Traveling next two days; will be fully available Thursday onwards.
Doesn't look like this is starting soon so should be no issue!
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
cakepie
985 Posts
Traveling next two days; will be fully available Thursday onwards. Doesn't look like this is starting soon so should be no issue! | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Alright, GLHF; let's jump straight into the discussion: ----- 1) Stance on Lurkers: i.e. Do you policy lynch? I am all for discouraging lurking, but policy lynching should never be a substitute for scum hunting. This game is about building well reasoned cases against suspected scum, pressing them, and the discussing and logically evaluating the cases on the strength of the evidence. When town is able to foster active, productive discussion, lurking is just another scummy behavior to be used to build up a case against suspicious players, and prolonged lurking in particular becomes more suspicious as the game continues. There is never a good reason for town to lurk. Only by discussing our reasoning and lines of thought can we hope to find and eradicate scum. Town must never clam up for fear of making mistakes -- 1. it is through discussion that we may hope to correct errors in reasoning; and 2. more importantly, in the event of a mislynch, it would leave trail for others to follow. Hence, a silent townie is a far more useless than a bad townie. I feel that it is futile to try to set predefined activity standards for what amounts to lurking; every game varies. Quality is also important. Insofar as fostering a healthy level of activity goes, this game is off to a good start; what we need to do now is to keep the discussion going. When we do get to the point when a few individual players are clearly standing out as not contributing productively (whether as a consequence of lurking or otherwise) we shall evaluate those cases at that time. Policy discussion is nice to start the ball rolling and get people posting, but now that a good chunk of us are here, we need to switch our focus to scum hunting soon. ----- On December 19 2012 07:50 Mocsta wrote: 2) How do you think scum would try to infiltrate us? You need to look up "infiltrate" in a dictionary. There is nothing to "infiltrate". The scum are already among us, posting openly in this public thread. Unless you have just made a slip? Hmmm? Scum may seek to sway opinion and/or cause confusion and influence the lynch. But everything here is open to the scrutiny of all. As town we initially outnumber scum; with responsible play and sound wits and logic, we can prevail. Remember: when everyone contributes, even a mislynch is informative for the survivors. ----- On seafood: Seafood is yummy. That it all. ----- On December 19 2012 08:29 threesr wrote: I don't have a problem with lurkers. On December 19 2012 08:42 threesr wrote: I like lurking because a lot of the time its hard to know what to say. Obviously it doesn't benefit the town but I don't think it hurts the town that much also. It benefits the scum because it makes it easier for them to blend in but good players should still be able to find the mafia even with lurkers. I disagree, and disapprove. If you are not thinking and scum hunting, then you are not playing responsibly as town. If you are afraid of being wrong, then I say: by sharing your thoughts, mistake can be corrected, and you leave a trail of reasoning that we can look back at even if you are killed or mislynched. Behavior that does not help town but benefits scum is a net loss for town, and we cannot condone it. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=386816¤tpage=13#249 A complete ban elsewhere and a modkill in witchcraft does no bode well for you. Your posts so far have been short and without substance. I don't know what your arrangement with the mods is for this game, nor is it my place to question that. But if you don't step up your game soon, be prepared to be under heavy scrutiny. ----- On lying: In this thread it is scum that is trying to mislead town, especially while town outnumbers scum. While there are some cases where town players, and blue roles in particular, may have reason to lie in some sort of gambit against scum, there is no place for that in this newbie game, none of us are at that level yet. When a townie lies, there is a far greater chance that it will sow confusion amongst us, and when discovered, it will distract from hunting actual scum. Bottom line: it is not acceptable for town to lie in this game, it will hurt us more than it helps us. ----- That's where I stand on policy issues and early game fluff. Going to get brunch and go about my day for now, be back in a bit. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 19 2012 11:52 cakepie wrote: GMT-8 here EBWOP: GMT+8. I need to stop forgetting that I've just crossed the Pacific Ocean. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- @Spaghetticus: this is my first game. If my count is right, this is the first time for 7 of us, and 4 others have just one game under their belt (not counting threesr who has played elsewhere before). Quite the newbie game! ----- On December 19 2012 17:58 Mocsta wrote: Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 17:42 OmniEulogy wrote: [snip] A player who doesn't want to add a lot to conversations or help scumhunt doesn't come across as being town to me, but I'm inexperienced so does anybody else have thoughts on the matter? Personally I'd love to know why he wants to lurk If i haphazard a guess i would say he is concerned about being outwitted. I.e. Mafia or even town intentionally misconstruing his comments As I have already stated, my belief is that such fear is unfounded, counterproductive, and not a valid reason for a townie to lurk. By posting, even if a player is misunderstood and killed for it, a trail will remain for others to follow. This is crucial in this game that is built about asymmetry of information. I can understand if players with blue roles are inclined curtail their activity so as not to stand out too much and present an obvious target for scum kp. However, that is not a free pass to completely lurk either. ----- On December 19 2012 17:16 Aquanim wrote: A big thing which has jumped out at me so far is cakepie's first post. Everyone else replied to those questions pretty briefly, cakepie dumped a wall of text. Well, sorry for wanting to answer thoroughly and spell things out clearly. =( | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- Aquanim: put some effort to find suspicious players, albeit evidence is too scant at this early point to build strong cases. Regardless, boldly throws down the first vote to get things rolling. I cannot fault the choice of voting cDgCorazon as a pressure vote; an excellent choice. I would hope to see more fleshed out cases as this day phase continues, and as the rest of the progresses. ----- cDgCorazon: you need to justify your stance on why lurkers should be handled on a "case to case basis" as this is a point of disagreement between you and several other players, myself included. On December 19 2012 10:24 cDgCorazon wrote: I think it should be handled on a case to case basis when it comes to lurking. Sometimes it helps when someone just sits back and tries to figure things out instead of discussing every point. Q1. How much time should someone be allowed in order to "sit back and figure things out?" A day phase is 48 hours long. What do you think is a reasonable expectation in terms of productive contribution from each player within that time frame? Is two to three substantial posts too much to ask? Q2. threesr openly condones lurking, and claims a lurking playstyle (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17239117). He was banned elsewhere, and modkilled in his last game here on TL. How do you propose we approach this situation, from your standpoint of handling on a "case to case basis" ? Where would you draw the line for unacceptable behavior, if his effort does not improve? My focus now is on forcing activity from lurkers and broadening the search for scum suspects, but if his play does not improve in the rest of the day, and questions are not answered satisfactorily, I would be happy to jump on the cDgCorazon wagon when we get to the phase of narrowing down the list. For now, ##FOS: cDgCorazon ----- Chromatically: pressed threesr and corazon earlier in the day, and brief discussion with mocsta, but has probably gone to sleep since, assuming NA timezones. Looking forward to more when he wakes up in a few hours from now. ----- FatChunk: not much besides a promise to be fearless. Needs to step it up. Q:Now that there are fairly substantial filters for several players and a conspicuous lack thereof for others, who do you think is suspicious, and why? You also need to address the question: On December 19 2012 17:25 Mocsta wrote: Please be fearless and share your thoughts on what you think promotes an environment for Mafia to thrive? ----- Kickstart: we agree that hunting scummy scum takes precedence over lurkers. Fingered to threesr’s defense of lurking, although that was pretty obvious, and comes after several others already pointed it out. Play so far seems less active than in previous games. Would like to see more activity and contribution in the remainder of the day phase. Show us the experience from your three games. Q1: re: threesr, he has openly declared that his playstyle was lurky, tried to defend it, and, well, did it. You said that: On December 19 2012 17:05 Kickstart wrote: I think scum would be hesitant to say something like that because allowing for people to just lurk creates a very bad town atmosphere, so I don't think scum would come in and so "o hey lurking is fine by me". What do you think of the possibility that threesr has adopted this meta in order to benefit himself when he rolls (eventually) scum? Q2: what do you think of the shz’s case on mocsta? What is your current read on mocsta? Does it look like scum with useless questions and creating a false impression of activity? Or an earnest townie? Q3: Apart from cDgCorazon, mocsta and threesr, has anything else caught your attention by now? ----- Mocsta: prolific, but does come across as a little over-eager. A bit too excited about first game? The FOS on sylencia was definitely too hasty. Shz’s case on mocsta so far does not look like it holds much water right now. Nonetheless, the time for banter about policy is past; it is time to put forward cases. Q: You accused shz of sheeping. What do you think after studying his filter? Are there the beginnings of a case that can be built upon? Whatever you find unsatisfactory about his play, I would like to see you question him and push him to take a position on someone or something. ----- OmniEulogy: NA time, was active up till 4 am ET, before cases started being made. Will assume sleeping, awaiting further contributions once awake. In particular, please comment on the cases so far, and see if you can build a case against someone. ----- OrangeRemi: Nothing apart from useless, "unsure" answers on mocsta’s initial questions, deferring to earlier answers and pleading inexperience -- we are all new here, but that is no excuse for not even putting some thought into simple questions. Besides that, only noted timezone and first game. This is despite three posts spanning over 4+ hours during which others were active. On December 19 2012 09:08 Orangeremi wrote: Just for the record, my timezone is GMT-7, but my waking hours are rather unorthodox. Conveniently enough, seeing as a few of us are aussies :D If waking hours are "unorthodox" in a way that is "convenient" for the aussies, we could have expected much more substance by now. Q: Pick and make a case against someone. Pressure voting. ##Vote: OrangeRemi ----- shz: Tried to provide a case on mocsta as an alternative to cDgCorazon. However, the fast town read was first pointed out by spaghetticus, and OmniEulogy was the one who first pointed to the questions about scum startegy. Not sure the case is viable at this point, but I agree that Mocsta seems a bit too eager. Q: Evaluate my play. Does it look town, or does it look scum? Why? ----- Spaghetticus: solid so far, no complaints. Would like to see you start getting on one of the cases or form one of your own. ----- Sylencia: Declared busy, has been mostly absent. Would hope to see at least some participation in the lynch discussion. Expecting to be much more active after your work dinner party when you are "free from any obligations whatsoever." ----- threesr: Has posted nothing but useless one- and two- liners. It is coming up to daytime EST, time to step up your play or else. As I and others have already mentioned, lurking is not acceptable here. In the absence of scummier targets, I will not hesitate to lynch you. ##FOS: threesr | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- On December 19 2012 21:12 Aquanim wrote: Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 21:08 cakepie wrote: @Spaghetticus: this is my first game. If my count is right, this is the first time for 7 of us, and 4 others have just one game under their belt (not counting threesr who has played elsewhere before). Quite the newbie game! I think your count's a little off: afaik Kickstart has three games, Sylencia, Chromatic, Spaghetticus and myself have one each. We actually agree, then: 7 first-timers, 4 with one game, and threesr and kickstart, a total of 13. ----- FatChunk has addressed the question posed by mocsta and put forward a case against threesr. keep the good stuff coming. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
cDgCorazon (2): Aquanim, Chromatically threesr (2): FatChunk, Mocsta Mocsta(1): shz, OrangeRemi(1): cakepie shz (0): FatChunk(1): threesr not voting (4): cDgCorazon, Kickstart, OmniEulogy, OrangeRemi | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 20 2012 00:05 Chromatically wrote: Comments on Corazon? On December 20 2012 00:32 Chromatically wrote: On Corazon, I'm focusing more on his defensiveness and excuse-making as reasons for why he is scum. Do you agree that the things I have highlighted in his posts are more likely coming from mafia? My read of his scant content is just slightly scummy. The lack of contribution is a bigger concern for now, and so I think two pressure votes plus the credible threat of more should hopefully cause a reaction one way or the other. I am waiting to see how he will address my questions to him. (may need to update questions though.) ----- So, we’ve got some shit starting to hit the fan. Mocsta with a bunch of posts, voting shz. Threesr the self-proclaimed lurker stops lurking and FoS Mocsta, triggering a voteswitch by Mocsta that does not look completely well-reasoned, even somewhat omgus. Then threesr himself switches to FatChunk before clamming up again. On December 20 2012 00:25 threesr wrote: ##FOS: Mocsta ... Then he keeps spamming the thread with questions, but not actually taking a stance on anything himself. Seems like he is trying to become the "town moderator" and by asking a million questions in order to appear pro-town without providing any substance. ... This is something I have noted myself. Looking at Mocsta’s filter, for all the prolific output and various questions posed -- hardly any of the questions apply pressure on anyone, only fluff about policy, scum strategy, what environment allows Mafia to thrive, how to stimulate discussion, etc, rather than scumhunting questions. Now, this is not to say that Mocsta has not openly presented (or tried to) his reasoning for suspecting people, and responded to questions and accusations. But his two votes were in response to others suspecting him, and there is no original scumhunting to be seen. Things seem to start going really haywire with the deathwish post: On December 20 2012 00:22 Mocsta wrote: Im dead regardless. End of Night 1, I suspect I will be shot. Hopefully we have a medic that likes me *sigh* It is way too early in the game for this nonsense. It is not only poor form to appeal to blues -- even if Mocsta earnestly believes that his play has singled him out as target for scum, I would consider it overrating his own contributions. Then, in response to the FoS from threesr: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 01:19 Mocsta wrote: On December 20 2012 00:25 threesr wrote: ##FOS: Mocsta He determines that Chromatically is a good town read after one post that he reads. Then he keeps spamming the thread with questions, but not actually taking a stance on anything himself. Seems like he is trying to become the "town moderator" and by asking a million questions in order to appear pro-town without providing any substance. I don't like that hes all over the place. First he says "Personally, I do not think Threesr is Mafia." then "I agree if no scummier target, lets lynch him." ##Unvote Thanks for the behaviour slip Threesr. You have made this too easy. SCUM:Threesr If we look @ the post above, his point is made relatively clearly. However, note, all his quotes are taken completely out of contex; let us put events back into perspective. (1) Threesr: He determines that Chromatically is a good town read after one post that he reads. Actual: On December 19 2012 11:06 Mocsta wrote: @Chromatically (1) So far you are my best town read. (Based on your other comments in thread) I concede "Best town read" is open to interpretation as "good town read". It is clear I expressed my decision based off more than 1 post, but here Threesr attempts direct manipulation of fact. Why? Threesr is attempting to condemn with no evidence. The addition of "one post" is a nice subtle reminder of his hidden agenda - SCUM BEHAVIOUR. (2) Threesr: "Asking a million questions in order to appear pro-town without providing any substance" Actual: Townies know their innocence, and are seeking the scum hunt. Threesr, for your benefit in future games (if you dont get modkilled again..) only scum think about trying to appear pro-town. Your interpretation of my behaviour correlates to your role in this game SCUM and in my opinion is a clear slip and to add further insult to injury, is an extremely poor attempt [again] @ fact manipulation. (3) Threesr: First he says "Personally, I do not think Threesr is Mafia." then "I agree if no scummier target, lets lynch him Actual: On December 19 2012 23:57 Mocsta wrote: This is going against the trend, but my priority is to lynch mafia. Personally, I do not think Threesr is Mafia. The conclusion is: I currently view Threesr as a future uncertainty to deal with (i.e. interests may or may not be vested in Town, but I do not think is mafia). [Having just now viewed Cakepie post Has posted nothing but useless one- and two- liners. It is coming up to daytime EST, time to step up your play or else. As I and others have already mentioned, lurking is not acceptable here. In the absence of scummier targets, I will not hesitate to lynch you. I agree if no scummier target, lets lynch him. However, i implore that with the remaining ~30hrs we do our best to find a candidate with more certainty. My post is quite clear cut. I advocate Threesr as a threat, but without enough post history, mafia is difficult to ascertain. The stance is also obvious, I think Threesr is a threat to town, but not a top priority. [Based on others also lurking] (Note: I even "implore" town to find another candiate for Day 1) Threesr knows Town will be coming after him, perhaps Day 2 or Day 3, so is trying to negate the threat by targeting me Unfortunately, with all the pressure to mount a case founded upon quicksand, he has had to resort to quote misrepresentation to convey himself. This equates to lying. And is grounds for a vote & lynch come Day 1. ##:Threesr Counter-arguments (1) and (3) are fine at refuting the accusations from threesr, but I am not completely convinced by (2) as I do indeed find a lack of substance in the questions posed by Mocsta. Mocsta seems to swiftly conclude that threesr is seeking to misrepresent what he had said, and quickly switches his vote on the basis of lynching liars. I offer an alternative explanation: the weak aspects of the case put forward by threesr could be merely lazy scumhunt by someone who has been accustomed to lurking and not following closely, but has been forced to participate under pain of lynch. (This is by no means defending threesr or offering an excuse for his behavior.) Mocsta You’re definitely getting too excited with the flurry of posting and you need to cool your head. Try to consolidate your posts more, it also gives you time to reflect and digest things. I hope you take another fresh look at things when you wake up in the morning. Q: Consider: if threesr is lazy "scumhunting" because he simply doesn’t know any better -- how would that measure against your case against shz for sheeping, and poor vote justification i.e. lack of critical analysis before voting based on "questions raised by others"? especially @ Aquanim, Chromatically, Kickstart, Spaghetticus, shz Q: what do you think of mocsta’s flurry of posts and vote switch? Is he merely overly excited, or could there be merit in the accusation that his incessant questions were noise without substance? ----- On December 20 2012 00:09 Spaghetticus wrote: I am someone with a natural inclination to lurk. So far I'm on my 6th page of notes, and once I have more than a 30% read on anyone as scum I'll make a case. Until then I just trawl through the data and try to keep others on track. I'm reluctant to play aggressively until I have a foot to stand on. I think you’ll have plenty to work with by the time you wake up On December 20 2012 00:09 Spaghetticus wrote: Personally I would like people to focus their efforts away from Mocsta and Cakepie, and focus almost exclusively on the lurkers. If they do happen to be scum then at this rate they will leave a trail and we will nail them day two. This, very, very much. Keep in mind: if I were to be mislynched or killed by scum, what could you infer from the trail that I am leaving? What about Mocsta? Or anyone else for that matter? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Elaborate on your case against FatChunk. On December 20 2012 04:04 threesr wrote: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 03:55 cakepie wrote:I offer an alternative explanation: the weak aspects of the case put forward by threesr could be merely lazy scumhunt by someone who has been accustomed to lurking and not following closely, but has been forced to participate under pain of lynch. (This is by no means defending threesr or offering an excuse for his behavior.) Sounds about right. Not a valid excuse. Lazy is worse than just plain bad. ----- On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote: I don't agree with your vote for Orangeremi at the moment though. Yes, he did not contribute until now, but I would give him some more hours before lynching him for that. It is early yet. The vote stands as a reminder so that OrangeRemi is not forgotten while we carry on at length about other players. Yes, there are several more hours, let’s wait a bit and see what he/she does with that time. Other key suspects have votes on them already, my FoS stands to back those up as well. As we draw closer to the lynch, there will be a process of consolidation. But I shall leave this pressure vote where it is for now, rather than switch frivolously, and will see where things stand in a few hours. On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote: I don't have an opinion on FatChunk yet, as he did not contribute enough. If we don't find a conses by the lynch-deadline, we should lynch one of the lesser active players, for sure. Really? As opposed to Mocsta, who you have your vote on? If you had to lynch for inactivity and/or lack of serious contribution, how would you order the 3-4 candidates? ----- It is past 3 am, going to bed now. I like that some NA folks are starting to chip in more now that it is day over there, and look forward to longer filters to analyze when I get back. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
It has taken a large chunk of the evening for me to catch up with all the posts since I was last in here, taking notes, etc. It is 0100 KST as I start drafting this post (excludes newer posts from consideration), and I have now pretty much made up my mind for D1. It is late and I need to get an early start to tomorrow as well, so forgive me for not addressing the status of every player (compared to my previous posts). But the important bits are definitely here. ----- As I did my catch-up reading I grew increasingly suspicious at the lack of pressure being applied from Spaghetticus. His response to my questioning is that he wanted to wait until he had a >30% scummy read on someone, but that is followed by some 15 or so posts in which little real pressure is applied on anyone. He tries to coax threesr and corazon to not OMGUS and to pick and stick to a read. Then presses OmniEulogy to diversify his suspects list, and asks OrangeRemi and Sylencia to step things up without any questioning of substance. I refuse to believe that Spaghetticus can have nothing of worth to bring to the table in that 8-hour duration. Of course, following that is the defence of Corazon as the votes got stacked up to a dangerous number of 6+fos. Aquanim builds a thorough and well-considered case, and that I agree with all of it. One thing I can add is that I am watching how others react to my choice of playstyle, and compared to everyone else who generally addresses my (early) play only in passing, or only addresses me directly in response to my questions, Spaghetticus comes across as conspicuously eager to seem chummy with me (but also deliberately cautiously so, under the caveat that I am leaving a trail if he later deems a need to consider if I am scummy or not.) This is anomalous and I do not like the vibe that it gives me, considering the various possible motives for such behavior. The only thing he has going for him is the lack of OMGUS, but he jolly well can't do that if he preached against it earlier! Consequently, he still has not voted yet, and it is now getting late in D1. ##Unvote ##Vote: Spaghetticus On December 20 2012 23:54 Chromatically wrote: If y'all won't go for FatChunk, though, I'm willing to go for Spag. Let's do this thing for reals. The only votes left on Corazon are threesr, shz, Sylencia. Two of those I will not take too seriously, and shz voted there as an overnight placeholder pending later consideration. @Spaghetticus out with your reads, if you are town and we are all terribly mistaken. It may not save you, but it will help the common town wincon when you get mislynched. There is no time to wait for >30% scummy or whatever now. ----- Reminder: these still stand from my earlier post. ##FOS: threesr ##FOS: cDgCorazon threesr has posted more, albeit abrasive, lazy, and chaotic. but it is marginally better than before. I can understand his play from a lazy angle, but I still do not approve of it. willing to see if there is a further effort at improvement. My FoS on cDgCorazon has strengthened at the attack on Aquanim's case in lieu of defending Spaghetticus. (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17302166) He has also failed to address my questions adequately. Q1 was ignored, and his answer to Q2 (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17295870) is hardly informative as by the time he posted that response, threesr had posted quite a bit as well as voted several times. Furthermore it is notable that the only votes left on threesr as I write this are corazon and fatchunk, both of whom picked him for being an easy target early on. (Don't forget that fatchunk is also under suspicion as well. I don't FoS him yet, but he has stayed firmly in the scummier half of my semi-ordered players list.) ----- Additionally, ##FOS: OrangeRemi although I unvoted. I can understand some reasons/motivation why you might be cautious, and am willing to wait to see what you can bring to the table N1/D2. But do not test my patience too much. Also, as chromatically already explained, no lynch leaves us with no info and down at least one from N1 scum kp -- please do not no lynch. ##FOS: Kickstart the lack of activity from him has gotten to the point of really uncharacteristic compared to his earlier games. Other than spaghetticus, only he has yet to vote. Give us something to work with soon, otherwise be prepared for further scrutiny. And please do not get modkilled -- if you are town, we'd like to see you put your past experience to work. ----- It is late now and I need to be out and about early tomorrow. Depending on whether I manage to drag myself out of bed, I may or may not be able to pop in around 2h before lynch (before I need to head out). Regardless, with the information at hand now, we should be on track for a lynch of Spaghetticus or cDgCorazon, with FatChunk earmarked for scrutiny next. I am satisfied with how things stand, at 6 hours to go. If this is headed for a mislynch, I trust spaghetticus will keep his head on, do the right thing and give us as much to work with as possible. (side note: good to see a less frenetic mocsta. keep it up.) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
