake a RB on themselves, a red flip on Orange confirms Cakepie town. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
 GLHF/obs please | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
 | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:20 cDgCorazon wrote: Well we would've had a better chance if the other two scum would've actually tried. There were points were I got really frustrated at them cause they just lurked forever and didn't do anything. I think that if we had a scum team that was half good, we could've won the game, because you guys had a lot of mislynches and bad arguments. If cake had not drawn up that post with the possible RBers, I wouldn't have claimed. O'course, the other side of that is that if the rest of the scum had been more active, there might have been better arguments to be had than "this guy is so very lurky". I mean, there were other aspects of Kick's play in particular which were scummy, but you just can't make much from a 1-page filter. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I will have no time to play XXXIV  | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:59 Hapahauli wrote: Nope! Haha, glad you learned something from our PM's. A couple of townies were trying to put together scumteams, and I think that's a pretty faulty way of playing. Your job is to lynch the scummiest player, and then make the associations. Association cases can catch really straighforward scum plans, but against any decent scumteam, such cases are worthless. For example, I just finished a game (Witchcraft Mafia) where two scum members spent most of the game double-bussing each other. Bleh - I tried not to make association cases as such, but if I hadn't just assumed Orange was scum finding Corazon would have been a fair bit easier. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 15:07 Mocsta wrote: I didn't pay detailed attention to the thread when I died.. but I thought in Night 1 though, I made some posts saying to leave you alone, because you appear to be playing the same town game as in the past. Found it.. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=386911¤tpage=35#689 The moral is, its important to be confirmed town. Well, I pushed the Spag lynch a lot harder than I pushed the Kick one in XXXI - even though Kick was scum in XXXI, noone really paid attention to my case, so I figured I should be more assertive about it. This game, I push the wagon a little harder, everybody sheeps on, and Spaghetticus flips town. Go figure. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 15:19 Hapahauli wrote: There's not much to comment on your play-style because I found it really focused and effective. Good job! I think you played a really good game overall. You're an effective communicator, an active player, and a good case-writer. All that's left for you to do is play some more games and refine your scum-hunting a bit. In particular, I suggest looking at some of the townies you were pushing this game (Spag, Omni, and Orange) and try to figure out where you went wrong. Regarding Spag, I think you correctly identified a deviation in his play, but didn't consider if that deviation was scummy as much as you should have. In addition, I think you let yourself get caught up in some confirmation bias and didn't objectively consider the defenses of a fairly active townie. Regarding Omni... VT claims are not scummy. They're stupid, but not damning by any means. Townies can do really stupid things, and as you grow as a player, you need to move away from objective reads (i.e. claiming VT under no pressure = scum) to a more subjective, case-by-case standard (i.e. is this particular player capable of doing this as town). It's tough stuff, but it's what separates the top town players from the solid ones. Regarding Orange... really can't blame you for finding him scummy =P Yeah, I applied nearly no critical thought to the Omni wagon. Sheeping on that was my biggest regret later on. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 15:32 Spaghetticus wrote: I think the fault in your thinking is that you assumed a stable meta from me. This was my second game, and I think I need to get all my experimenting out of the way before my meta 'settles' and any deviation is considered scummy. The 'fault' was completely understandable, and a non-issue in more advanced play me thinks. I was tinkering with the extent to which one can be precise without losing town to WIFOM. I was about to start actually making cases, but you bum-rushed me so hard I was gone without a chance to adjust. Of course, if I was scum, your play would have been a crushing victory. IMO a solid play. To be honest, I think I'd have pushed you hard without the XXV meta - that was just what made me overconfident. My problem wasn't that you were different from before, it was that you were being very active (and getting town reads) without doing anything that scum couldn't easily mimic. I left it as late as I possibly could to give you opportunity to make cases, but between sleep and work I simply didn't have any more time to wait. These things will happen, I suppose =P EDIT: So you know, if you play like that again I will push you again, because I stand by my statement you could play like that as scum very easily... but next time there'll be a warning shot first. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 31 2012 21:38 OmniEulogy wrote: it's a bit late but Aqua I think you played really well. If I wasn't a complete amateur I think D1 we could have had a nice conversation and bounced idea's off eachother and possibly saved Spag instead of me just jumping on the wagon. Too bad you wont be in the next game Thanks! Unfortunately, I probably wouldn't be able to make any lynch deadlines for the next month and a half (as in, not present for 4 hours either side), and missing them all is really annoying. I'd also have to spend every one of my few free moments playing Mafia for an entire week like I did in XXXI, and I don't think I could do that again. I'll be back on Valentine's Day  On December 31 2012 21:53 Spaghetticus wrote: No Aqua next game?! Why not? I guess that answers this question too | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I will join you in the one true faith of "Host will write postgame at some point" | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On January 23 2013 10:10 Promethelax wrote: Overall I felt town played well this game but probably would have lost if Yamato did not replace Threesr, without him scum could (and probably would) have killed aqua on night two and chrom on night three by which point cDg would have been the strongest 'townie' remember guys, replacements OP. I'd like to think that if Threesr hadn't been replaced by someone like Yamato but Orange hadn't been modkilled that his cop checks and Cakepie could still have carried it home, but I guess we'll never know When you point out Corazon's play day one it looks obvious... :/ I still find it difficult to tell scum from a town that just doesn't know better. Didn't Kick frame Omni night one? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War firebathero Dota 2 1080actioN  859Flash 685Bisu  490Killer 305Hyun 267BeSt 227hero 165Hyuk 154PianO 145[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games ceh9643 Pyrionflax184 RotterdaM183 XaKoH  155crisheroes95 NeuroSwarm76 Mew2King32 Trikslyr26 ZerO(Twitch)9 Organizations StarCraft: Brood War Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
LiuLi Cup
OSC
RSL Revival
Maru vs Reynor
Cure vs TriGGeR
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Zoun vs Classic
Korean StarCraft League
BSL Open LAN 2025 - War…
RSL Revival
BSL Open LAN 2025 - War…
RSL Revival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