@Spag give us something to work with. If you have been keeping close track and taking notes, then you should have some reads to share by working off those notes, this should take less time than a defense and should come first (followed by the defense). What you've given earlier on OmniEulogy is not quite up to snuff. It appears a sufficient number of people might just be present if there is a need to swing the vote elsewhere. There is a little time yet, use it well. For my part I need to head out now, and will not be able to follow things very closely until later. Also, after sleeping on it, I have decided that my substantial night post will be made later in N1 than I originally planned -- though I still intend to pop in at that time to catch up. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
GG spag. Thank you for your final thoughts, it will give us something to chew on this night. The hunt continues! Continued activity would be nice, but let us also exercise caution lest we give scum too much that will aid them in deciding their night actions. Those who have been relatively inactive should start joining in more, but those who have already had a lot to say may want to save some for later in the night, at least until just before the dawn of day. Well, time to pore over notes and voting patterns! To make up for my absence earlier yesterday I will stick around for an hour or two now and take brief questions on the side while I work on my analysis. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 21 2012 11:47 cDgCorazon wrote: + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2012 07:39 cDgCorazon wrote: Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 23:21 cakepie wrote: cDgCorazon: you need to justify your stance on why lurkers should be handled on a "case to case basis" as this is a point of disagreement between you and several other players, myself included. Q1. How much time should someone be allowed in order to "sit back and figure things out?" A day phase is 48 hours long. What do you think is a reasonable expectation in terms of productive contribution from each player within that time frame? Is two to three substantial posts too much to ask? Q2. threesr openly condones lurking, and claims a lurking playstyle (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17239117). He was banned elsewhere, and modkilled in his last game here on TL. How do you propose we approach this situation, from your standpoint of handling on a "case to case basis" ? Where would you draw the line for unacceptable behavior, if his effort does not improve? I do apologize for not answering your questions, which I will do so now in the little time I have before going to work. In terms of figuring things out, I would say between 24-36 hours should be allowed for someone at the beginning of the first day phase. That way, others can put some pressure on and make other arguments, and instead of focusing on the case of one person, they can sit back and see things from a wider perspective to make their reads. However, I do feel that they should come forward with at least their reads on Day 1, even if they do not vote for anyone. Contributing all at once with a great amount of information all at one place is a lot more convenient for all of us than make several reads as the day goes on. We know more information than we did 24 hours ago, and everyone has posted enough to get off the "lurker label", someone making a smart evaluation here would most certainly more than make up for 24 hours of not posting much detail. Unacceptable behavior would be coming to conclusions too fast, as in threesr's case. He likes to lurk, and besides a few posts here and there, and his self-defense from my attacks, he has mostly been in the shadows. He has openly accused multiple people of being scum, which signals something is not right. Why would you pursue multiple cases within a few hours when the focus is on one or two people. To figure that out, we must ask ourselves two questions: What would be a possible Mafia lynching policy? The mafia knows who the other mafia are, so they should be looking to defend fellow mafia that are under attack. On offensive lynching policy, they should all look to communicate with each other to be on the same page voting wise, and as long as a member of the mafia does not get lynched, they are content to see anyone and everyone get lynched, because it would be the town just killing themselves off and playing the game for them. Hypothetically, the mafia could not kill anyone and still win the game if the town manages to argue themselves to death. Of course, this is unlikely. What would be a possible SK lynching policy, assuming that we have an SK? The SK policy is similar to the mafia's lynching policy, except the only one they have to defend is themselves. They are ok with anyone and everyone getting lynched, as long as it is not them. Along with the Mafia, they could hypothetically win without killing anyone, as long as the town lynches each other, and he never get targeted. If you would like more detail, do not be afraid to ask. I will gladly be able to help you after work. Was this a good enough answer for you? Your answers provide a little more insight into how you would judge players, and are welcomed. I remain concerned about the lateness of the answer and the possible benefit of the clarity of hindsight, especially now that Day 1 is done. However, I will listen to you with a little more good faith on account of Spag's "will" post. As a follow up, I would like you to look away from threesr for a moment and consider those players who have had more to say in D1, especially early contributors such as Aquanim, Chromatically, Mocsta and myself, as well as shz and fatchunk with their early votes. Not all 3-4 scum are likely to sit relatively idle for 24-36 hours. With that in mind, how do you assess the players I have mentioned above? (please try to minimize the omgus) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 21 2012 12:34 cDgCorazon wrote: I hate to ask, but what is OMGUS? It feels like it is when you vote someone because they voted for you. Close to that. It's "omg you suck", an emotional retaliation/counter-accusation that lacking solid reasoning, and founded on little beyond "you voted me, and that reads bad/scummy to me". | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 21 2012 13:22 Mocsta wrote: @Cakepie I refer you to. Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 11:42 cakepie wrote: The hunt continues! Continued activity would be nice, but let us also exercise caution lest we give scum too much that will aid them in deciding their night actions. Those who have been relatively inactive should start joining in more, but those who have already had a lot to say may want to save some for later in the night, at least until just before the dawn of day. Mod has confirmed night actions can be placed at the last second. If your intent was to post your commentary after the "lockdown" period to avoid putting a target on your head; well.. this is now null and void. No, I was aware that there would not be a lockdown in any case, so that is absolutely not the intent. I do not seek to overly influence the night actions of blue roles, if any. All that we know for sure is Spaghetticus' town flip; and the posting and voting behavior of day one is open for analysis. Any attempts to direct blue roles on what to do are WIFOM, since the one giving advice may be an earnest townie, or may be a god scum trying to lead town astray. In the end, it boils down to the same thing: blues now need to weigh what they see and come to their own decision of what to do. The rest of town may discuss a little, but ultimately must hope that any blues we have are up to the additional responsibility that their role confers. I have little new advice for blue roles; my most important thoughts toward end of D1 are there to be read and considered with an analytical mind. I may add a little more later perhaps, based on what happens over the next 10-12 hours. But mostly I do not want to add more WIFOM burden at this point. The more crucial goal is to thwart scum. Apart from their obvious goal of killing off townies, they will also maximize their utility by sowing chaos to confuse blues and VTs alike. They must decide if they want to hunt blues before they become too useful, or off the town players that are most dangerous to them. As for the second variety, how should they pick? By activity, by town cred, by amount of good intuition shown, or by amount of correct scumreads? Let scum ponder that on their own, try not to feed them any bones. We should of course all be looking closely at the D1 posting and voting patterns, but there is no need for us to help scum unravel that right now. Save it for the rise of the sun, when there is little time left for that to influence scum's decision of who to kill, but with plenty of daytime ahead to compare, study, and discuss our analyses. @Mocsta: Buy it or no, the above is my philosophy on night play and I am sticking to it. @Corazon: your effort and thought shows, even if it is only in response to my questions. Peace now, and form your analysis of D1; have it ready at start of D2, where we will hope for you to show more initiative rather than to be prodded into action. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 21 2012 14:47 cakepie wrote: or may be a god scum trying to lead town astray. ebwop: *good scum ... but perhaps indeed godly good if they do so well at it =) Going out now. Thanks corazon and mocsta for the light discussion. See y'all again in around 12 hours. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Not sure what possessed me to think I could stay up late after dinner, let alone still function well at mafia. Time to try and make up for that. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- It is my belief that scum will likely keep a nice spread of playstyle between themselves, I don't think they can imagine getting by with everyone being middle-of-the-road, 50-50 type players. There will be someone trying to seem active, as well as a possible designated lurker/chaos-causing player set up in case a bus is needed. ----- There is scum among the group Aqua, Chrom, fatchunk, shz, (and possibly Mocsta) Not everyone jumping in the early discussion and trying to move things along is town, it is expected that at least one scum should be in that group trying to appear town and gain credibility. It is instructive to look at the first 4-7 votes, before things started getting messy with threesr and corazon. Note that corazon & threesr were really easy targets to be pushed as lynch candidates, given the state of their play from early- to mid- D1. This could cast suspicion on Aquanim and chromatically (early corazon voters) and fatchunk (taking threesr as an easy way out early) Shz did not justify/elaborate very well on Mocsta with the second vote either, even frivolously putting it forth as an alternative for an alternative's sake. Although I must say I did share some of the suspicions he (and threesr) had about Mocsta's playstyle and intent, i.e. high quantity but a bit short on substance at times. Mocsta's votes on shz is a bit omgus, and the vote on threesr could have been taking the easy road to look like he was contributing. This adds to the suspicions on him that arise from his playstyle -- although it must be said that at least that has improved since I commented about it in (post#17292684) Contrast with my vote on OrangeRemi which is a stated pressure vote to force activity, and which I stuck to for a good while, to patiently gauge a longer-term reaction from him. (More on that later, hopefully) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Worth a good long look. ----- OmniEulogy: Seems more suspicious to me in hindsight, with the benefit of voting analysis. First votes corazon, although long after the initial accusations there, and conveniently after corazon's possible "scumslip", although crafted to be primarly on the "slip" rather than other aspects of his play. Could be carefully spaced to be later than Aquanim. Particularly strange that: On December 20 2012 19:47 OmniEulogy wrote: Till then Corazon is still my #1 read. without unvoting... what?! Other vote is the fairly quick follow-up to Aquanim's sudden push on Spag. Like Aquanim, not much else to work with in terms of other players. Very scary to consider the possibility of him working in concert with Aquanim as the scumteam. ----- OrangeRemi: I will be hoping for a lot more in D2. Held up patiently against my pressure vote in D1, choosing not to jump into anything in haste at all. Inspecting his filter in relation to the whole thread will reveal that he is present and paying attention, watching and waiting, and hopefully analyzing. The no lynch was a terrible idea, but I can understand a newbie view of preferring to avoid a mislynch. But now with all the information from D1 and the voting patterns, there should be enough for him to start forming some thoughts and opinions, if not full cases. I don't think it is possible to wait for any more certainty. Will look to judge on if he delivers, if he has indeed been watching and thinking. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Sylencia: got a free pass D1 for being away, but had better start contributing. Looking okay so far in N1. ----- On Corazon: Reanalysis of his defense of Spaghetticus, as well as they way he has conducted himself since, lifts a lot of the suspicion cast on him based on his earlier play, which can be explained as coming from an uncertain newbie. As for the "slip", a simple mistake could be just that -- a simple mistake. I am willing to evaluate him afresh based on how he steps up his play henceforth. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB) I will now continue my intended end-of-night dump, then go grab breakfast before coming back to all the end-of-night dumps that have been going up. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Voting patterns, part 2: I believe that scum voting would have been distributed at all times. ----- Early phase: Aquanim -> cDgCorazon 19 1740 shz -> Mocsta 19 1833 Chromatically -> cDgCorazon 19 2210 FatChunk -> threesr 19 2246 cakepie -> OrangeRemi 19 2321 Mocsta -> shz 19 2347 Mocsta -> threesr 20 0119 I have discussed this already, there could be one, possibly even two scum here if they chose to go for a more active-looking play. Too few to meaningfully discuss distribution. ----- Havoc phase: threesr -> Mocsta 20 0205 threesr -> FatChunk 20 0219 cDgCorazon -> Aquanim 20 0518 threesr -> cDgCorazon 20 0632 cDgCorazon -> threesr 20 0637 threesr -> FatChunk 20 0651 Mostly threesr causing a mess. He could indeed be lazy/bad/crazy as both Spag and myself had observed in D1. At the same time I cannot shake the niggling feeling that this is the great havoc-causing play that he had been waiting for. It is so careless and imprudent, it might be just crazy enough to work. ----- Corazon wagon phase: OmniEulogy -> cDgCorazon 20 0929 threesr -> cDgCorazon 20 1311 shz -> cDgCorazon 20 1317 Sylencia -> cDgCorazon 20 1405 If scum has not already put two on corazon, they would be doing it here. A third scum is either still lurking and waiting, not voting yet, or has already voted elsewhere -- in which case I feel it would most likely on threesr {FatChunk, Corazon, Mocsta}, which leads me to suspect FatChunk somewhat. ----- Spaghetticus case initiation phase: Aquanim -> Spaghetticus 20 1936 OmniEulogy -> Spaghetticus 20 2150 OrangeRemi -> nolynch 20 2247 Chromatically -> FatChunk 20 2354 cDgCorazon -> nolynch 21 0026 cDgCorazon -> threesr 21 0040 The main thing in this phase is that it is clear that many of us find OmniEulogy suspicious for the way that he followed as the second vote on Spag. I have mentioned this in my posted reads of Aquanim and Omni just a while ago as well. We've got the nolynch votes, which at this point I would treat as cautious/confused newbie play rather than anything scummy. Chromatically switches off from corazon onto fatchunk here. These were his top two scum reads. He left himself the possibility of moving onto Spaghetticus. I liked his thoughts on fatchunk, and had a mild town vibe off of that. However, it can also be seen as a careful positioning to not agree too quickly with Aquanim and OmniEulogy. ----- Spaghetticus wagon phase: Mocsta -> Spaghetticus 21 0052 cakepie -> Spaghetticus 21 0252 kickstart -> Spaghetticus 21 0531 Chromatically -> Spaghetticus 21 0657 shz -> Spaghetticus 21 0725 OrangeRemi -> Fatchunk 21 0850 After Mocsta's contribution, I found myself in agreement with Aquanim and Mocsta here, and less so with OmniEulogy who did not present as much in the way of compelling arguments for the lynch. My urging of chromatically to move was motivated by a high confidence from the high level of agreement with Aquanim, Mocsta and myself, conferring some mutual confirmation. I also still believed Chromatically to be town-ish at the time. However I now downgrade him to mildly scum-ish for his shortage of good justification when switching his vote over. If scum has not already put two on Spaghetticus (i.e. both Aqua and omni being scum), then one of kickstart, chromatically, and shz is scum. - Kickstart I have commented about, if he continues to lurk as hard as he has done it will start shifting from null- to much scummier for him. - If chromatically is the scum, he would be scumbuddy with Aqua or Omni, but not both, I think -- unlikely to be all three of them, at most two of three. I think a case against shz can be built upon his poor case initiation against mocsta in the early game, plus the fact that he wagoned onto both Corazon and Spaghetticus. ----- I would look for one or two scum among {OmniEulogy, Aquanim, Chromatically} in that order of decreasing suspicion. Beyond that, shz is next most suspicious for me. Threesr is hard to place, but I still don't like the confusion he causes. The away / heavy lurking {Kickstart, Sylencia, OrangeRemi} are null-, with kickstart being of most concern. Their play on D2 (or lack thereof) will determine greatly how my read of them changes. ----- To start the day I would like to continue the pressure on the heavy lurkers to start getting in on the discussion. ##Vote: Kickstart ##FoS: OrangeRemi Surely there is a lot more useful things to discuss now. With the loss of Spaghetticus and Mocsta, and Aquanim and Chromatically both under suspicion, we really need the quieter townies to start stepping up, if townies you be. If you do not speak up, then scum you are. For Sylencia I will give a single good faith opportunity for now based on his away claim. Be back after breakfast. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 10:46 cakepie wrote: Wait; one second. Would a jailkeeper action result in a roleblocked notification? On December 22 2012 10:47 Dandel Ion wrote: Yes. Please confirm my understanding: because jailkeeper has priority over night KP, the jailkeep action will go through first, and will continue to apply despite death of the jailkeeper by KP (resolved later) In which case, what I said here: On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB) may not be correct, as now that I have gone over mocsta's post it seems he certainly could have reasons to want to jail me for the night. ----- Also a quick note for those thinking about possible SK: not compulsive kill in this setup You can kill one person every night, but you don't have to. In my opinion, there is very little at the moment to suggest if there Descartes is in the game or not, and I do not feel that we should devote too much energy into figuring that out just yet. ----- Self-reflection: When considering motives while thinking through the possibilities, I may have looked too hard for scum acting the busy townie, and assumed blues would be keeping low. I failed to give enough credence to the possibility of a cautiously active blue role, which is how Mocsta turned out to be playing. ----- I was really concerned about the lack of scrutiny on myself throughout D1, and it does not help that when something as finally brought up, it had to come from a dead man's mouth. Corazon, OrangeRemi, Aquanim and maybe sylencia seem to be around atm. What is your take on Mocsta's read on me? Anyhow, I'm going to stick around in the thread for a bit now while I toss around all the possibilities in my mind. Feel free to ask for my thoughts on anything. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 13:45 cDgCorazon wrote: Basically, he is stating that many of your posts have been fluff, Because my RL schedule dictated that I could not be ever-present in the thread over the past few days, I costantly found myself being "scooped" in terms of arguments that could be made and evidence that could be presented. I tried to make up for it by playing hard and putting effort into writing carefully and in detail as time allowed. I am dismayed, and think it is unfortunate that he considered my post length to be lots of fluff padding. ===== On December 22 2012 13:45 cDgCorazon wrote: you have only handed out questions to players, and have come under little fire True, but I would urge you not to take my questioning at face value only. Clearly, I must seek something by choosing to target and pressure specific people. What does that imply about my read on them at that time? For instance, with Mocsta I wanted to believe he was town, but kept getting thrown off by the way he posted and the kind of questions he asked, hence I posted to obtain a reaction that I could gauge. (more on that below) With several cases, I wanted to get people to start talking, or talking more -- even if just in general, because I didn't have enough to start making a firm read on them yet. I did not feel comfortable about the lack of scrutiny on myself, you might note that I even specifically asked for reads on myself! But it looked like people were pretty okay with what I was doing -- no one complained that I lacked in substance, and I was initially glad that my bursty availability in the game did not seem to be an issue. ===== On December 22 2012 13:45 cDgCorazon wrote: How do you feel about it? That is what I would like to hear from you. Then I can make a judgement call on how right I believe Mocsta is. Right now, it seems like the two scum that Mocsta proposed have all tried to disassociate themselves from each other. Are you standing by how you jumped on the Spag lynch train? Or are you thinking on your own? I feel that he has misinterpreted my intent, and tried too hard to cobble together things that do not exist in order to try to analyze my behavior when I have played with nothing to hide. I feel that he may have taken offense to some of my comments directed toward him as well, and let that affect his judgement. I was quite seriously disturbed by the faint possibility that he was a scum acting active, and wanted to needle him a little and see how he reacted, but looks like that went awry. Like these: Then he tries to cock block me by insulating my vocabulary knowledge. Ironically. his statement is wrong (but I think he already knew that..) Definition Infiltrate: "Gain access to (an organization, place, etc.) furtively and gradually, esp. in order to acquire secret information." Scum already has access to the open discussion in the thread, so my reasoning is that the two criteria of "furtive" and "secret information" do not hold, and while scum may try to manipulate us, there is really no need to "infiltrate" to "gain information". Good blues would not be so stupid as to blatantly play all their cards openly from the get-go anyway, so the only town who might have some shared secrets that scum would want access to would be masons, if they existed. I meant this as a jest with a mild touch of needling in case it was a true scumslip, too bad he took offense. Then trys to associate me as scummy, and then to avoid me coming after him with an OMGUS, he backfoots and potentially infers I am still being pro-town. I truly had some suspicions of Mocsta, and was open to the possibility that he could be a pretending scum, while being really unsure because of how earnest he came across and his high activity. Was it genuine or trying too hard at acting it? I understand it is the first game for many of us, but he was a bit too excitable for me to place properly. I got my answer when he calmed down a little . But it looks like I also sufficiently annoyed him by this act. My slight prod, in the hopes of helping me get a better read on him, got construed as "tore me to shread - respectfully", to use Mocsta's own words. He also picks this out: Show nested quote + I can understand if players with blue roles are inclined curtail their activity so as not to stand out too much and present an obvious target for scum kp. However, that is not a free pass to completely lurk either. Throws in blue role out of no where, potentially as a play to associate his role as blue. This was merely my thought process in considering why others are lurking; and I should hope that my play not be characterized to be as lurky as several others -- because while I have not been able to be around at all times, I feel that have put in the required thought and effort at the times that I devote to this game. Why would a blue role call attention to himself and hint at his role? It is too dangerous a move to me. Trying to ask for protection that is not guaranteed? Nah. Worse if scum figures what your role is, and prevents you from using it effectively, or kills you off. I personally feel that a blue role would/should play to be inconspicuous, stay alive and keep the role hidden for a while in order to make the most use of it. Then: Then stands by vote to Orangeremi for being a lurker. The real cause is.. the bandwagon on Croazon was big enough for a lynch. Nonsense, the corazon wagon was far from guaranteed at that point. That post was made Dec 20 0436 KST. I actually facepalmed at this. How do you arrive at such a conclusion..? Also: This is the breadcrumb post. You can read all teh fluff. giving excuses blah blah. But the guy who in post one was so in control, well reaonsed and calm.. decides to join the bandwagon on spaghetticus. Breadcrumb: try this one.. Why the heck would scum issue an open call to arms in this manner? That would be just silly. This is hardly a crumb of any kind, but rather two things: 1. having noted the possible spag-corazon association on my own, I was readily convinced by Aquanim's case, and wanted to take the votecount to a credible threat of 5 votes. 2. I still had a slight townread on Chromatically, and sought to see if he could deliver on his promise to move over as time ran out, with adequate justification. But remember: I am not infallible either -- after a full day of important RL administrivia I was definitely not thinking as clearly as I could have with a fresh, rested mind. Looking back at it now I completely understand how I myself can be seen as sheeping, since I had failed to properly convey where I drew my own conviction from. Whatever I say about that now is going to be WIFOM, unfortunately. When I got up just before the lynch, I was still not well rested, nor fully awake, and was more concerned about having my things ready to go to the embassy and getting there on time. I regret this, but at the same time am at peace with what happened because 1. I may try to play hard at this game, but ultimately I will not let it take precedence over important things in RL, and 2. the voting patterns turned out to be quite interesting and useful in my opinion. I was still feeling pretty upbeat in early N1, seeing the different ways I could tease the voting behavior apart. But the social obligations that followed had me so physically exhausted (and slightly drunk) that it would not have been responsible to post in that state -- it was all I could do to drag myself out of bed to put up my dawn dump ahead of end of N1. I will not deny I have had misreads and misplays, I am not the only one and we are all relatively new here. But I have sought a style that is open, upfront, and honest. The rest is up to town to judge. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 14:01 Orangeremi wrote: @cake I'm interested in his theory regarding you+OE+Chrom scum team, but I don't know how much credibility it has. you mean this: I am hoping the links between cakepie, and definite mafia (OmniEulogy & Chromatically) is enough to seal the deal. Simple: Mocsta is unfortunately chasing after shadows, looking for links that don't exist In this post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17290113 I skip over Aquanim, Chromatically, OmniEulogy and Spaghetticus because they were already actively posting and I did not feel I needed to prompt or pressure them, nor check anything in particular. As long as their filter continued growing at the same rate, I should have something to work with. Later on, I had a slight town read on Chromatically and was happy to let him continue engaging and prompting everyone, pressing Corazon, and later on, FatChunk. As for OmniEulogy, he remained in null+/- territory for me until fairly late, and by then I was more focused on narrowing down lynch candidates than figuring out new leads. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 15:37 Kickstart wrote: First he basically claims blue. Where might this be, if I may ask? On December 22 2012 15:37 Kickstart wrote: he says I do nothing while saying a case can be made on shz, when I have already made a case and was the first to state suspicion of shz with this post: Try waking up hungover and running out of time? I could barely get through the D1 and voting pattern analysis as it was, let along catch up to something you posted while I was asleep. I am still in the midst of sifting through all of that. On December 22 2012 15:37 Kickstart wrote: And here cakepie is, saying he has a null read on me, listing tons of other slight scum reads, and throwing a vote on me. Not sure what he is doing, but the fact that he is voting me instead of one of his listed scum reads is suspicious. How about, I think you're capable of more than one case, and wanted to prompt for more, even if it is scraps of suspicions? Looks like I got what I wanted but not quite what I expected. Regardless, bring it, and let me be on the answering and defending end of things for a change. Still, I am startled that you would take such an early pressure vote so seriously. ##Unvote | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 16:27 Kickstart wrote: I take every vote seriously in every game I play, check my games if you like - I don't throw it around meaninglessly. If I vote someone it is because I think they are scum. And here is where you "basically claim blue": Show nested quote + On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: Well crap. That is a shame. GG mocsta. I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB) I will now continue my intended end-of-night dump, then go grab breakfast before coming back to all the end-of-night dumps that have been going up. You claim you were roleblocked, meaning you have a role. Funny how after this you make a post where you say "Why would a blue role call attention to himself and hint at his role? It is too dangerous a move to me." When you did it yourself (if your attempt at a claim is to be believed anyways). Not a claim, but a statement of fact. I received a notification, and I felt that it was important enough to get that out early before I went back to my intended posting. I stand by my statement that it is foolish for blue to call attention to themselves so soon. But here in the OP it says: All roleblocks will result in the target being notified. That is to say, regardless of whether the roleblock actually does anything at all or not. Feel free to verify this with the hosts, but I think my understanding is correct on this and so disclosing the existence of a roleblock (or, as it turns out, block due to jailkeeper) does not tell you anything about whether I am one of the esteemed scientists, or a simple white male voter. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 15:50 cDgCorazon wrote: This is the most interesting point that Mocsta's case that I feel you need to address. He is linking you with Chro/Omni, and is basically saying that because you were willing to follow both of them on the Spag lynch train, that Chro/Omni directed the other two mafia to jump on the Chro lynch train, and that is what you did. This is what Mocsta has accused you of, and now I feel like you need to address these accusations. Chromatically: I fail to see how I am "following" Chromatically when I am the one urging him to consider joining the Spag wagon. I liked that he had cases going against FatChunk and Corazon, though he had relented against Corazon and was at FC > Spag > Cor when I made that post that mocsta refers to. With both Spaghetticus and Corazon at 3 votes, I did not feel that my vote was enough, and called on him on account of my townread on him and his willingness to consider Spag as an alternative to FC. Most importantly I felt I could rely on him to think carefully about the strength of the case, and take Spag up to a more credible 5 votes if he felt there was enough merit in the case. Surely I wasn't going to ask these guys: - Corazon, FatChunk (benefits from attention removed from them) - OrangeRemi, Kickstart, Sylencia (lurking/away) - shz (play was relatively weaker) - threesr (... nah.) I genuinely did not want another swing onto someone else (which was numerically possible) in the space of a few hours, knowing I would have a severely limited ability to participate in such a discussion. OmniEulogy: I don't think I allude to Omni's case or support at any point. (more on my spag vote below). If you try to link me with Omni by the fact that I pretty much let him be throughout D1, or vice-versa, well, he was one of several who were generating enough text for my liking and thus was not the only one I didn't feel a need to prod for more. And basically no one expressed any misgivings about my play either. With 13 players and a need to focus attention on a few, it is hardly statistically surprising that any two given players do not pursue one another. Were you sheeping on your vote for Spag just because the FC lynch train never took off This was a side factor. With about 6 hours to go, it definitely looked more likely to me that a consolidation onto Spag was more viable than onto FatChunk. or were you sheeping because another scum told you so? Do I come across to you as a player who takes instructions from someone else? Of course I deny this, but anyone would do say the same -- town in honesty, and scum would lie. How is this question anything but forcing me to put WIFO[U]? In other words, explain your vote for Spag. Since I was playing catch-up, I continued where I left off and took notes while going forwards in the thread. When I got to Aquanim's case on spag, many points resonated with me, same was true with Mocsta's posts. Both of them I had a town vibe on, and Mocsta particularly after he relaxed the pace of his posting. The mutual confirmation of opinion among players I have a town read on (relative to the others) led to higher confidence, and as discussed above, I felt a need to bring the lynch toward greater certainty given that time was running low and I would not be able to participate much. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 17:07 Sylencia wrote: @Cakepie What do you think about OE claiming he also got roleblocked? If true, would that mean the town RB blocked OE and the scum blocked you? If there was a roleblocker on each side that's how I would see it but what would that mean for the distribution of roles? 7-9 VT + 1 RB + 0-2 other blues(/SK)? 2 mafia + 1 RB seems plausible I guess, but having 2 role blockers in the game suggests a lot more blues than usual.. All we know is one of the roleblock notifications could have arose from Mocsta using his jailkeeper powers; it is highly likely he would not have wasted the power leaving it idle. It is entirely possible for him to have targeted either OE or myself, if you read his end-of-night analysis. If it was indeed Mocsta, what was his intention? To block a perceived scum power role, or to block scum KP? Or to protect? Did he crumb his action? We may never know. If both roleblock claims are true, then another RB exists. Is it the scum RB or town RB? Which of two targets did this RB block, and with what intention? Don't forget, you must consider the possibility that either one or even both the roleblocked claims may very well be a lie -- though I would naturally assure you that mine is the truth. I do not think it is worth pursuing setup theorycrafting at this juncture. The reason for claiming roleblock is open disclosure and insuring against fake claims and other shenanigans later in the game. There isn't enough to work with from the setup angle yet, except possibly say that we should expect some parity in the amount of roles for both sides for balance reasons -- which does not help us in anyway right now. Scum hunting still takes precedence. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- On December 23 2012 06:15 FatChunk wrote: Show nested quote + On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB). I'm just curious, why would you assume it's scum RB? This was in error if you refer to my other post shortly after that: + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 13:18 cakepie wrote: Show nested quote + On December 22 2012 10:46 cakepie wrote: Wait; one second. Would a jailkeeper action result in a roleblocked notification? Please confirm my understanding: because jailkeeper has priority over night KP, the jailkeep action will go through first, and will continue to apply despite death of the jailkeeper by KP (resolved later) In which case, what I said here: Show nested quote + On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB) may not be correct, as now that I have gone over mocsta's post it seems he certainly could have reasons to want to jail me for the night. My first reaction was to associate the roleblock notification with the presence of a roleblocker, and it did not initially occur to me that the same could arise from the jailkeeper. Furthermore, at that point, having not gone over mocsta's pre-dawn post yet I had no reason to believe that mocsta would want to spend his action on me -- last I left off in early-mid N1 I thought he would be far more concerned about Omni/Aquanim/Chromatically and would have read me at null at worst. ----- I'll be around for a few hours from now (with a brief interruption for dinner). Currently drafting cases, but since some people are here, please leave any questions you might want to direct at me and I will get to them later this evening. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 10:24 cakepie wrote: I would look for one or two scum among {OmniEulogy, Aquanim, Chromatically} in that order of decreasing suspicion. Here we go on the top two of those: ----- Aquanim Casting the very first vote on Corazon was stated as pressure vote, and it was effective at generating activity -- except that it devolved into havoc for a bit with threesr shitting up the thread. The corazon "scumslip" did not help either. While this was happening he did not ask Corazon any questions himself, which is a little strange to me. Perhaps the volume of resulting posts was good enough for him? Beyond that, it is his initiating and pushing forward the Spag lynch that might be the greatest cause of suspicion for anyone -- but Mocsta also thought it was a good case. I too have no right to fault Aquanim for his case, which I found to agree with many of my observations and suspicions. After that, he has remained inviting and open to scrutiny about the D1 mislynch when answering questions about it. He has continued to pressure the most inactive players and most recently has been advancing his suspicions on OrangeRemi. This, continuing from his D1 performance, leans toward town behavior. What is interesting to note is that he started two of the three wagons that actually got anywhere on D1. (the other being on threesr, who pretty much made himself an inviting target). Overall, I find it much easier to explain his behavior by a townie hypothesis than by a scum hypothesis. Leading a wagon is far too conspicuous and risky, and to do it twice in one day phase has got to be absolutely nuts or balls of steel. I shall record my thoughts on the scum hypothesis here for information and scrutiny: + Show Spoiler + If Aquanim were scum trying to influence/direct town, the scumteam would be making an exceptionally daring and risky play -- although the way town has played (and I do not exclude myself from blame here) actually makes it viable to run this risk, it was difficult to know this in advance. Continuing the scum hyphothesis, with Aquanim aiming to lead the town lynches, the remaining scum would have to run interference and cause confusion and/or lend support to the target wagons. Out of all the possibilities for that, I think it is most likely that threesr is the scumbuddy designated to draw attention, run interference where necessary, and lurk where not needed. He can then be safely bussed D3+ if needed. One other scum I would expect to lie low, but remain careful not to be the most unhelpful/unproductive -- most likely a scum with a power role -- sadly we have several candidates that fit the bill here. Regardless, I currently consider Aquanim to be null+, having completed the obligatory scrutiny required as a consequence of his leading the Spag wagon. ----- OmniEulogy Managed to fly under the radar for the better part of D1, but then drew the suspicion of both Spaghetticus and Mocsta. Crucially, he wagoned onto both Corazon and Spaghetticus, and made really ridiculous statements with his VT claim, and "100% scum" read on Corazon. His vote on Corazon was motivated primarily by the "scumslip", with little additional support On December 20 2012 09:29 OmniEulogy wrote: He slipped up so badly I can't believe it was a mistake. He actually claimed mafia after an already terrible start while being defensive and being overly cautious of most of his posts. I think Theesr's constant back and forth with him made him slip up. [snip] I believe at the moment our best bet is to lynch Corazon at the end of D1, see who jumps on the bandwagon and if he flips scum we'll be able to look at who tried to defend him, who eventually gave in, and who was set on lynching him right away. What rubs me the wrong way here is that with still almost a whole day to go, he is perfectly happy to settle down to a bandwagon on Corazon, on the basis of a supposed slip, for the sake of information gain, looking at who might jump to Corazon's defense. His vote takes it up to three, and makes it easy for threesr (re-vote), shz and sylencia to follow on the wagon, which I do not consider a positive outcome. Besides this he was participative, although his discussion revolved around uncontroversial targets and did not reveal much, except when he FoS'ed OrangeRemi for an "unjustified claim" against Sylencia + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 18:22 OmniEulogy wrote: You have good points Spaghetticus but it doesn't really change my mind. People did come to his defense and tried to counter by voting for Threesr. Corazon started off the game saying he hoped D1 would be quiet and peaceful and no real information should come out during it which also seems a little scummy as everybody else started off hoping for some good conversation and to build up leads. Not wait for N1/D2 where we lose somebody and have no information about why they die. The fact that he's new CAN explain these things but I refuse to believe he is dumb. I think he thought it out and tried to come across as reasonable. I've already said I want to start going after the lurkers with our remaining time D1 and if we find something that removes Corazon from suspicion so be it. My vote is not locked yet it is just on the person I find most likely to be scum. I don't think he's past the point of no return either. I believe the vote count is 5 for Corazon and 3 for Threesr at the moment. and as I said Threesr would be my #2 if it weren't for the fact that it wouldn't make any sense for both him and Corazon to be scum. I'd like Corazon to tell us his top scum reads, and why they seem to be. I'd also like to note to Spaghetticus and everybody else that if you are looking for more people who came to Corazon's defense, Orangeremi tried to make a case of why Corazon wasn't scum and went back to lurking. I'd like to actually hear why Orangeremi refused to give us an idea of who his top scum reads were and why he didn't actually say why Corazon wasn't acting scummy. The fact that he then put out the same three names for his top scum reads that everybody else had and then went into hiding again is also suspicious. In Orangeremi's own words "Instead of looking for scum players, they would be making unjustified claims hoping others hop wagon in an attempt to get an innocent player lynched." and then "Otherwise, I have a slight suspicion of Sylencia that is based solely on a hunch and little to no evidence." based on that... ##FOS Orangeremi The next big thing from him is his vote onto Spaghetticus, which is mainly supported by the fact that Spaghetticus attempted to defend Corazon, who he considers "100% scum", and for a what he considered a poor defense against the case. The one way I can try to justify this as town is if he were tunneling so incredibly hard and by extension tunnels Spaghetticus as well simply by association (and perhaps even OrangeRemi as well, who tried to find an explanation for Corazon not being scum). This would, of course, be a terrible way to play as town -- why not lynch the 100% scum read then, especially if you are going for simple and straightfoward play? More importantly, it runs counter to his express intent from earlier: to lynch Corazon and then assess the information gained from that. On December 21 2012 00:15 OmniEulogy wrote: I'm going to play safe in my first game as VT in mafia. As has already been pointed out, this VT claim is utterly ridiculous, and is atrocious ahead of N1 as it helps scum focus their PK onto blue roles. It is premature, since there is hardly a threat of him being lynched. He has tried to explain it as "pre-emptive" to protect himself -- but at what cost in terms of risk to our blues? This is a selfish play without any motive to help the town. As for playing safe, I cannot see his Spaghetticus vote and VT claim as "safe" plays, if he were indeed a VT. The safe vote, considering his position on different players at the time, would have been to stick to his vote on Corazon. The VT claim is a "safe" play only for self preservation, and not in the interest of town. In N1 Omni chummies up to Mocsta and Chromatically, agreeing with both of them that he has a strong town read on the other person for the same reasons. Mocsta certainly did not agree that the evidence pointed to a strong town read on Chromatically. Apart from these, Mocsta raises a few other points on Omni that he considers suspicious in his pre-dawn post, but I feel that he may be reading too much into things on some of these suspicions -- the same way that he is wrong about casting me as his third suspect. On D2 Omni starts by fending off questioning from Chromatically about his VT claim, and then... chooses to pursue threesr -- who has conveniently not even been playing. Now that that has proven futile he chooses to FoS FatChunk and OrangeRemi in OMGUS fashion. ----- Assessing the state of the game:
In my D1 voting pattern analysis, I tried to trace how scum may have planned to distribute their voting and thread posting activity. In our current state, feeling the loss of Spaghetticus and Mocsta, I consider that the greatest threat to us is scum that is amongst the few remaining highly active players. The lurkier scum have too much room to hide for now, and it is difficult to nail them townies who had been lurking before step it up some more; threesr has been absent and is on track to be modkilled at this rate, and in any case his absence for now means he is not in the thread causing havoc. I have too many "just-below-null" reads at the moment to tease apart (will post some thoughts after this). But OmniEulogy is my biggest scumread at the moment, and a scum Omni continuing to masquerade as town in D3 and onwards is far too dangerous for me to contemplate. ##Vote: OmniEulogy Any other lynch today for me is more than two-thirds likely to be a mislynch, and scum will kill at least one more useful townie tonight, putting us at 6-3 with 3~5 lurkers -- a terrible spot. Of course, if I am wrong about Omni, then we will be pretty much in the same place as well. But this is the best shot I've got at the moment, and I've got to take it. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 01:26 cDgCorazon wrote: Right now, I am going to vote for a no-lynch, as my mind is not made up on who we should lynch. We have about 5.5 hours left in the day, so anything could happen. ##Vote:No-lynch If anyone has a problem with this, let me know. I hope you intend to change that at some point. With the current spread of votes across different candidates, and time running short, I am concerned that this would make it too easy for a lynch to go through with as few as 3-4 votes, with scum comfortably scattered to thwart analysis. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 01:43 Kickstart wrote: Eh nothing changed for me yet, going to go ahead and put my vote on SHZ since he is the scummiest to me. Care to share your number 2 read? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
His problematic D1 voting behavior has already been described by Kickstart: + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 00:04 Kickstart wrote: So I took a look through some filters and the person who stuck out most to me was SHZ. Just a quick lookthrough of his posts shows you that he been very wishy-washy on everything and committed to absolutely nothing. In my mind there are only 2 options for this sort of play, 1 is a timid towny who is unsure of themselves, 2 is scum trying to leave themselves options to try and work their way out of bad commitments. Since I believe this is SHZ's first game I am somewhat inclined to think that he is just a timid towny, but then I look at his voting and his justification behind them (read: NONE) and it seems he doesn't care at all about who gets lynched. Townys should worry very much about who gets lynched because they do not want to lynch town, even first time players know this and typically show that they care about who gets lynched. His votes are a big issue with me and I read them as scummy right now because to me it seems SHZ does not care who gets lynched (it is typical of mafia to not care who gets lynched, as long as it is town getting lynched), look at his vote posts: Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 18:33 shz wrote: So if we need another wagon to jump, or not, to jump on: ##Vote: Mocsta Why? He/She did start a discussion, but I don't think that was all that useful, other than proving him being active and establish an alibi. Questions like the seafood one waste time and distract from substantial discussion. Also he/she is quite fast on "reading" someone as Town. Additionally he/she asked repeatedly about Mafia strategies. This is no way a waterproof case, but I think its a start and something we could work with. Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 13:17 shz wrote: I would have done it tomorrow but I can do it now I guess. ##Unvote ##Vote cDgCorazon Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 07:25 shz wrote: It seems like we have the strongest case against Spag at the moment. I will still keepmy eye on Cora, but for now: ##unvote ##Vote Spaghetticus @Aqua: If you did not argue that, then its all good. Of course rational not equals town, but its not equal mafia either. Its neutral. He takes every chance to hop on whatever bandwagon is popular at the moment, providing no reason for being on any of them. Given this I think he is the person I am most suspicious of at the moment and want to see some real reads and commitment, not wishy-washy posts that don't commit himself to anything. @SHZ Why did you jump on every bandwagon without giving any reasons at all for why you think those players are scummy? Do you have any current scum reads that you would be willing to push instead of sheeping? And elaborated upon by Chromatically: + Show Spoiler + On December 23 2012 05:45 Chromatically wrote: shz shz has been playing like classic scum. Real stances are nonexistant, real contribution is nonexistant, yet he manages to blend in and look like a contributor very well. Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 18:19 shz wrote: Could not sleep, so I can be at least productive here. I think we pretty much made it clear that we don't accept lurking as a playstyle for Town, so I don't think this will be much of a problem. If it is, we also made the consequences clear for everyone. Our focus should be to find null- & unconstructive posts which don't help us at all. That would be a pretty good starting point to pressure and get some more information. Corazon did indeed more or less only reacted to direct questions and was not that talkative in general. I don't think that is a huge tell, but why not investigate further? The interesting thing is that he/she kinda defended lurking and lying. I don't agree with the arguments at all, as they seem a bit weak and pointless. His first "contribution" is here. This looks like a good post at first: it's fairly long, it covers a lot of topics. However, all this is is a summary of what's happened so far. He doesn't take any stances on any of the issues of the time: look at the wishy-washiness on Corazon. He's afraid to take an actual stand, so he says things like "they seem a bit weak" instead of taking a position on it himself. This is merely the first in a long line of posts of this type, taking no stances while writing long posts anyway: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote: As I did not get any sleep tonight, I caught some of it up until now. This is getting somewhere. So I'll start with answering my questions and then stating my thoughts. Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 23:21 cakepie wrote: shz: Tried to provide a case on mocsta as an alternative to cDgCorazon. However, the fast town read was first pointed out by spaghetticus, and OmniEulogy was the one who first pointed to the questions about scum startegy. Not sure the case is viable at this point, but I agree that Mocsta seems a bit too eager. Q: Evaluate my play. Does it look town, or does it look scum? Why? Your analysis is quite thought out and you point out three POIs and try to get something out of it by pressuring them. This is good. At the same time you still trying to get reads on most of the others by asking questions. I don't think these three are your only suspects. All in all I tend towards town as I don't see much evidence which would support you scumminess. I don't agree with your vote for Orangeremi at the moment though. Yes, he did not contribute until now, but I would give him some more hours before lynching him for that. @Mocsta So I'm scum because I said that my case against you wasn't waterproof? What would have happened if I acted so sure about you, as you act about everyone who attacks you? You getting quite defensive and jumping to, rather fast, conclusions about who is mafia and who is not. You changed your vote from me to threesr immediatly to countervote him and then spam a couple of posts saying "how easy it was", "he slipped", in big red bold latter. This is way over dramatized. To top that of you trying to martyr your way into town. I don't like that at all. I'm still not 100% conviced, but this is not helping you. For now my vote stands. And I think threesr, however fishy and rare his posts are at the moment, has a point. You seem quite conviced and at the same you are saying you are not. I don't have an opinion on FatChunk yet, as he did not contribute enough. If we don't find a conses by the lynch-deadline, we should lynch one of the lesser active players, for sure. Answers a question directed to him, defends himself a little against Mocsta, and still takes no stands. Noncommittal reads on Mocsta ("For now my vote stands"), threesr (leaving his options open by throwing a little suspicion his way), and FatChunk (doesn't have an opinion). On December 20 2012 08:45 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 04:36 cakepie wrote: On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote: I don't have an opinion on FatChunk yet, as he did not contribute enough. If we don't find a conses by the lynch-deadline, we should lynch one of the lesser active players, for sure. Really? As opposed to Mocsta, who you have your vote on? If you had to lynch for inactivity and/or lack of serious contribution, how would you order the 3-4 candidates? Mocsta did contribute more than FatChunk before I voted him. It seems some of the players have awaken and contributed to the discussion, but some are lurking too much. 1. I'm really getting tired of threesr. Even if he/she isn't mafia he/she is creating so much chaos, only commentates snarky and very brief. He/She is dangerous whethere scum or not. 2. Kickstarter stated that he/she thinks lurking is bad, but lurks him/herself. 3. Orangerem is lurking too much. 4. Sylencia too, but that was announced, so we have to see how the next couple of play-days go. More noncommittal reads. Wants to lynch threesr even if he's not mafia and attacks Kickstart, Orange, and Sylencia for lurking (very easy for scum to do). On December 22 2012 01:58 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 22 2012 00:04 Kickstart wrote: @SHZ Why did you jump on every bandwagon without giving any reasons at all for why you think those players are scummy? Do you have any current scum reads that you would be willing to push instead of sheeping? "Whatever bandwagon is popular right now" is not true. My mocsta vote was to push for an discussion and I did explain my Corazone vote before. If you want to quote, don quote out of context. + Show Spoiler [Corazone reasons] + On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote: The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects. Corazon If Mafia: - threesr most likely not scum. - FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr. If Town: - threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either. - FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before. FatChunk If Mafia: - Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed. - threesr most likely not scum. If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - threesr still possbile mafia. threesr If Mafia: - Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - FatChunk still possible mafia. I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. On December 20 2012 12:53 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 11:50 Chromatically wrote: @shz We should be lynching the player who is most likely to flip scum, not based on any information we might gain. We can look at association stuff after the flip, but we want to focus on lynching scum before. Based solely on who will flip scum, who do you want to lynch and can you move your vote there? Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 12:48 Chromatically wrote: @Spag Our objective as town is to lynch mafia. What we should not be doing is lynching for information instead of lynching mafia. The information gained from a flip is not great enough that we should lynch a townier player. If you look at what shz's post actually says, there's very little actual conclusions that could be drawn. Most of it is just "x is possible scum". All of it is just worrying about the d2 lynch, which we should do on d2 instead of now. I dislike your post saying that we should "expect a town lynch". Good towns can find scum d1. Good players can be correct in their reads with over "40%" certainty. We we will never be able to be sure, so we have to single some guys out, discuss, search for tells, and lynch one. And I think it is to our benifit to also include possible information we can get from it in our decisions. We will most certainly lynch town too, so better make it worthwhile in terms of information. This is not me saying we should lynch town for information, it is saying we should always keep in mind that our lynch can flip as town, so better take the safe bet and at least get some information out of, if the worst case will happen. I think all three are good (for the amount of information we have) picks. Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 11:56 OmniEulogy wrote: That is true but I think he's saying all three of them are the top scum picks and then based on information we gain from each of them the one we benefit the greatest from is Corazon from his list. Excactly. But after I read the reasons to vote for Spaghetti, it made sense. Of course it didn't matter anyway because he was dead at that point, but whatever. At the moment I'm leaning forwards FatChunk. But not sure at all at the moment, and I'm busy as fuck so I don't think I can contribute more tonight, I am working on a post with my thoughs on anyone but I have to go now~~. Sorry for the lack of contributions. I will look into FatChunk and see if my suspicion holds true. And I still have the feeling that out of the big mass contributors, there is a scum somewhere.Chroma, Mocsta, etc. Do whatever you think of it. Leans toward FatChunk, but is not sure. Also points the finger at "the big mass contributors", which says nothing at all. Next, let's examine his voting patterns: Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 18:33 shz wrote: So if we need another wagon to jump, or not, to jump on: ##Vote: Mocsta Why? He/She did start a discussion, but I don't think that was all that useful, other than proving him being active and establish an alibi. Questions like the seafood one waste time and distract from substantial discussion. Also he/she is quite fast on "reading" someone as Town. Additionally he/she asked repeatedly about Mafia strategies. This is no way a waterproof case, but I think its a start and something we could work with. The first vote on Mocsta for some fairly lackluster reasons. I'm not going to say much about this, it could have town or scum motivation behind it, really no way to tell. I could see the scum motivation of discrediting an active townie and possibly pushing that as their mislynch if a mafia was in danger. Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote: The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects. Corazon If Mafia: - threesr most likely not scum. - FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr. If Town: - threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either. - FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before. FatChunk If Mafia: - Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed. - threesr most likely not scum. If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - threesr still possbile mafia. threesr If Mafia: - Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - FatChunk still possible mafia. I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. He votes Corazon shortly after this post, but with no other justification. He's blatantly lynching for information and is not even paying remote attention to whether Corazon is actually scummy or not. This is the first time he's actually mentioned Corazon since his first (non)read. This was also during the phase of the competing threesr/Corazon wagons, so this is obviously an extremely safe vote. Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 01:57 shz wrote: Before I'm on the road for most of the day before the lynch: 1. We should not assume someone is playing bad or good because of information from sources outside this game. I don't think this is very worthy of discussion. For all we know everybody could be a smurf, played with a smurf before, or just played somewhere else. Don't assume anything, look at their actions in this game. 2. It is too early to discuss possible SK. We don't know if this role is even in this game. We should stick to looking for scum for now. 3. New development! - So, Carazon is on the verge of getting lynched today and Spaghetticus comes out of nowhere to help. What does that mean? Either Carazon is Scum, Spaghetti is not, both are or neither is. If Spaghetti is scum, Carazon is too. Otherwise it does not make sense to help him/her out. But this does not help us very much. So the question is if we should change from Carazon to someone else? What are the argument for not voting Corazon Spaghetti provided: - Statistics: This does not matter at all. If there is a 75% propability for the wrong lynch in day it stays the same whether we Lynch Cora or anyonw else. - Votes arent locked, wie can always change Thema before the deadline. - There is still discussion going on. Cora defended, people analyized. We are not just stopping to post just because Cora is the target at the moment. I'm not convinced by Spaghettis arguments. Art the Moment I can see him as scum too. I'm not ruling out voting him out. - Aquanim changes his vote from Corazon to make a case against Spaghetti. While I agree that Spaghetti is possible scum, the argument that rational posts = scum is dumb. If anything overly emotional argumemts are Moore scum. Here's his next big post, as the Spag case has been made, but before the wagon has really taken off. This is another post which looks informative at first, but actually has no content. There's literally no positions taken in this post at all. He has a paragraph about Corazon/Spag associations, but doesn't reach a conclusion. He shoots down a little of Spag's defense, but that's very easy for scum to do. Note that he doesn't actually vote Spag at this time, even though the case was posted already. Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 07:25 shz wrote: It seems like we have the strongest case against Spag at the moment. I will still keepmy eye on Cora, but for now: ##unvote ##Vote Spaghetticus @Aqua: If you did not argue that, then its all good. Of course rational not equals town, but its not equal mafia either. Its neutral. Blatant sheep onto the wagon when it's finally clear that Spag is the lynch for today (6 on Spag v 3 on Cora). Zero justification is given at all for this vote, ever. Note that he only votes Spag after the wagon has taken off and it's clearly a safe vote. Apart from that, that's it. shz has: - sheeped onto Cora and Spag with no reasoning when the wagons took off - posted long posts that look good, but take no stances at all - lynched solely for information - done nothing else I have the following to add. Chromatically has also identified this post: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote: The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects. Corazon If Mafia: - threesr most likely not scum. - FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr. If Town: - threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either. - FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before. FatChunk If Mafia: - Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed. - threesr most likely not scum. If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - threesr still possbile mafia. threesr If Mafia: - Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - FatChunk still possible mafia. I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. Chromatically already notes that it bad to lynch for information rather than trying to read if Corazon is scum or not. I would add that this is nearly a full day to go before the lynch, with plenty of time left for positions to change, so presenting this information gain analysis as guidance for choosing how to vote is ridiculously premature. It is also interesting to note that despite his conviction that Corazon is "the best vote at the moment", he does not change his vote yet, instead keeping it on Mocsta (it has already been brought up how that itself was a terribly bad and flippant "pressure vote") Only when Chromatically prompts him here: On December 20 2012 13:12 Chromatically wrote: Yes, right now I want to lynch Corazon, with FC in a close second. Tomorrow I will examine them again to make sure that that really is my preference; hopefully at least one will have responded by then. If you want to lynch Corazon, can you move your vote to him? On December 20 2012 13:17 shz wrote: I would have done it tomorrow but I can do it now I guess. ##Unvote ##Vote cDgCorazon Does he change the vote... TWO HOURS LATER ... although he was around during much of that duration. And the "best vote" could wait until tomorrow? This is irresponsible. Why did he need to be prompted by Chromatically before he would change his vote? To lessen the amount of responsibility he would have to bear for it? Omni is bigger fish for now, but you're next on my list. ##FOS: shz ----- OrangeRemi Recall that I assessed his D1 as follows: On December 22 2012 08:50 cakepie wrote: Held up patiently against my pressure vote in D1, choosing not to jump into anything in haste at all. Inspecting his filter in relation to the whole thread will reveal that he is present and paying attention, watching and waiting, and hopefully analyzing. I continue to sense that he is present and lurking rather than completely absent, answering enough questions to seem active. The only time he came close to questioning anyone was when he asked what I thought about Mocsta's theory about me being scum with Omni and Chrom, and that is only in response to me asking thoughts from the present players in (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/postmessage.php?quote=766&topic_id=386911) Hypothetically, for his play to be town, he would be have to be continuing an incredibly cautious playstyle of not singling out players on the basis of only weak suspicions, and completely avoiding points that have been brought up before so as not to be accused of sheeping. The current state of affairs does mean that some of us may find ourselves with many weak scumreads, and he admits as much... but there is no initiative from him to question anyone further, not even people who are clearly available in the thread. It is no longer acceptable to sit and wait and analyze passively. The quieter players have already been called on several times to step up and speak out. In case it was forgotten, this still stands from before: ##FoS: OrangeRemi ----- Kickstart I voted him early D2 to prompt for more, but all I got was anger in response. He clearly took issue with my play, yet did not pursue the matter, even when I openly invited questioning. Then he states that he did not like my play when asked for his opinion by Aquanim. He has built a case against shz based on his tendency to vote and jump on wagons without justification. He has commented on threesr, but that is not very useful. No other case was forthcoming despite a request from Aquanim. Somewhat more useful than OrangeRemi, but I was hoping for more from him. I regret backing off so quickly from pressing him for more -- part of it was due to shock at his reaction, and part due to the confusion of trying to figure out why and what I might have done wrong. As it is, all we've got is a case and vote on shz and his remaining suspicions on me -- and it is not clear if that forms his next strongest case. His thoughts about threesr do not really carry any new information since threesr has reverted to lurking, and many of us already agreed long ago that it is more worthwhile to pursue scum. You can do better than that, Kickstart. If not a case, at least reveal some of your other suspicions to us, or explain why you have chosen not to do so. ##FoS: Kickstart | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 02:11 OmniEulogy wrote: Anyway, Cake seems town to me. Aqua remains town. 1. Care to explain why you think I am town? Mocsta listed me at his #3 read, and Kickstart has his misgivings as well. Other players have put me at null or difficult to read. What makes you think otherwise? 2. Please elaborate on why you consider Aquanim to be town. As far as I can tell, your assessment of Aquanim is given here: On December 21 2012 19:48 OmniEulogy wrote: If Aquanim were scum, he didn't need to try to get Spag lynched to save Corazon, as Corazon defended Spag and imo proved his innocence. If Aqua were scum he could have sat back and let us lynch Cora. - same thing happens N1 but his name isn't out there for starting the lynch. For this I believe Aqua is town. Which is based on your change of heart about Corazon: On December 21 2012 19:48 OmniEulogy wrote: I'll start off with Corazon. After re-reading everything he's said a few times I believe I owe him an apology. As he defended Spag while the vote was on him I'm willing to say I believe he is town. He stuck with his vote on Theesr the entire time. I am willing to overlook every mistake up to this point in his posting and trust that what ever he says from now on is from the mouth of a townie. This has already been pointed out as ludicrous. "100% scum" to "what ever he says from now on is from the mouth of a townie.", just for Corazon not joining the Spaghetticus wagon? Care to elucidate beyond this reason? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 04:02 cakepie wrote: Care to elucidate beyond this reason [why you think aqua is town]? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Aqua, Syl: On December 24 2012 06:10 Chromatically wrote: Show nested quote + On December 24 2012 06:01 OmniEulogy wrote: hmm I think even if I vote Shz I'll still get lynched but I'm not going to vote for somebody I don't have a scum read on. Let's examine the possibilities: Omni and shz: Omni knows for certain that he is town. He thinks shz is town, but is not sure. Obviously, he would rather lynch shz over himself, because shz at least has a chance of flipping scum. Omni would vote for shz. Omni and shz Omni knows for certain that shz is town. Obviously, he would rather get shz mislynched than have himself lynched. Omni would vote for shz. Omni and shz Omni knows for certain that shz and himself are both scum. He doesn't want either of them lynched. He might vote for shz over himself, but only if shz is under more suspicion (which he's not). Omni probably wouldn't vote for shz. Scumteam 100%. I take issue with "100%" being thrown around so carelessly again. Thoughts on this, and on Chromatically in general? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 06:10 Chromatically wrote: Show nested quote + On December 24 2012 06:01 OmniEulogy wrote: hmm I think even if I vote Shz I'll still get lynched but I'm not going to vote for somebody I don't have a scum read on. Let's examine the possibilities: Omni and shz: Omni knows for certain that he is town. He thinks shz is town, but is not sure. Obviously, he would rather lynch shz over himself, because shz at least has a chance of flipping scum. Omni would vote for shz. Omni's late-late D2: he refused to hop onto that wagon for the sake of a chance at saving his life, choosing instead to stick to his conviction that shz was not as suspicions as other players out there, and pursuing one of those. Shz has increased his amount of activity, and perhaps Omni saw value in this, when the dearth of D3 discussion would very well be the last of our downfall. In contrast to his poor choices in D1, here he has made the VT play of taking one for the team... I just fear that the cost was too great this time around. ----- On December 24 2012 08:37 Aquanim wrote: Let's say he's dying like I think a town player would die. Like I said, though, scum might do this in hopes of last-minute deliverance. And if there was a competing wagon I'd feel a lot happier about the outcome of this day. Your vote was absolutely not required on the Omni wagon. Why did you not find a better use for it, if this is all you had to say about the way the lynch was headed? ----- On December 24 2012 13:01 cDgCorazon wrote: @Aqua/Cake: Do you feel like these lynches are scum-driven, trying to get the town to kill each other off, or are they mislynches on townies that are acting erratically or do not know how to play like a townie? Have the lynches been scum driven? I think not, except for the slim chance that Aquanim is incredibly gutsy master scum on D1 as I explored here: + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 00:43 cakepie wrote: Aquanim Casting the very first vote on Corazon was stated as pressure vote, and it was effective at generating activity -- except that it devolved into havoc for a bit with threesr shitting up the thread. The corazon "scumslip" did not help either. While this was happening he did not ask Corazon any questions himself, which is a little strange to me. Perhaps the volume of resulting posts was good enough for him? Beyond that, it is his initiating and pushing forward the Spag lynch that might be the greatest cause of suspicion for anyone -- but Mocsta also thought it was a good case. I too have no right to fault Aquanim for his case, which I found to agree with many of my observations and suspicions. After that, he has remained inviting and open to scrutiny about the D1 mislynch when answering questions about it. He has continued to pressure the most inactive players and most recently has been advancing his suspicions on OrangeRemi. This, continuing from his D1 performance, leans toward town behavior. What is interesting to note is that he started two of the three wagons that actually got anywhere on D1. (the other being on threesr, who pretty much made himself an inviting target). Overall, I find it much easier to explain his behavior by a townie hypothesis than by a scum hypothesis. Leading a wagon is far too conspicuous and risky, and to do it twice in one day phase has got to be absolutely nuts or balls of steel. I shall record my thoughts on the scum hypothesis here for information and scrutiny: + Show Spoiler + If Aquanim were scum trying to influence/direct town, the scumteam would be making an exceptionally daring and risky play -- although the way town has played (and I do not exclude myself from blame here) actually makes it viable to run this risk, it was difficult to know this in advance. Continuing the scum hyphothesis, with Aquanim aiming to lead the town lynches, the remaining scum would have to run interference and cause confusion and/or lend support to the target wagons. Out of all the possibilities for that, I think it is most likely that threesr is the scumbuddy designated to draw attention, run interference where necessary, and lurk where not needed. He can then be safely bussed D3+ if needed. One other scum I would expect to lie low, but remain careful not to be the most unhelpful/unproductive -- most likely a scum with a power role -- sadly we have several candidates that fit the bill here. Regardless, I currently consider Aquanim to be null+, having completed the obligatory scrutiny required as a consequence of his leading the Spag wagon. It would be exceedingly sad if we were all jumping at our own shadows and killing each other off while all the scum lurk and laugh in their own QT. However, we cannot discount the fact that some of the cases and arguments presented contained too much speculation and reading too much into things that simply aren't there. This is partly inevitable when there is so little to work with. A good part of this is zealous newbie townies focusing on trying to convince ourselves, and others, that particular targets are scummy. Confirmation bias has seeped in, and cases are not being scrutinized and torn down. This is our biggest failing. We are not, however, acting erratically (except, well, threesr), if that is your concern. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 04:44 shz wrote: + Show Spoiler [cakepie] + Cakepie: [...] Town Reads: Sylencia [...] Notes: Clamined RB 1. How on earth did you arrive at me having a town read on Sylencia? I am certain I have never had Sylencia above null. I challenge you to cite the source for this. My filter is not that long, so I have no clue how you could have hallucinated this. 2. I did not claim to be a roleblocker. Get your facts right. My filter is not that long, go over it again. On December 24 2012 04:44 shz wrote: I may have overlooked something, so you can of course correct me. [...] I am conviced we will find connections and answers in here. I take issue with the post for this: it is disguised as a thourough summary, but says conspicuously little about most players except for the ones that he is trying to connect together, with incredibly tenuous links at the very best. These connections that he is trying to form are even weaker than what Mocsta had to give, when he himself easily dispelled Mocsta's Omni-Chrom connection. The flawed analysis depends upon erroneous "evidence". An honest mistake, or carefully camouflaged misdirection? Notably, he has not "overlooked something", but is creating "facts" to suit his purpose. I would have liked to give shz credit for increasing his activity, but this is even more of the same jumping at shadows as before, and it will be the death of us if shz is town and continues to play like this. It does not help his position at the top of my suspects list. Like Chrom, and possibly Omni, I am conflicted about the possibility that shz would be a mislynch and cost us too much of in light of the precious little remaining activity. I want shz to build us a new case or two so we can tear it down. How he goes about this will go a long way toward my cost-benefit evaluation of pursuing suspicions on him vs potentially devastating mislynch. ----- @ Aquanim, Chromatically: what do you think of the connections that shz seems to be implying? Can something be built out of that at all? What about other connections; do you see any that are worth further pursuit and scruity? I had "found" some Omni-shz connections myself, but held off from posting those knowing well how they can seem stronger than they really are with confirmation bias glasses on. Looking back at this and in the light of the environment in this game, I am starting to doubt the usefulness of such links -- I do not think they are worth much unless otherwise moderately strong cases can be made against both sides using other evidence. Thoughts? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 12:48 Aquanim wrote: Well, I'll start with the good old cliched question of who are your top scumreads and why. The lynch was not very informative, what with the incredible bandwagonning that happened. KickStart stayed with his convictions about shz, and was not convinced by the list that shz produced. But he has hardly given us anything else to work with. I refer you to my earlier post: + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 03:44 cakepie wrote: shz His problematic D1 voting behavior has already been described by Kickstart: + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 00:04 Kickstart wrote: So I took a look through some filters and the person who stuck out most to me was SHZ. Just a quick lookthrough of his posts shows you that he been very wishy-washy on everything and committed to absolutely nothing. In my mind there are only 2 options for this sort of play, 1 is a timid towny who is unsure of themselves, 2 is scum trying to leave themselves options to try and work their way out of bad commitments. Since I believe this is SHZ's first game I am somewhat inclined to think that he is just a timid towny, but then I look at his voting and his justification behind them (read: NONE) and it seems he doesn't care at all about who gets lynched. Townys should worry very much about who gets lynched because they do not want to lynch town, even first time players know this and typically show that they care about who gets lynched. His votes are a big issue with me and I read them as scummy right now because to me it seems SHZ does not care who gets lynched (it is typical of mafia to not care who gets lynched, as long as it is town getting lynched), look at his vote posts: Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 18:33 shz wrote: So if we need another wagon to jump, or not, to jump on: ##Vote: Mocsta Why? He/She did start a discussion, but I don't think that was all that useful, other than proving him being active and establish an alibi. Questions like the seafood one waste time and distract from substantial discussion. Also he/she is quite fast on "reading" someone as Town. Additionally he/she asked repeatedly about Mafia strategies. This is no way a waterproof case, but I think its a start and something we could work with. Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 13:17 shz wrote: I would have done it tomorrow but I can do it now I guess. ##Unvote ##Vote cDgCorazon Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 07:25 shz wrote: It seems like we have the strongest case against Spag at the moment. I will still keepmy eye on Cora, but for now: ##unvote ##Vote Spaghetticus @Aqua: If you did not argue that, then its all good. Of course rational not equals town, but its not equal mafia either. Its neutral. He takes every chance to hop on whatever bandwagon is popular at the moment, providing no reason for being on any of them. Given this I think he is the person I am most suspicious of at the moment and want to see some real reads and commitment, not wishy-washy posts that don't commit himself to anything. @SHZ Why did you jump on every bandwagon without giving any reasons at all for why you think those players are scummy? Do you have any current scum reads that you would be willing to push instead of sheeping? And elaborated upon by Chromatically: + Show Spoiler + On December 23 2012 05:45 Chromatically wrote: shz shz has been playing like classic scum. Real stances are nonexistant, real contribution is nonexistant, yet he manages to blend in and look like a contributor very well. Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 18:19 shz wrote: Could not sleep, so I can be at least productive here. I think we pretty much made it clear that we don't accept lurking as a playstyle for Town, so I don't think this will be much of a problem. If it is, we also made the consequences clear for everyone. Our focus should be to find null- & unconstructive posts which don't help us at all. That would be a pretty good starting point to pressure and get some more information. Corazon did indeed more or less only reacted to direct questions and was not that talkative in general. I don't think that is a huge tell, but why not investigate further? The interesting thing is that he/she kinda defended lurking and lying. I don't agree with the arguments at all, as they seem a bit weak and pointless. His first "contribution" is here. This looks like a good post at first: it's fairly long, it covers a lot of topics. However, all this is is a summary of what's happened so far. He doesn't take any stances on any of the issues of the time: look at the wishy-washiness on Corazon. He's afraid to take an actual stand, so he says things like "they seem a bit weak" instead of taking a position on it himself. This is merely the first in a long line of posts of this type, taking no stances while writing long posts anyway: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote: As I did not get any sleep tonight, I caught some of it up until now. This is getting somewhere. So I'll start with answering my questions and then stating my thoughts. Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 23:21 cakepie wrote: shz: Tried to provide a case on mocsta as an alternative to cDgCorazon. However, the fast town read was first pointed out by spaghetticus, and OmniEulogy was the one who first pointed to the questions about scum startegy. Not sure the case is viable at this point, but I agree that Mocsta seems a bit too eager. Q: Evaluate my play. Does it look town, or does it look scum? Why? Your analysis is quite thought out and you point out three POIs and try to get something out of it by pressuring them. This is good. At the same time you still trying to get reads on most of the others by asking questions. I don't think these three are your only suspects. All in all I tend towards town as I don't see much evidence which would support you scumminess. I don't agree with your vote for Orangeremi at the moment though. Yes, he did not contribute until now, but I would give him some more hours before lynching him for that. @Mocsta So I'm scum because I said that my case against you wasn't waterproof? What would have happened if I acted so sure about you, as you act about everyone who attacks you? You getting quite defensive and jumping to, rather fast, conclusions about who is mafia and who is not. You changed your vote from me to threesr immediatly to countervote him and then spam a couple of posts saying "how easy it was", "he slipped", in big red bold latter. This is way over dramatized. To top that of you trying to martyr your way into town. I don't like that at all. I'm still not 100% conviced, but this is not helping you. For now my vote stands. And I think threesr, however fishy and rare his posts are at the moment, has a point. You seem quite conviced and at the same you are saying you are not. I don't have an opinion on FatChunk yet, as he did not contribute enough. If we don't find a conses by the lynch-deadline, we should lynch one of the lesser active players, for sure. Answers a question directed to him, defends himself a little against Mocsta, and still takes no stands. Noncommittal reads on Mocsta ("For now my vote stands"), threesr (leaving his options open by throwing a little suspicion his way), and FatChunk (doesn't have an opinion). On December 20 2012 08:45 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 04:36 cakepie wrote: On December 20 2012 02:57 shz wrote: I don't have an opinion on FatChunk yet, as he did not contribute enough. If we don't find a conses by the lynch-deadline, we should lynch one of the lesser active players, for sure. Really? As opposed to Mocsta, who you have your vote on? If you had to lynch for inactivity and/or lack of serious contribution, how would you order the 3-4 candidates? Mocsta did contribute more than FatChunk before I voted him. It seems some of the players have awaken and contributed to the discussion, but some are lurking too much. 1. I'm really getting tired of threesr. Even if he/she isn't mafia he/she is creating so much chaos, only commentates snarky and very brief. He/She is dangerous whethere scum or not. 2. Kickstarter stated that he/she thinks lurking is bad, but lurks him/herself. 3. Orangerem is lurking too much. 4. Sylencia too, but that was announced, so we have to see how the next couple of play-days go. More noncommittal reads. Wants to lynch threesr even if he's not mafia and attacks Kickstart, Orange, and Sylencia for lurking (very easy for scum to do). On December 22 2012 01:58 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 22 2012 00:04 Kickstart wrote: @SHZ Why did you jump on every bandwagon without giving any reasons at all for why you think those players are scummy? Do you have any current scum reads that you would be willing to push instead of sheeping? "Whatever bandwagon is popular right now" is not true. My mocsta vote was to push for an discussion and I did explain my Corazone vote before. If you want to quote, don quote out of context. + Show Spoiler [Corazone reasons] + On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote: The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects. Corazon If Mafia: - threesr most likely not scum. - FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr. If Town: - threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either. - FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before. FatChunk If Mafia: - Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed. - threesr most likely not scum. If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - threesr still possbile mafia. threesr If Mafia: - Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - FatChunk still possible mafia. I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. On December 20 2012 12:53 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 11:50 Chromatically wrote: @shz We should be lynching the player who is most likely to flip scum, not based on any information we might gain. We can look at association stuff after the flip, but we want to focus on lynching scum before. Based solely on who will flip scum, who do you want to lynch and can you move your vote there? Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 12:48 Chromatically wrote: @Spag Our objective as town is to lynch mafia. What we should not be doing is lynching for information instead of lynching mafia. The information gained from a flip is not great enough that we should lynch a townier player. If you look at what shz's post actually says, there's very little actual conclusions that could be drawn. Most of it is just "x is possible scum". All of it is just worrying about the d2 lynch, which we should do on d2 instead of now. I dislike your post saying that we should "expect a town lynch". Good towns can find scum d1. Good players can be correct in their reads with over "40%" certainty. We we will never be able to be sure, so we have to single some guys out, discuss, search for tells, and lynch one. And I think it is to our benifit to also include possible information we can get from it in our decisions. We will most certainly lynch town too, so better make it worthwhile in terms of information. This is not me saying we should lynch town for information, it is saying we should always keep in mind that our lynch can flip as town, so better take the safe bet and at least get some information out of, if the worst case will happen. I think all three are good (for the amount of information we have) picks. Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 11:56 OmniEulogy wrote: That is true but I think he's saying all three of them are the top scum picks and then based on information we gain from each of them the one we benefit the greatest from is Corazon from his list. Excactly. But after I read the reasons to vote for Spaghetti, it made sense. Of course it didn't matter anyway because he was dead at that point, but whatever. At the moment I'm leaning forwards FatChunk. But not sure at all at the moment, and I'm busy as fuck so I don't think I can contribute more tonight, I am working on a post with my thoughs on anyone but I have to go now~~. Sorry for the lack of contributions. I will look into FatChunk and see if my suspicion holds true. And I still have the feeling that out of the big mass contributors, there is a scum somewhere.Chroma, Mocsta, etc. Do whatever you think of it. Leans toward FatChunk, but is not sure. Also points the finger at "the big mass contributors", which says nothing at all. Next, let's examine his voting patterns: Show nested quote + On December 19 2012 18:33 shz wrote: So if we need another wagon to jump, or not, to jump on: ##Vote: Mocsta Why? He/She did start a discussion, but I don't think that was all that useful, other than proving him being active and establish an alibi. Questions like the seafood one waste time and distract from substantial discussion. Also he/she is quite fast on "reading" someone as Town. Additionally he/she asked repeatedly about Mafia strategies. This is no way a waterproof case, but I think its a start and something we could work with. The first vote on Mocsta for some fairly lackluster reasons. I'm not going to say much about this, it could have town or scum motivation behind it, really no way to tell. I could see the scum motivation of discrediting an active townie and possibly pushing that as their mislynch if a mafia was in danger. Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote: The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects. Corazon If Mafia: - threesr most likely not scum. - FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr. If Town: - threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either. - FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before. FatChunk If Mafia: - Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed. - threesr most likely not scum. If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - threesr still possbile mafia. threesr If Mafia: - Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - FatChunk still possible mafia. I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. He votes Corazon shortly after this post, but with no other justification. He's blatantly lynching for information and is not even paying remote attention to whether Corazon is actually scummy or not. This is the first time he's actually mentioned Corazon since his first (non)read. This was also during the phase of the competing threesr/Corazon wagons, so this is obviously an extremely safe vote. Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 01:57 shz wrote: Before I'm on the road for most of the day before the lynch: 1. We should not assume someone is playing bad or good because of information from sources outside this game. I don't think this is very worthy of discussion. For all we know everybody could be a smurf, played with a smurf before, or just played somewhere else. Don't assume anything, look at their actions in this game. 2. It is too early to discuss possible SK. We don't know if this role is even in this game. We should stick to looking for scum for now. 3. New development! - So, Carazon is on the verge of getting lynched today and Spaghetticus comes out of nowhere to help. What does that mean? Either Carazon is Scum, Spaghetti is not, both are or neither is. If Spaghetti is scum, Carazon is too. Otherwise it does not make sense to help him/her out. But this does not help us very much. So the question is if we should change from Carazon to someone else? What are the argument for not voting Corazon Spaghetti provided: - Statistics: This does not matter at all. If there is a 75% propability for the wrong lynch in day it stays the same whether we Lynch Cora or anyonw else. - Votes arent locked, wie can always change Thema before the deadline. - There is still discussion going on. Cora defended, people analyized. We are not just stopping to post just because Cora is the target at the moment. I'm not convinced by Spaghettis arguments. Art the Moment I can see him as scum too. I'm not ruling out voting him out. - Aquanim changes his vote from Corazon to make a case against Spaghetti. While I agree that Spaghetti is possible scum, the argument that rational posts = scum is dumb. If anything overly emotional argumemts are Moore scum. Here's his next big post, as the Spag case has been made, but before the wagon has really taken off. This is another post which looks informative at first, but actually has no content. There's literally no positions taken in this post at all. He has a paragraph about Corazon/Spag associations, but doesn't reach a conclusion. He shoots down a little of Spag's defense, but that's very easy for scum to do. Note that he doesn't actually vote Spag at this time, even though the case was posted already. Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 07:25 shz wrote: It seems like we have the strongest case against Spag at the moment. I will still keepmy eye on Cora, but for now: ##unvote ##Vote Spaghetticus @Aqua: If you did not argue that, then its all good. Of course rational not equals town, but its not equal mafia either. Its neutral. Blatant sheep onto the wagon when it's finally clear that Spag is the lynch for today (6 on Spag v 3 on Cora). Zero justification is given at all for this vote, ever. Note that he only votes Spag after the wagon has taken off and it's clearly a safe vote. Apart from that, that's it. shz has: - sheeped onto Cora and Spag with no reasoning when the wagons took off - posted long posts that look good, but take no stances at all - lynched solely for information - done nothing else I have the following to add. Chromatically has also identified this post: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 11:19 shz wrote: The question is, what information do we get if we lynch one of the current suspects. Corazon If Mafia: - threesr most likely not scum. - FatChunk unknown, but showing scummy tendencies as he/she did kinda defend Corazon and plans on voting to lynch threesr. If Town: - threesr not off the hook, but still not confirmed either. - FatChunk unknown, but leaning towards town, for the same reason as stated before. FatChunk If Mafia: - Corazone possible mafia, but not confirmed. - threesr most likely not scum. If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - threesr still possbile mafia. threesr If Mafia: - Likely town: Mocsta, Corazon (Very likely town), and FatChunk If Town: - Corazone still possible mafia. - FatChunk still possible mafia. I'm starting to think that Corazon is indeed the best vote at the moment. Chromatically already notes that it bad to lynch for information rather than trying to read if Corazon is scum or not. I would add that this is nearly a full day to go before the lynch, with plenty of time left for positions to change, so presenting this information gain analysis as guidance for choosing how to vote is ridiculously premature. It is also interesting to note that despite his conviction that Corazon is "the best vote at the moment", he does not change his vote yet, instead keeping it on Mocsta (it has already been brought up how that itself was a terribly bad and flippant "pressure vote") Only when Chromatically prompts him here: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 13:12 Chromatically wrote: Yes, right now I want to lynch Corazon, with FC in a close second. Tomorrow I will examine them again to make sure that that really is my preference; hopefully at least one will have responded by then. If you want to lynch Corazon, can you move your vote to him? Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 13:17 shz wrote: I would have done it tomorrow but I can do it now I guess. ##Unvote ##Vote cDgCorazon Does he change the vote... TWO HOURS LATER ... although he was around during much of that duration. And the "best vote" could wait until tomorrow? This is irresponsible. Why did he need to be prompted by Chromatically before he would change his vote? To lessen the amount of responsibility he would have to bear for it? Omni is bigger fish for now, but you're next on my list. ##FOS: shz ----- OrangeRemi Recall that I assessed his D1 as follows: Show nested quote + On December 22 2012 08:50 cakepie wrote: Held up patiently against my pressure vote in D1, choosing not to jump into anything in haste at all. Inspecting his filter in relation to the whole thread will reveal that he is present and paying attention, watching and waiting, and hopefully analyzing. I continue to sense that he is present and lurking rather than completely absent, answering enough questions to seem active. The only time he came close to questioning anyone was when he asked what I thought about Mocsta's theory about me being scum with Omni and Chrom, and that is only in response to me asking thoughts from the present players in (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/postmessage.php?quote=766&topic_id=386911) Hypothetically, for his play to be town, he would be have to be continuing an incredibly cautious playstyle of not singling out players on the basis of only weak suspicions, and completely avoiding points that have been brought up before so as not to be accused of sheeping. The current state of affairs does mean that some of us may find ourselves with many weak scumreads, and he admits as much... but there is no initiative from him to question anyone further, not even people who are clearly available in the thread. It is no longer acceptable to sit and wait and analyze passively. The quieter players have already been called on several times to step up and speak out. In case it was forgotten, this still stands from before: ##FoS: OrangeRemi ----- Kickstart I voted him early D2 to prompt for more, but all I got was anger in response. He clearly took issue with my play, yet did not pursue the matter, even when I openly invited questioning. Then he states that he did not like my play when asked for his opinion by Aquanim. He has built a case against shz based on his tendency to vote and jump on wagons without justification. He has commented on threesr, but that is not very useful. No other case was forthcoming despite a request from Aquanim. Somewhat more useful than OrangeRemi, but I was hoping for more from him. I regret backing off so quickly from pressing him for more -- part of it was due to shock at his reaction, and part due to the confusion of trying to figure out why and what I might have done wrong. As it is, all we've got is a case and vote on shz and his remaining suspicions on me -- and it is not clear if that forms his next strongest case. His thoughts about threesr do not really carry any new information since threesr has reverted to lurking, and many of us already agreed long ago that it is more worthwhile to pursue scum. You can do better than that, Kickstart. If not a case, at least reveal some of your other suspicions to us, or explain why you have chosen not to do so. ##FoS: Kickstart My top concerns are still the same as with only slightly increased suspicion on Shz for his connection play, with correspondingly increased apprehension. I still want more from Kickstart, patience running thin. Notice I say "concerns" rather than "suspects" -- other than shz, it is still incredibly difficult to build a case on the others that would stick well. Such is the sorry state of our town. ----- More shz On December 24 2012 08:42 shz wrote: My vote does not matter anyway, but I'm gonna go with my gut for now and really hope we either start giving lurker shit or they come out and contribute more so we can actually get something done. ##Vote: Chromatically Once again he tosses his vote around carelessly without a solid case. @shz please justify your vote beyond gut feelings and perceived connections. Are you going to build a case against Chromatically on D3? Who are your top two candidates that you have the most suspicions about? ----- On December 24 2012 13:59 Aquanim wrote: Agreed. Now that Omni has flipped town, why do you think Shz is scum? I am going to take up this question even though it is not directed at me. Shz has not done much to allay any of the concerns brought up about his voting behavior, simply dismissing them as useless: + Show Spoiler + On December 23 2012 08:45 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 23 2012 05:45 Chromatically wrote: Apart from that, that's it. shz has: - sheeped onto Cora and Spag with no reasoning when the wagons took off - posted long posts that look good, but take no stances at all - lynched solely for information - done nothing else Agreeing with comments and arguments is sheeping = scum. Repeating others information and arguments = scum. If that is your reasoning, you will find scum in everyone. You can't provide unlimited new information. Others have at least tried, at some point, to bring something new, or at least outlined their thought processes. Shz has done none of that. This feels like a sorry excuse for him to invoke. In D2 he starts with a bunch of three longer posts to dispel the Omni-Chrom connection, and to "defend" Omni. Even with the wagon on Omni under way, he does not add any further opinion, besides this, when asked, he does not elaborate: On December 24 2012 05:35 shz wrote: I am not convinced that Omni is scum, and you mostly ignore my ignored my arguments why. If he was not convinced that Omni was scum, why did he not try to stop the wagon and direct attention to whoever or whatever he felt was more suspicious? Why did he not use his vote until very late in the day, when he could cast it around carelessly with the excuse that it would not have made any difference? I offer one scum motive hypothesis for consideration: rather than join an easy wagon to mislynch a townie, he wanted gain some town cred by posting in Omni's favor. His vote wasn't needed to confirm an Omni lynch, so he could save his vote in case of an eventuality later in the day, while distancing himself from a mislynch he knew was coming. The extent of his defense of Omni lasted for only as long as was needed to convince Omni that he was town. The defense revolved around debunking the Omni-Chrom link that was weak to begin with, and did not address other arguments against Omni. It was enough as long as he got the desired outcome from Omni: On December 23 2012 22:54 OmniEulogy wrote: @Chrom I am much less convinced in voting on Shz after his defense of us because if he was scum it would be easy to push a lynch on me. I also said before that I had a neutral opinion of Shz and that has more or less stayed true. His recent contributions have been well thought out and although it isn't really scum hunting I believe it's still good that he is trying to explain who he thinks is town and why. [...] Actually based on Shz's case for me, and I know I'm town, it wouldn't make any sense for scum to defend me and put himself at risk through association right now so I'm leaning towards him being town. On December 24 2012 06:23 OmniEulogy wrote: 1) I flip town, Shz is cleared, and Chrom doesn't know what to do anymore considering he's going to look like scum. Although Omni did not completely dismiss the possibility of scum shz, still: On December 24 2012 05:18 OmniEulogy wrote: Shz stepped up and as I've said before either made a really smooth play as mafia by defending me (knowing my alignment) or really did look through the posts and come to the right conclusions. With the wagon safely underway and with himself safely off of the wagon, a scum Shz would have become free to start setting up his next misdirection play. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 22:37 shz wrote: It seems that your big case against me is, that I don't have one. Thats not pretty strong. No, the biggest beef I have with you is the way you voted. Just because I ask you for a case does not mean that it is the only thing I hold against you, or the basis of a case. Other lurkers have given even less, so that would hardly be a logical way to build a case. On December 24 2012 22:37 shz wrote: Show nested quote + On December 24 2012 14:25 cakepie wrote: I want shz to build us a new case or two so we can tear it down. So you want me to make a case, so you can "tear it down" and make a case against me for that? No, I want you to make a case, which will hopefully help me and others better decide if you are town or not, but even if that does not give us a very clear read on you it will still help us decide if it would be helpful to keep you around another day on the basis of you being active as compared to the lurkers. We have our suspicions, but nothing is certain, and we must weigh the strength of any suspicions and arguments against you vs the possibility that you'd turn out to be another mislynch. If you are active and post with substance, it would be useful and informative to keep you alive for a bit still. As for tearing cases down, I have already explained that not enough of that is happening in general. When discussing cases, it should not merely be about latching on to points that we agree on; we need to do a better job at trying to find flaws in reasoning and coming up with counterarguments in order to test the strength of each case. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
My understanding of the OP is that roleblockers can target the same person on consecutive nights. Please correct me if I am mistaken about this. Alright guys, out with the roleblocked claims! There may be one more, if all D1 roleblocked claims were indeed true. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
I have had (not) enough of this guy. I don't like the notion of trying to apply meta in a newbie game, since people could be experimenting with playstyles, but he himself has thrown around his track record a couple of times: + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 06:36 Kickstart wrote: If you didn't expect that sort of post from me than you don't know how I normally post ^^. On December 22 2012 16:27 Kickstart wrote:check my games if you like But his posting here, while stylistically similar in the way he writes, pales in comparison to his other filters in terms of both volume and substance. Is he merely settling in with the lurky environment, or actually fostering it? The former is unlikely for a townie kickstart, he knows better than to do that: On December 19 2012 17:05 Kickstart wrote: [...] That kind of ties in with the "what would mafia do thing", my answer to that is they would try to blend in, so it is imperative that we as town generate meaningful discussion and that EVERYONE contributes (no one lurks) so that we have plenty of information to work with for everyone and we make it difficult for the scum to blend in. [...] DON'T LURK, LURKING BAD. His posts are so few we can easily summarize them in a dozen or so points: + Show Spoiler + 1. Policy fluff 2. uninformative answer to and uninformative question 3. asks FatChunk for more reasoning on threesr 4. "nothing much to add"; looking for scum on threesr wagon 5. onto the spaghetticus train 6. responds to chromatically question by spag > FC on basis of volume of posts available to develop a "solid read" --- end D1 --- 7. Shz case 8. retort against "did not expect that sort of post from you" --- end N1 --- 9. Flips out on my early pressure vote, calls me out for blue claim? 10. responds to my denial of a blue claim !!. conspicuously quiet despite being invited to scrutinize further 11. sticks to Shz case with no new arguments, conveniently talks about threesr -- not informative, but tries to cast threesr as scummier lurker than himself 12. has nothing useful to add about me when asked about it, other than not liking my posting. - And then a few short, uninformative posts - refuses to provide more ("I wrote what I thought about SHZ already") - Shz vote, because "nothing changed for me" Compared to other lurkers, he comes across as being very measured about how much he posts. Almost as if he was carefully making sure to stay ahead of the lurkiest. He has made only one case and has not been forthcoming at all about his other suspicions, unlike most other players who have been willing to talk about bits of suspicions even in the absence of enough for a solid case. He has been selective in answering questions directed at him. In particular, anything asking for a read or even to elaborate on suspicions has been ignored or rebuffed. In (9)-(10) he reacts because of a vote, and perhaps due to the "blue claim" that he perceived? Why does he care so much about a lone pressure vote so early in D2? And why would he read this hard into my posts to find a blue claim that was not even there? Surely he is the sort who would read the OP carefully. He conveniently slinks back into the shadows with my vote taken off, and wrong about the hasty "blue-tell". This was my mistake, in hindsight. I think it can be best summarized by this: On December 22 2012 06:36 Kickstart wrote:I am easy lurker lynch-bait for mafia to role with at this point. This is no coincidence. By staying in "lynch-bait" territory he has positioned himself so that he can counter any lynch attempt by being "just sufficiently active", and can fend off any suspicion or scrutiny by pointing to any number of other candidates. Conveniently, Kickstart himself would rather "push scum reads over policy lynches", so as long as he can find someone to target as scummy. This he has done so, but offering one target, and no more than that. And unlike others who may admit that it is hard for them to have strong reads, he has flat out refused to share any suspicions beyond one case. This is in spite the position that town is in, where we must look to the smallest suspicions in the hope of a beginnings of a case with which more pressure can be applied. Too convenient. This is still a pressure vote for now, but it is a far more serious pressure vote then before -- it comes with enough FoS that I am willing to turn this into a lynch. It is backed by even more unsatisfactory contribution from you in D2, and not just D1. I will not be easily bullied out of it this time. Give us substance and so establish your townie-ness, or scum you be. ##Vote: Kickstart | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 26 2012 09:24 Aquanim wrote: #notaroleblockclaim So Cakepie, two questions: - Why Yamato? - What do you think about the issues raised in my wall above? ----- Yamato brought very useful fresh perspectives and clarity of thought to a town that was getting muddled by equally lousy looking lurker lynches, and brought fresh conviction where we are getting perhaps too wary of mislynching. Perhaps he came too close with his reads? I don't think this was an attempt to off a blue role, because threesr's play hardly supports a blue hypothesis. Rather, it suggests that Yamato was seen as a big threat -- much bigger than any of us original players -- who could establish solid town cred and lead a strong and correct lynch. In fact, even before Yamato started posting much, I had already shifted him from null- to mildly town, since threesr hardly had any reason to ragequit out as scum (he would be doing a fantastic job being the bus candidate). It says a lot to me that the scum team felt that it was more useful to kill Yamato now, as opposed to, say, you (aqua), chrom, cora, or even myself, who have been more active over the duration of the game. =/ <--- I cannot overstate this enough: they don't fear us as much as Yamato coming into the game fresh. ----- I haven't had a chance to digest your wall yet, will get to it after I grab some breakfast. Feel free to leave other questions in the meantime. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- On December 26 2012 09:24 Aquanim wrote: - What do you think about the issues raised in my wall above? I think you may be headed in a good direction with your reasoning here: On December 26 2012 08:51 Aquanim wrote: Mafia start with more information than town. It is in the Mafia's best interest to keep town from finding information. Conversely, it is in the Town players' best interests for the Town to gain information. Therefore, Townie players:
By comparison, Scum players:
It reminded me of something I brought up before myself. I would urge you not to take my questioning at face value only. Clearly, I must seek something by choosing to target and pressure specific people. I was looking for something with my questions. What were others seeking with their questioning (or the lack thereof)? This is turning out to be a useful line of reasoning. ~ On Shz: Lynching for information alone isn't really a good idea, but Shz is providing this insight into his thought process without being prodded. Could be mafia attempting to control the direction of play, but also could be honest town. He also defended Omni with his own ideas, not anyone else's. This is what I mean by finding alternative explanations and counterarguments. It helps to counter confirmation bias. ~ On Kickstart: Personally, there's no way I was confident enough on a scum read day 2 to just park all my suspicions and vote at the start of day 2 then leave, without even a pretence at pressuring anyone else. This struck me as well. It is too unlike a town Kickstart, and I have immense difficulty explaining it as some sort of blue play -- it would be too irresponsible. His response to Shz's list post is not even substantial pressure but a straight diss of the post: + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 05:02 Kickstart wrote: Why the list post ;/. And why do that and say you are convinced we will find connections when you could look for them yourself and then post those? I was waiting for you to do something to convince me that you might be town but that post wasn't it. While remaining disinterested in the ongoing wagon on Omni -- no mention at all. Does he not care? ~ On Orangeremi: What I really, really didn't like about his play, in addition to the lack of activity and not being forthcoming, is the way he was conspicuously "present but lurking" throughout D1. I was willing to extend the benefit of the doubt that he was just patiently observing, but the lack of anything coming of that is forcing me to reconsider. His D1 lurking includes some particularly unhelpful distractions: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 07:28 Orangeremi wrote: as a side note, you edited the wrong post lol On December 20 2012 14:08 Orangeremi wrote: Forgot the pound sign this time. Not sure if intentionally, but now I'm laughing He's looking too hard for people slipping up instead of scum hunting. This, in particular, was especially flippant: On December 24 2012 02:37 Orangeremi wrote: Show nested quote + On December 24 2012 02:11 OmniEulogy wrote: ##Vote: Orangeremi The only "active" lurker throughout the game who hasn't made a case on anybody in nearly 100 hours. I'd like to argue that I haven't made a case in over 100. All game, even. Someone behaving like this has no right to be asking: On December 20 2012 22:07 Orangeremi wrote: Omni, if you believe your theory true, who is scum #3? If you have a read, that is. In fact, this here: On December 24 2012 23:15 Orangeremi wrote: Show nested quote + On December 24 2012 21:31 Aquanim wrote: On December 24 2012 20:43 Orangeremi wrote: On December 24 2012 18:07 Aquanim wrote: On December 24 2012 17:51 Orangeremi wrote: I'm flabbergasted that Omni turned town. This really puts a wrench in things for me. Well, given that he has, who are your main suspects now? Chrom's going to come under pressure (understandably) but I do think we need to pressure the less active players come next Day phase. I'm really thrown for a loop right now and don't know what to think. Looking over filters and after recent events I'm stumped That wasn't really an answer to my question. Care to try again? I'm not really looking to throw names out there if I'm not confident after that lynch. I'm sticking with my statement that lurkers need to come out before anything else. Well, he himself is definitely lurking, which is why we want him to come out with his reads. But no -- the scum hypothesis here says that he's going to wait for the next case to sheep on. ~ The rest: On Chromatically: I still have some small niggling suspicions about him, but I have to concede that he has used his vote and pressured well (relative to the majority) on both D1 and D2 before coming aboard the wagons of the eventual lynches. I still regret extending the easy sheep option to him on D1, was definitely in a hurry and not thinking clearly back there. On cDgCorazon: I concur on this read as an improving townie. A closer look at his post here shows some attempt at taking the case on Spaghetticus apart, albeit it was rushed, aggressive, and a bit emotional. On FatChunk: I need to go over his filter again. He has flown under my radar for far too long, while I was focusing on possible scum ringleaders or the worst lurkers. On Sylencia: His play isn't super active to begin with (from meta). I feel he may not be the type to take up the initiative, and could use a bit more prompting. Unlike the other lurkers, I can't find as much dirt to use on him from his filter, so it's still null here in light of stronger suspicions elsewhere | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- Aquanim: I like the direction you're thinking in, and I'm happy to let you continue posting at the pace you've been keeping for now. cDgCorazon: You had a nice thing against OrangeRemi going, until he somehow convinced you that he had only "suspicions" but no reads to share. Care to pick up where you left off on that? Chromatically: Assuming we do not lynch Kickstart, who out of the following looks like a better lynch candidate to you: OrangeRemi, shz, or FatChunk? Justify. Fatchunk: On December 24 2012 03:03 FatChunk wrote: Let's have your analysis, since you somehow considered the lynch to be potentially informative.Well so far I'm going to have to vote for Omni tonight because lynching omni gives us the most amount of information. Kickstart: Okay, we get it, your strongest case is on Shz. Let's look elsewhere for a moment. What do you think of the arguments raised against OrangeRemi and FatChunk? Is there any merit there? Which of the two cases is a more compelling lynch, in your opinion (or is there something else better, in your view?) OrangeRemi: Please play the devil's advocate, and try to knock holes in the arguments against shz laid out by Kickstart, myself and others. Are there good townie hypotheses that would explain how he voted? What of his early D2 defense of Omni, which ceased despite the lynch gaining momentum? Does this give you a overall town vibe or scum vibe on him? Shz: Please play the devil's advocate, and try to knock holes in the arguments against Kickstart laid out by yamato, chromatically and myself. Can you think of good reasons for a town Kickstart to hold his cards so close to his chest, when we are so starved for anything at all? Why has he answered and responded only selectively? Please steer clear of the OMGUS, I am asking you to attack the case, not the player. Sylencia: Please provide a risk-reward assessment on "lynch shz for voting irresponsibly" vs "lynch kickstart for delibarate calculated lurking". Based on their play and your current read on them, how would you weigh the costs of mislynching if they are town, and the potential damage from not lynching if they are scum? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 26 2012 16:21 Sylencia wrote: Show nested quote + On December 26 2012 15:42 cakepie wrote: Sylencia: Please provide a risk-reward assessment on "lynch shz for voting irresponsibly" vs "lynch kickstart for delibarate calculated lurking". Based on their play and your current read on them, how would you weigh the costs of mislynching if they are town, and the potential damage from not lynching if they are scum? I'll answer this soon, but with your second question are you referring to what happens if we lynch one of them and they are town / not lynching one and they are scum? Your understanding is correct. In particular, we can only pick one to lynch, I'd like to hear how you'd weigh each case against the other, and consider perhaps which is the greater or lesser of two evils. If you would like to consider other lynch candidates and compare them in the same way, even better. I just thought I'd start you off with two for now. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 26 2012 19:31 Sylencia wrote: Just as a note too, what were the roleblock claims: Day 2: Omni, cake Day 3: cake, Orange? N1: 22 09:08 cake 22 13:36 omni 23 08:45 shz N2: 26 09:16 cake 26 18:51 orange I may or may not have been blocked by the same person; targeting the same player consecutive nights is allowed in this game. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 26 2012 21:57 Aquanim wrote: Show nested quote + On December 26 2012 21:16 Sylencia wrote: So the jailkeep gives the same message as a roleblocker? To the best of my knowledge, yes. Could a mod confirm this? FFS guys, it's not that hard to find: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=386911¤tpage=38#755 | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
What's worse: 1. mislynch kick and scum shz remains in the game, or 2. mislynch shz and scum kick remains in the game (this by no means implies that I think only one of them is scum) Also: On December 26 2012 19:30 Sylencia wrote: Danger of leaving him really depends on how much information we can get out from voting someone else - at the current moment it'll probably be shz or FC. Please explain: why would the information gain from some other lynch affect the threat level of a scum kickstart left alive for another day? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 11:50 cDgCorazon wrote: What do we do if none of them give an answer? They're pretty much useless lurkers to begin with. The intent was to get them to start contributing, but if they don't, then nothing has changed -- we will simply be forced to lynch into the scummiest of them based on what we know. But I don't think it'll be a complete coin flip at least. shz, fatchunk, and Kickstart all haven't posted for a very long while; the latter two not since three days ago. It's pretty ridiculous if you ask me, considering N2 was extended for xmas already. Orangeremi hasn't done much either except pop in, spend forever catching up, and making a weak attempt at debunking the shz case. (hint: I think there's definitely more to be said than that, including points that were raised already, if one would just look for them.) If there's more than one town in there losing interest and tuning out, then we're pretty much doomed already anyways. If newb scum is waiting to discuss and decide what to do (perhaps someone is still away) then I see us with a much better chance of getting out of this yet. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 12:53 cDgCorazon wrote: Where does Syl fit into this equation? Is he lurking like the others, or do you feel like he is contributing as well? Looking over his filter, he seems to be still trying to piece something together based on setup (or is putting up a good act of it). I am not convinced that it would be a productive inquiry; too many possible explanations when I considered it for myself. @Syl: a penny for your thoughts? What have you come up with after tossing things around? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 00:31 Chromatically wrote: @cakepie My lynch candidate will depend a lot on how they act today. This is why I don't think that we should form a consensus on Kick too early, FC and Orange need to post too. What now, now that we've still got absolutely nothing to work with apart a token answer from Orange? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
N1: 22 09:08 cake 22 13:36 omni 23 08:45 shz N2: 26 09:16 cake 26 18:51 orange 27 13:42 shz Either this game is a perverse RB (bleep)fest or someone is lying and looking to cause confusion. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 13:42 shz wrote: This is really hard to get a grip on and in no way I am confidend in this days lynch. Fuck. Well, time to get a grip then. You can start by answering my questions and commenting on what others have answered. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17355890 | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 13:56 shz wrote: I said I was not RB this night. I stand corrected then. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 14:30 shz wrote: Ome thing to note though, which seems very odd to me. If we misslynch today, we pretty much fucked, so it should be in scums interest to direct us towards a misslynch, to nearly lock that game down. But there seems to be no oposition towards lynching Kick. Could this mean that mafia is fine with that lynch? Which would mean we are wrong. Numerically, all it takes is for two to three tonwies to vote on the same person, and mafia would be able to pile on to make 5 for a mislynch, taking us down to 5-3, and then 4-3 overnight. They may just be biding their time, since trying to direct the vote would be too conspicuous. Perhaps one scum has already parked their vote somewhere for now. (Seriously, if we have two parked mafia votes and townies are still goofing off I shall be very cross indeed when we find out postgame) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
This could be - a deliberate play as scum - RL actually getting in the way, whether scum or town. A town kickstart giving up is very unlikely, this would be very irresponsible and unlike him. A town kickstart playing like this deliberately is also difficult to justify. In fact, I should think that kickstart is a serious and responsible enough player to ask for a replacement if RL was foreseeably going to be an issue. In either case (or both), we won't be getting anything out of him with this pressure, and I refuse to let my vote fester when I could, and should be pressuring others. This wagon is getting far too easy, and crucially another mass sheep-fest will get us nowhere with no information gained. ##FoS: Kickstart Kickstart is still a good deal scummier than the rest of my suspects, though. We shall see by end of day. For now, let's see if other avenues of inquiry will yield anything -- if not for today, it may help us tomorrow. ##Vote: FatChunk Come on, Christmas is over; get in here and show us why you should not be considered scum. ----- I'll be stepping out for a while now | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 17:26 cDgCorazon wrote: Convenient that the 5 people Spag called out as scum on D1 are STILL being accused of lurking? It is a truly disturbing sight to behold. 100% there is scum in at least one of these lurkers. Our job moving forward is to figure out who is scum and who is not. This. Even when someone finally comes out and gives us something, it will be quite the task trying to consider if they are finally coming out with their reads as town, or scum trying to make the final misdirection play. The town who may be among the lurkers are in fear that whatever they can bring to the table now will not be enough, and they fear getting mislynched, what with how we did on the first two days. So ironically while we are pressing them for substance, we cannot hope for much substance anyway. If they have been playing lazily, the task of catching up, and then stepping up to the plate, can be too daunting. Ultimately, the recent posting behavior of Sylencia and shz are minimally cooperative, and do not sway my read of them in either direction. We will have to try to ask the right questions and work from there. In terms of trying to stay out of attention, both have done so in equal measure. Sylencia has become quite quiet unless prodded, in contrast to his N1 and early D2. Shz had something going in late D2, but he has not followed up on it despite (or because of?) losing some of the heat on him after N2. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Let's try to take the questions in a different direction. Hypothesis: Chromaticity is scum. Discuss. Yes, this means to present arguments both for and against the hypothesis. Caution: this does not imply that I have a scum read on Chrom. He just happens to be interesting enough to build a discussion around. This one is fair game for open discussion, but I particularly want to hear what shz and sylencia have to say about it, seeing as they've commented on some aspects of Chrom's play before. FatChunk and OrangeRemi are also encouraged to chime in. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
The lynch is pretty much set unless we get some crazy swing going elsewhere, so I don't see that moving my vote would do anything here. Impending Kickstart modkill (if somehow not lynched) does not move me either direction. If he gets replaced, I feel it would not be as straightforward to figure out the replacement as it was with threesr/yamato, so I can live with this lynch for that reason. If kickstart flips scum, how everyone has reacted as time ran out would be useful for analysis over the night. If kickstart flips town, then ... wtf kickstart. shz, you're here. What of this: Could this mean that mafia is fine with that lynch? Which would mean we are wrong. Do you think anything has changed since yesterday? Among the posts that came in with <8 hours to deadline, which are possibly scum motivated? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Seriously, I hang around all day waiting for stuff, but all the shit actually happens in the last 8 hours before deadline, when I am asleep. =/ | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:42 Chromatically wrote: shz had no scumreads all of d2 and had no original scumreads all of d1. How is this town play? Everyone who's not switching to shz needs to answer this. The same can be said for others. Not a compelling argument in itself. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
shz is here, but obviously not likely to vote for himself. Aquanim is here. Who else have we got to work with? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:41 Chromatically wrote: Will there be a modkill or replacement for Kickstart? This is remarkably important. If no replacement, we should be looking to use our votes elsewhere. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:59 Aquanim wrote: AAAAND my other scumread jumps in GUYS THIS IS TOO OBVIOUS Reminder: maybe not *that* obvious. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 09:10 Aquanim wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: On December 28 2012 08:59 Aquanim wrote: AAAAND my other scumread jumps in GUYS THIS IS TOO OBVIOUS Reminder: maybe not *that* obvious. I was panicking and posting the first thing that came to mind to stop anyone else switching to Shz I was ready to vote Kick at XX:59, but with the tie vote rule, I decided to just sit here and sip my coffee instead. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 27 2012 18:37 cakepie wrote: So, lurkers have nothing much useful to say about other lurkers, not surprising perhaps. Let's try to take the questions in a different direction. Hypothesis: Chromaticity is scum. Discuss. Yes, this means to present arguments both for and against the hypothesis. Caution: this does not imply that I have a scum read on Chrom. He just happens to be interesting enough to build a discussion around. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 09:45 Sylencia wrote: Having a framer in play suggests there's a Cop in play, right? Hush! Seriously, framer without cop would be a bit bastard. I don't think a newbie game would be set up that way. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 09:16 cakepie wrote: I was ready to vote Kick at XX:59, but with the tie vote rule, I decided to just sit here and sip my coffee instead. Tbh I got scooped by the votecount with my final refresh. But sipping coffee sounds way more cooler. Enough exuberance at the small victory. We are most likely at 6-2 now, and will be 5-2 tomorrow. @Chrom: scum mass switching from scum Kick to town shz would be incredibly bad play. In view of that - how strong is your scum read on shz now, after the failed switch? - other than Kickstart, OrangeRemi and FatChunk switched over to shz. Assuming only one of them is scum, who is the sheeping townie, and who is the scum? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 11:33 Chromatically wrote: Also consider: given that both Orange and FC both tried to get shz lynched, shz scum would mean that both Orange and FC are town (unlikely). Orange/FC fits much better. You haven't answered my second question: assuming scum is not so awfully bad as to all jump onto shz, and only one of Orange/FC is scum, who is the sheeping town, and who is the scum, and why? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
@Syl: still trying to figure out the possible setups? That should get you nowhere, unless you are scum pondering the existence of a cop/vig. Let scum worry about that. Come tell us what you think of the Kick/shz interplay. ----- @all anyone have anything to toss my way? I'll stick around a bit but may be gone for a stretch later. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
If both FC and chrom are misguided townies, what was Kickstart up to? How has he managed to misdirect both FC and yourself onto chrom's case? And who among the Kick wagon would you finger as the two likely scum, looking to gain town cred off of Kickstart's 'sacrifice' play? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 11:13 cDgCorazon wrote: 1. Realized that there was a window of opportunity to get Shz lynched, and if he flipped scum, all of the pressure would be off him because he voted off scum. 2. Realized that he might not get lynched and decided to actually try. Was not trying to bus, just trying to stay alive. I think you're overlooking some possibilities: 3: Kick's play is a calculated chaos play betting on the sheeping tendencies we have already seen the past two days. It enables massive WIFOM bombs, while perhaps part of the scumteam stays on the Kick wagon to keep distance and gain town cred, while townies make a fool of themselves. 4: (less likely) Kick's is scum buddy with shz, but his play is not a bus, nor an attempt to stay alive. Instead, it a calculated gambit: stick a lousy case on shz all of D2 without intent to bus, and then bring the vote on shz in order to clear shz from suspicion. But this would have been incredibly ballsy seeing how close we came to actually lynching shz instead, with Kick remaining under heavy suspicion -- it would have needed the last remaining scum to be very, very safe before scum would want to try something like that. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 12:13 Sylencia wrote: At this point the possible remaining scum teams I can see being feasible are 2 of Chrom, Orange and FC, with Orange and Fatchunk's play in the last half hour looking absolutely ridiculous, if they are both scum, I'd laugh pretty hard and how messed up this game became. 1. how would you order the three suspects? 2. What of shz? Earlier, you mentioned that his loyalty was still "up in the air": On December 26 2012 19:30 Sylencia wrote: The risk of voting out shz is that if he is town, we're really leaving ourselves vulnerable to scum manipulation in votes. The majority of the town has not really been active in choosing votes, there's just a lot of bandwagoning happening. shz, while he has been voting non-optimally, still gives us a reasonable chance of voting out scum if we find one, if he is town. The problem lies with his loyalty, which is up in the air, but I am honestly unsure of his status. If we leave in shz and he is scum, the reverse of what I mentioned just now happens, where he can easily manipulate the votes with the rest of the scum playing a bandwagon game, requiring only one extra vote to end the game. This can easily be done, and it's rather risky. Personally, I'd still consider Kick a higher priority simply because it's easier to tell by the end of the next day what shz is since he does participate in the discussions. Does kickstart's shz vote + the failed switch convince you that Shz is town? We've lynched kickstart, but shz's "non-optimal" voting may still be a liability as town, or mask his intentions as a bandwagoning scum. How would you assess his participation in D3 discussions, notwithstanding the failed wagon on him? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 12:15 Chromatically wrote: What I said there was a correct conclusion drawn from an incorrect premise. I assumed that Orange and FC weren't in a team together because Orange had voted FC before and was voting him now. Because of the voteswitch and the scumteam's willingness to bus this game, that's obviously a bad assumption. Sorry chrom, what is this in response to again? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 14:31 cakepie wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2012 12:15 Chromatically wrote: What I said there was a correct conclusion drawn from an incorrect premise. I assumed that Orange and FC weren't in a team together because Orange had voted FC before and was voting him now. Because of the voteswitch and the scumteam's willingness to bus this game, that's obviously a bad assumption. Sorry chrom, what is this in response to again? Nvm figured it out, it's to address Syl's point to your Dec 28 06:56 post. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 14:58 cDgCorazon wrote: Because he voted to lynch FC. He was on the fence of the whole Shz/Kick lynching trains. Not quite. Wait for my explanatory post. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 14:46 shz wrote: Could you please explain why? What was your reasoning behind voting Kick at 59 when you could have done it earlier? I'll be glad to step you through my late-D3 experience. I woke up to the posts at around 7:10KST, Kickstart was still away, and counting up the votes it was still rather even at kickstart 4, fatchunk 3. Nothing much changed overnight, and no one had cared to offer much else in response to my questions; neither scum nor lurker town were baited out, and I was frustrated. My original intention had been to try to get some discussion and voting activity going while I was asleep, so that I could assess it, as well as vote back onto Kickstart if needed. But: The lynch is pretty much set unless we get some crazy swing going elsewhere, so I don't see that moving my vote would do anything here. Voting back onto Kickstart would simply give the wagon the final push it needed, and figuratively turn the ignition on the obvious scum bus. I would not do it. On the other hand, a swing elsewhere would be ridiculous crazy either way you look at it. Would enough townies sheep it? How many scum would have to risk sticking their necks out to pull something like this off? Hence I was extremely skeptical of a swing onto shz wagon, initiated by Chromatically: On December 28 2012 08:49 cakepie wrote: Numerically, you need to move two people off the Kickstart wagon onto shz, assuming kickstart is really headed for a modkill. (yes, even if you get all FC votes to consolidate onto shz, due to tie vote) shz is here, but obviously not likely to vote for himself. Aquanim is here. Who else have we got to work with? The implications I was trying to make, if you read beteen the lines: besides Chromatically, Aquanim, shz and myself are conspicuously present. Others may be lurking -- have not posted in the past hour, while useful discussion had been ongoing. Who cares enough to be actively discussing, and who is just bumming around uselessly? Shz, with his 8:08KST post, was locked in either as a townie in despair, or scum bus on Kickstart. Furthermore, I firmly believed Aquanim would not be budged, and I had been prepared to switch my vote back onto Kickstart to begin with anyway, if things changed sufficiently while I was asleep. But I saw a possibility to make the voting interesting for later analysis, so I tried to make it look like there was enough of a possibility of switching, in order to draw out scum or bad sheep. My key questions to myself at that point: Are sheeping townies really so bad as to not learn their lesson, and still sheep again? - I should really hope not, but who knows? Are scum really going to switch wagons en masse in a ridiculously obvious move? - if Kickstart is scum about to be lynched, then they're in a bit of disarray anyways, might as well give it a shot. Whatever the case, it would give us people to scrutinize, and did not threaten to derail the kickstart lynch yet, so I was resolved to let it run for a bit and see if it went anywhere. Crucially, we get to this post: On December 28 2012 08:51 cakepie wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2012 08:41 Chromatically wrote: Will there be a modkill or replacement for Kickstart? This is remarkably important. If no replacement, we should be looking to use our votes elsewhere. This is me, caught up to 08:49. With 10 minutes to go, my mind was considering the following: - if replacement, then the kickstart lynch should be pushed through due to the risk of a replacement for possibly scum kick playing completely differently, and making it impossible to read kick/replacement - if modkill, then kick dies either way scum or town, and it is more important to have votes elsewhere for the purposes of analysis. My decision of staying on the FatChunk pressure or moving back to Kickstart depended on this. Although I also had my eye on OrangeRemi, there was more of a credible threat going on FatChunk, so there my vote stayed. Of course, once I posted that I saw Kickstart's vote, leading to: On December 28 2012 08:53 cakepie wrote: Oh god kickstart WHAT THE FUCK (WIFOM) fact: I actually finished typing in a vote on Kickstart along with this post, but I paused and realized it would be too soon if I did that. I wanted to wait and see who would make the jump off from the Kickstart wagon onto shz, now that Kickstart being in the picture made a mass voteswitch marginally numerically viable, plus the fact that a shz wagon started to look like the correct kind of bait. So I stayed my hand, and deleted the vote before posting, waiting to see what would happen. Lo and behold, we have Orangeremi switching, while fingering Chromatically to be blamed for a potential mislynch. Which was fine by me -- 8:55 and still room for one more to safely switch. I checked my math again, with the benefit of coffee this time. Yep, let's wait a while yet, let the tension build up. ...aaand FatChunk makes the switch. It is 8:58. I start preparing my vote in case it is needed. Refresh -- okay, it's just Chrom and Aqua, time 8:59. Refresh again -- oh snap, it's the votecount -- well, thank goodness my vote wasn't needed. Post the vote anyway? Nah - don't want to anger the hosts, and incoming WIFOM is already guaranteed, whether I post the vote or not. Celebrate a bit, refill coffee, get ready to analyze voting. And that's what happened. (Note: withholding one scumhunting observation that is not directly relevant to this discussion) ----- Anything else before I pop out of here? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Assume not all scum is stupidly trying to swing onto together with Kickstart. Out of chrom, orange, and fc, who is the scum that jumped wagons, and who is the misguided town? And where would the remaining scum be hiding? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 22:20 Orangeremi wrote: The wagoners? I don't know, Syl and Aqua seemed to hop on that train with little initiative and rode it undercover. With what they've contributed, I'm surprised they haven't been nk'd yet. What do you mean "surprised they haven't been nk'd yet"? Care to elaborate? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
They "hop[ped] on that train with little initiative and rode it undercover" only D3, so surely you don't intend that as a reason that they should have already been killed earlier. So, I ask you again: How/Why do you see them to be so great a threat to the scum team that they should have taken precedence over mocsta on N1, and yamato on N2? If not as a threat, what other reason do you have to expect that they should be dead by the hands of scum by now? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
If neither Aqua or you, Syl, get killed, who would scum look to kill? And what misdirection would they be attempting, if they are not killing the most obvious threat to themselves at the moment? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 28 2012 23:49 Sylencia wrote: If you stay alive, he's making a play at you to vote someone other than himself. And if I don't? (Keep your answer to yourself.) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 29 2012 08:42 cDgCorazon wrote: Show nested quote + On December 29 2012 08:33 cakepie wrote: I'd like to hear your thoughts on "surely scum is not so stupid as to all switch together" and the possibility that one of orange or FC is still a hapless bad sheep. By "hapless bad sheep", do you mean they are a bad town? Or scummy? bad town | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 29 2012 08:40 cDgCorazon wrote: + 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? Show nested quote + On December 28 2012 12:30 cakepie wrote: 3: Kick's play is a calculated chaos play betting on the sheeping tendencies we have already seen the past two days. It enables massive WIFOM bombs, while perhaps part of the scumteam stays on the Kick wagon to keep distance and gain town cred, while townies make a fool of themselves. 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: Show nested quote + 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. 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: Show nested quote + I was pretty confident in following someone with a town rep like chrom, especially someone who is willing to risk his town rep on a scum read. 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? EBWOP: Fixed BB code. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Early phase: Shz strange early pressure vote on Mocsta FatChunk taking the easy threesr vote (and staryed there all day). Chrom onto corazon is hard to place one way or the other Havoc phase: Basically bad/lazy threesr causing a mess, nothing to look at here. Corazon wagon phase: OmniEulogy -> cDgCorazon 20 0929 threesr -> cDgCorazon 20 1311 shz -> cDgCorazon 20 1317 Sylencia -> cDgCorazon 20 1405 If scum has not already put two on corazon, they would be doing it here. A third scum is either still lurking and waiting, not voting yet, or has already voted elsewhere -- in which case I feel it would most likely on threesr {FatChunk, Corazon, Mocsta}, which leads me to suspect FatChunk somewhat. We now know Omni and threesr to be town. The other two are hard to say -- shz is still under some scrutiny; syl has fallen under the radar somewhat. The note on FatChunk may have been right. Spaghetticus case initiation phase: Aquanim -> Spaghetticus 20 1936 OmniEulogy -> Spaghetticus 20 2150 OrangeRemi -> nolynch 20 2247 Chromatically -> FatChunk 20 2354 cDgCorazon -> nolynch 21 0026 cDgCorazon -> threesr 21 0040 This is uninteresting now that Omni flipped town. Chromatically left off the pressure on Corazon, and switched to FatChunk, a reasonable choice, while keeping open the possibility of moving to Spaghetticus. This is consistent with his overall play D2 and D3 as well -- broadening the number of lurkers and suspects under pressure before consolidating. Spaghetticus wagon phase: Mocsta -> Spaghetticus 21 0052 cakepie -> Spaghetticus 21 0252 kickstart -> Spaghetticus 21 0531 Chromatically -> Spaghetticus 21 0657 shz -> Spaghetticus 21 0725 OrangeRemi -> Fatchunk 21 0850 It is now clear that kickstart sheeped onto the wagon. But what of Chromatically and shz? An honest townie mistake, or scum on the wagon? Did Chrom deliberately leave open the option to move to spag, so as to blend in with the lynch of the day? OrangeRemi votes very late, and the vote does not matter to the lynch -- comfortably distancing himself from Fatchunk, perhaps? Revisiting D2 voting. Actually interesting when compared to D1: now kickstart is apart, while the whole bloody world sheeps onto OmniEulogy. On roleblocks I believe the roleblocked claims are all true -- town need not lie, and scum would not risk being called out on lying, so they must follow suit. I asked the hosts some pertinent questions. I will let you all think on it yourselves, and act appropriately. Someone tried to block me both nights so far, so I will not reveal what I am just yet. On D3 voting and the voteswing I am actually fairly convinced that FatChunk and Orangeremi are the most likely remaining scum, and that we saw very frazzled scum in mid to late D3 in the absence of kickstart. Occam's razor says this is the simple and obvious solution (yes, in spite of me raising the possibility that there is some complex masterplan behind it). Crucially, under this hypothesis it is possible to parse the D3 voting as follows: + Show Spoiler + When Corazon (at 28 0136) took the D3 voting up to KickStart (3): FatChunk (2): Chromatically, cakepie With time running out, FatChunk and Orangeremi are forced to distribute their votes: OrangeRemi -> FatChunk @28 0159 + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 01:59 Orangeremi wrote: The overwhelming vote count for Kick right now leads me to believe the scum are just hopping on his wagon. If he was actually scum, wouldn't the mafia would find another player to try and start a wagon for to save him. But that isn't happening. I think we need to reevaluate. In the meantime I'm going back to one of my initial reads. ##Vote: FatChunk Reason given: scum seems okay with the Kickstart wagon. FatChunk -> KickStart @28 0507 + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 05:07 FatChunk wrote: Show nested quote + On December 27 2012 18:22 cakepie wrote: The town who may be among the lurkers are in fear that whatever they can bring to the table now will not be enough, and they fear getting mislynched, what with how we did on the first two days. So ironically while we are pressing them for substance, we cannot hope for much substance anyway. If they have been playing lazily, the task of catching up, and then stepping up to the plate, can be too daunting. I literally just kept delaying posting for this reason. I have been quite lazy. OMGUS? First, I'd like to address something that gave cakepie a scumread on me: Me lynching omni for information. In that post of mine I prefaced the post with such a statement. I later began to develop why I think this would be a good lynch, followed by stating that I had a scumread on him. The town flip on omni makes us doubt Mocsta's cases on chrom and cakepie, and helps us look at relationships omni has with other players. My scum reads are for Kickstart, and orangeremi, and sHz. Followed by Sylencia. basically, the lurkers. Now i realize this is hypocritical because i lurk too. I think that mafia have let town go crazy and lynch themselves while they wait in the back on a weak LAL policy. But I think we're all learning now - posters that are coming active NOW are the ones trying to establish themselves as town (sHz, orangeremi,). I guess kickstart is an exception though, busy holidays? no defense whatsoever can't be smart. Kickstart: -Basically in the early game he makes the vote on the spag train to a town lynch. -Is very narrow-minded in whom he suspects scum. Poor scumhunter, makes a small effort in the vein of "I'll make a weak case against someone for them to shut it down, so that i look like a scumhunter!" against cakepie, shz. -His reads are basically shz. nobody else except a well-deflected stand against cakepie. Kick: who are your other two scum reads besides sHz and why? -bandwagonner -no effort to help town sHz: -One of the players who is attempting to establish themelves as town. -after 2 days of afk from christmas, shz posts: + Show Spoiler + On December 27 2012 13:42 shz wrote: while Orange declared him scummy on a few occasions but never actually voted or applied any real pressure. I don't think that anyone actually looked into Kick because of him, which could be a very clever scum-play. But is it? I don't know. I'm not sure if we could actually get any information on their relation if we lynch any of them. But I don't know if we actually could gain more information by lynching anyone else, and out of all the lurkier players, he seems to be the scumiest. I will probably vote for him. At this point, no one is a safe bet, but the safest seems to be Kick. This is really hard to get a grip on and in no way I am confidend in this days lynch. Fuck. -very mild reads, not confident in his scumread on kick. basically 50/50 read. What happens if Kick turns town, he looks like scum. if kick turns scum he looks like scum because he tried to save kick. Orangeremi: -my third suspect, basically the same as all the other lurkers -suspects me early on, with no explanation why. He just agrees with the case that Chrom put forward, and then claims that its his suspicion. why? because he has to pick another player in the lurkers to keep the attention off himself and his team. Is forcing it now to get pressure off his back. -one-sentence scum reads on players who are already under suspicion. -forced town-sympathetic posts of frustration. And regarding the discussion question: Chrom: i used to have suspicions on because he would aggressively twist my words and throw them back in my face. but I now realize that this can just be the aggressive nature of a towny. Has had some pretty good logic and scumhunting, however, like everyone else, has been wrong 100% of the time. Honestly, the effort put into this game makes me think he's town. From what I can tell he is the best scum read for alot of us: ##Vote: Kickstart terrible, terrible sheep, while distancing from Orange Yet when Chromatically offered shz wagon, and Kickstart appeared, both Orangeremi and FC jumped. I discussed my involvement (or, technically, the lack thereof) here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17368370 I have alluded in an that discussion that "shz wagon started to look like the correct kind of bait." whereas I was unable to get a response to my questioning/voting. What was “incorrect bait” on my part? The alternative wagon on FatChunk, because he is scum as well, so scum is forced between a rock and a hard place as long as kickstart was not available. They were not willing to bus him outright -- he was too valuable perhaps. And so the vote sits comfortably at 4:3, pending...and the rest is history. We’ve all already taken note of the terrible way that FC switched, and the way that OrangeRemi conveniently transfers blame for a potential mislynch onto Chromatically while not actually convinced shz is scum. If you go back to early N3 you’ll see I have been poking around for other players' reads on FC vs Orange vs Chrom (vs Shz), or checked if their read on shz has turned town due to the wagon, or offerred the possibility that not all of the voteswitch is scum. Several players have answered capably. But orange... What the (bleep)? Go read 22:20 KST onwards, if you haven’t already http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17370236 How the @#$% is it possible to be surprised that aquanim and/or sylencia are not dead by NK yet, [given] "what they've contributed"? Sylencia has been rather quiet and has never been a big threat to scum. Why on earth would scum spend NK on a mildly suspicious, inscrutable player rather than a clear townie threat? Utter rubbish and a distraction. Aquanim was certainly ripe to be killed by scum tonight. But there is no way scum needed to kill him N1 (after he led the spag mislynch) and he kept a lower profile D2, so it is easy to argue that yamato with his fresh reads is a better NK than whatever towncred basis there is for killing Aqua. When pressured, Orange follows up with a load of crap that Syl and I talked over for a bit. Is this a scumslip? Perhaps scum coach is trying to help cook something up, but orange is not up to the execution? If orange is town who switched votes and would admit it is stupid, why is he not going after fatchunk, who he has been suspicious of for a long time? Instead, he tries to tell me that he thinks it is most likely that neither Chrom nor FC are scum either, and that all remaining scum are hidden on the Kick wagon. Why not FC? And then he points to Aqua as Syl, forced to identify his most likely hidden scum on the wagon. Basis? That they’ve survived so long without being offed by scum... when easy explanations exist for why that is the case. Words fail me. okay, so? Scum has competing priorities upon their single KP:
Not all of the objectives necessarily align all the time. With this in mind, we can consider the possibilities already raised between syl and myself (obviously, we will not address the first point): + Show Spoiler + If fc/orange scum kill shz, they could try to finger Chrom and may try to convince me to their side, while claiming that they are hapless sheep. They successfully kill off a player who has arguably gained a lot of townie points as a result of the D3 vote. If FC/orange scum kill me, it’s a WIFOM bomb against Chrom and whoever else, based on me “getting close to the answer” of other scum safely hidden on the Kick wagon. I certainly seem more open to other scumteam possibilities besides FC/orange, so killing me would be a misdirection, and offing a clear town player in their mind. But what will they hope to do against the remaining town? The other possibilities arising from the posts [/spoiler] If FC/orange scum kill Aquanim or Syl, dumb WIFOM happens re: orangeremi’s 22:20 and 23:17 posts. Killing aqua also disposes of a threat, and a strong townread for many.[/spoiler] The importance of night actions PRs truly start coming into their usefulness around now. If we assume neither a cop nor vig nor sk in this game, RB has a great chance of winning the game for us as long as he has managed to remain hidden and is unblocked. Raw odds of blocking scum RB and/or NK in N3 is 1/7, and much higher as long as the RB is savvy about his targeting -- I’d say as good as 25~33%. If the RB has stayed hidden, and we can push the game to conclusion without him claiming, then that would be best. Don’t claim yet, if you can! But, I have my reasons to think that there might be more to this game than RBs. But it is still dangerous to discuss it. We will have to see as things progress. What now? If I live, I will push top scumreads according to above and react as needed to the NK. Town should not hesitate to try to tear my case apart, and present alternative explanations for any point raised. If I don’t make it through the night: + Show Spoiler + If SK is not evident, I want you guys to push Orange, then FatChunk... but you were going to do that anyway, right? If SK rears his head: good luck, you’ll need it. Caution: one NK does not automatically imply no SK. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Roleblocked claims gogogo | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
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 [snip] Well, Aqua did get NK'd. This does not, however, excuse you from answering my earlier questions. Why were you surprised that Aqua and Syl had not been NK'd in the first two nights? This implies you have reason to expect that they were higher priority targets for scum at some point in N1 and/or N2 compared to the people who were actually killed, namely mocsta and yamato. What reason do you have to expect that Aqua and/or Syl should have been dead by the hands of scum before N3? Are they so great a threat to the scum team that they should have taken precedence over mocsta on N1, and yamato on N2? Or is there some other reason? Also, On December 28 2012 22:20 Orangeremi wrote: I still want to wait to see who gets killed tonight. I'm really curious who they'll pick. Well let's hear what your thoughts on the flip are, since you clearly had this on your mind before. ----- I'm going to get breakfast and do morning things for now, be back in a bit | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Shz is here yah? @shz You were trying to figure out if Kick and/or Orange is scum, before you eventually settled on the wagon for Kick, with: I'm tired to be accused of anything no matter how or who I vote. I'm sure we're at least willing to listen to and consider what you have to say, after the failed voteswitch on you. Come, what are your thoughts now? What are your reads now? What do you think of what Aquanim had to say? What about my predawn post? You had questions on my late D3. Are you satisfied with my explanation, or is there something you want elaborated? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 29 2012 08:57 Chromatically wrote: My advice is to sheep Aqua. Chrom, you are terrible for suggesting this, and had better have a good explanation for it. We're far from home and dry yet. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Just out of the shower, give me some time to digest the new information. For now, I want to call attention to the fact that with the wagon at the critical 3 of 7 votes, and despite me being obviously around, I have chosen not to hitch the wagon to the horse, so to speak. Shz, syl: keep going, I really want to you guys in this discussion, and want to have your thoughts, now that we've calmed down from the D3 madness. roleclaims: not yet. I am still toying with the possibilities in my mind. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 29 2012 15:56 shz wrote: I can't, it's 7:55am and I haven't slept yet. If I can't sleep, I'll be around. Alright, but I will expect you to be back later. We do need all hands on deck this day phase. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + 7 players remain: I see two most likely setup possibilities in my mind: - 5 town vs 2 scum, with town RB and scum RB or - 4 town vs 2 scum vs SK, with town RB, scum RB and one more blue role (I see cop more likely than X-shot vig due to framer.) Note 1: SK also aims to scumhunt early game, and wants to maintain town : mafia ratio within certain bounds while blending in. Note 2: one kill in N3 could have been an incredibly patient and confident SK, or a successful RB blocking either scum KP or SK KP. Do not discount the possibility of scum RB blocking SK. Remember, mafia start with the knowledge of alignments, but do not know the distribution of power roles to begin with. Thus far they have managed to take out mocsta, who stuck his neck out too far, but have subsequently gone after most threatening townies, who turned out to be VTs. How effective have mafia been with their RB? And if we have a cop, did the framer make a difference? The town PRs have an incredible amount of information, but we cannot squander this too easily. We cannot afford to out the blues if we may need them still. Likewise, it is important for PRs to really step up to the responsibility that comes with their role. As long as we don't mislynch into blue, we'll be in good shape for tonight. Caveat: we might also be in a different setup than the two I raised. so caution is still the best approach. tldr: Is there a watertight plan to win with very high likelihood, in any eventuality, any setup, with any scumteam, with the information we have? If not, then it is not time to roleclaim yet. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 29 2012 16:53 cakepie wrote: tldr: Is there a watertight plan to win with very high likelihood, in any eventuality, any setup, with any scumteam, with the information we have? If not, then it is not time to roleclaim yet. EBWOP: And any plan had better be openly discussed, scrutinized and endorsed before anyone jumps the gun with roleclaims. Unless you're about to die, in which case we will have to weigh the claim accordingly together with other arguments for/against. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 29 2012 16:02 cDgCorazon wrote: Lets just say you are right, and FC/Orange is 1 scum and 1 town. Who is the scum to you, and who is the town? Orangeremi for horribly lost town, FC for scum. I've been thinking and working on a bad townie hypothesis for orangeremi. Give me more time to organize my thoughts and put them down coherently. ----- A 3/7 wagon with no alternative candidates is no way to foster discussion and is not going to coax anyone to talk to us. On December 29 2012 08:57 Chromatically wrote: My advice is to sheep Aqua. ##Vote: Chromatically You are sorely mistaken if you think town can kick back and relax now and sheep the way to victory. Get out here and explain yourself, and then start helping. ----- @FatChunk At least orangeremi had some reverse-psychology reasoning thing going on with his voteswitch. Also, he switched off you onto shz. On the other hand, you left the Kickstart wagon and followed him onto Shz. You have not provided enough justification or reasoning for your switch. You have not sufficiently addressed the questions directed at you. I've got one more for you too: + Show Spoiler + Here at 8:50 you respond to my 8:49 post: On December 28 2012 08:49 cakepie wrote: shz is here, but obviously not likely to vote for himself. Aquanim is here. Who else have we got to work with? On December 28 2012 08:50 FatChunk wrote: i am here, lurking. are we considering switching to shz? So you are capable of refreshing webpages quite rapidly. Kickstart appeared at 08:50, causing Aquanim and myself to start flipping out. Orangeremi switched at 08:55. You switch-voted at 8:58. Never mind Chrom's case and wagon initiation; please justify how you can possibly switch your vote even after these two guys jumped in? Especially Kickstart, who was your other strong scumread besides shz. Do alarm bells not ring for you when you see the convenient timing of his appearance and vote? Why would you follow the voting of a strong scumread, even if the target of the switch is also a strong scumread for you? Did it not occur to you how bad it would look? ##FoS: FatChunk Speak up. Fearlessly, as you promised early in the game, if you be town. I want to get Chrom's ass in here right now, but once that is done, my sights are on you. Prove to me why we should not lynch you today or tomorrow. ----- @Orangeremi: get out here and talk to us. You've got some thoughts on FatChunk, depending on various hypotheses we've been tossing around: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 11:44 Orangeremi wrote: I'm not that stupid. I don't think any of the combinations are correct, but FC is most likely. But his partner ? On December 28 2012 22:20 Orangeremi wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2012 12:12 cakepie wrote: @orange: Assume not all scum is stupidly trying to swing onto shz. Who is scum initiating/moving with Kickstart onto shz: chrom, FC, or neither? And where in the Kick wagon is the remaining scum hiding? If both FC and chrom are misguided townies, what was Kickstart up to? How has he managed to misdirect both FC and yourself onto chrom's case? And who among the Kick wagon would you finger as the two likely scum, looking to gain town cred off of Kickstart's 'sacrifice' play? 1) I'm leaning towards neither, unless it's just bad scum play. If I had to choose, it'd be FC since he hopped on last and could use that fact as an excuse. 2) I wouldn't say I'm on chrom's case. I am suspicious because of that move, but his motives seem sound. I don't understand what Kickstart was doing AT ALL. The only thing I can think is that the rest of the mafia planned this lynch to avoid their own suspicion. [snip] Care to expound? Also, go back and answer outstanding questions directed at you. I'm sure I had a few I wanted to hear from you about. FatChunk drew a lot more flak than you did for the D3 voteswitch attempt, and you might not be looking this bad if not for your two terribad N3 posts. At the very least, corazon and I are still looking at FC, and not tunnel-sheeping on you yet. Come, give us something to work with if you are town -- at least, you won't be faulted for not trying at this critical juncture, regardless of any poor play earlier. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- Can we explain Orangeremi using a terribad townie hypothesis? D1: It's the first day, none of us really have very strong reads or high confidence in anything. Initial no-lynch is a not unexpected, and by the time he checked in again and actually put in a vote it was very late. The vote was not accompanied by any justification, but it was inconsequential anyway -- consider it as just a flag to indicate one of his top suspects. D2: Starts by sheeping onto Chromatically's OmniEulogy wagon, and stays put. Given the massive sheepfest that occured, we cannot hold this against orange. In any case, Chrom's case convinced him enough to overtake his own suspicions (on kick and FC) He shares some thoughts on Kickstart and FC when prodded, also asks me about mocsta's OE+chrom+me scum team theory -- some minimal due diligence following cues left by the deceased. D3: Confused, and feeling pressured due to Yamato directing suspicion his way. Indicates his concern about the Kickstart wagon: On December 28 2012 01:59 Orangeremi wrote: The overwhelming vote count for Kick right now leads me to believe the scum are just hopping on his wagon. If he was actually scum, wouldn't the mafia would find another player to try and start a wagon for to save him. But that isn't happening. I think we need to reevaluate. This is an attempt at trying to figure out what scum would do in the situation, some reverse psychology going on. He genuinely doesn't think scum would bus Kick, perhaps because kick is the most experienced player among all of us? Votes onto FatChunk, who he has had suspicions on before. When the voteswitch happens, he still really does not think scum would bus scum kick, and is convinced therefore that kick is town. But numerically, the only way to avoid kick being lynched was to hope that the alternative shz wagon would work -- the FC wagon, which he would have preferred, certainly wasn't going anywhere. This explains his exasperation at Chrom for moving from FC to shz. N3: Already looking bad from the failed voteswitch, frazzled from questioning, and feeling under pressure, he botches his answers to my questions. But there is undeniably another attempt again at trying to fathom what scum is doing. I should highlight: it's not like he doesn't have a history of trying to use reverse-psychology reasoning: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 19:02 Orangeremi wrote: Show nested quote + On December 20 2012 18:24 Mocsta wrote: @orangeremi. Your filter comments on corazon doing the slip. You said you didnt pick up anytjing till someone else pointed it out. Q. If scum have superior starting knowledge and know remaining scum. Do you think it is reasonable to think you took corazon comments innocently because you knew he was innocent? Do u have rationale to make me think otherwise? ##fos: orangeremi Completely reasonable. Clever, in fact. I'm happy you caught that, I never would've thought about it. I'm not sure what kind of rationale you're looking for. The only thing I can think of is how foolish it would be of me to post what I did if I were mafia. I'd have no reason to defend a non-mafia claiming to be one since he would be an obvious distraction and good lynch target for me to bandwagon without suspicion. + 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 just don't think the whole reverse psych thing has been working very well. Best stop trying to do that. @Orange: if you are town, you have got to make a last shot, and step it up, or we are all doomed. You've had some beef with fatchunk before, and voted him twice already -- sure some things have changed, but I don't see why is it hard for you now to at least scrutinize him and his play. If you are concerned about botching your answers from before -- well, come out and explain what happened. A townie loses nothing by being honest. See, when I carelessly made up cool story about sipping coffee while the voteswitch occurred, I got called out for it -- but a clear explanation in good faith can go a long way. Staying quiet is not going to help you, and most definitely does not help town, so the longer you remain clammed up, the worse it is for all of us. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Anyhow my vote was clearly to get you in here and has achieved its objective. Stick around, yah? ##Unvote I like the vote balance as is; under the 1 scum, 1 town hypothesis, both orange and FC have equal incentive to come out and talk to us. Let's hope we may learn something more, yet. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 30 2012 01:35 cDgCorazon wrote: Show nested quote + On December 30 2012 01:25 cakepie wrote: I like the vote balance as is; under the 1 scum, 1 town hypothesis, both orange and FC have equal incentive to come out and talk to us. Let's hope we may learn something more, yet. Do you really feel like theyre both going to defend themselves? Orange hasn't even defended himself at all the whole game. FC has done a little work defending himself, but they've been inconsistent and weak. If you go out and attack Orange, he just kind of sits there and posts other things, pretending your argument is not even there. That's why I've been after him since D2. He's afraid to rise to the challenge of defending himself, and just hopes that no one notices his lack of defending himself. At least FC has done a few things to try to prove he's not scum, even if they aren't very convincing. I'm not saying FC is 100% town, but I think Orange is still the most likely scum, trying to get FC to be lynched. Well, being bad at defending oneself isn't a new problem in this game: + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 10:04 threesr wrote: Wow chrome is so good at defending me. On December 20 2012 10:04 threesr wrote: <3 chrome On December 20 2012 10:05 Chromatically wrote: You're pretty bad at defending yourself. On December 20 2012 10:05 threesr wrote: That goes without saying Of course, we know how that turned out. I don't want to read too much into ability or willingness to defend oneself. If attacking them did not work before, why should we expect continued attacks to yield any different results? The point of the 1 scum / 1 town hypothesis is, if we're making a terrible mistake with the theory of Kick/orange/FC scumteam, and one, or even both of them is innocent, they have nothing to lose in talking to us (we're close to lynching them!) and everything to lose by staying silent (we mislynch, shit happens, town loses). | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
A couple loose ends before I sign out for the night: 1. Can someone else try formulating a townie hypothesis for FC? Although I expect it will be quite a challenge. 2. Implicit in 1 scum/1 town is that there is one more scum hiding among the remaining five besides orange/FC. So, qualified scumhunt, gogogo. (Please clearly indicate that you are working on 1 scum/1 town assumption) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 30 2012 04:32 FatChunk wrote: Quick Q to orange: who is your 3rd scumread after myself? If you are town you should have a good idea. Now, being in my shoes, I am telling you that there is one more scum out there besides orangeremi. I know this isnt too helpful but please consider sylencia. And what are your reads apart from orangeremi and sylencia? We can grant that you were lazy and posted with very low frequency, but if you are town and care enough about winning you should be more concerned right now, and step up your play a bit. I'm not asking you to play with mocsta-exuberance or write super long posts like some of mine, but you'll need to give more reads and build better justification for your cases -- I can understand if you feel that writing more on orange would be beating a dead horse, but what of syl? Play to win. This means you play your best to help your team win while you are alive and in the game. Right now, assuming you are still playing to win, I can explain your play better with a scum hypothesis than a town hypothesis. I'm going to need more convincing before I will consider a Syl case stronger than a FC case. ----- @Sylencia you need to get in here and respond to Corazon [edit before post] oh good, you're here. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 30 2012 04:32 FatChunk wrote: Now, being in my shoes, I am telling you that there is one more scum out there besides orangeremi. I know this isnt too helpful but please consider sylencia. Actually, it is clear that you very strongly believe that orangeremi is scum, even if your justification is minimal. Care back up your strongest scumread with your vote? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
My putting out the 1-1 theory has two key aims: - provides a failsafe in case orange/FC scumteam is a horrible mistake. It is pretty much a last chance for one or even both of them, if town, to step up and prevent this game from being basically lost by a mislynch on themselves. - it keeps the discussion going. The lessons of D2 are ever in my mind, and in D3 I did not manage to move the discussion despite my questioning. Let's be honest, we caught a lucky break from Kickstart's play. Sure both aqua and I explicitly said to push orange, then FC -- but I will not allow us to all vote orange and twiddle our thumbs for 48 hours! | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
General consensus seemed to have strongest suspicions on orange and FC, and a kick/orange/fc scumteam was at the forefront. Aquanim, Chrom both mentioned at some point that it is the simplest, most obvious solution. And I actually agree. But what if we're making a mistake, and one of orange/fc is actually really just a terrible terrible townie? Corazon has pointed out already: given the way orange and FC have played so far, if we simply continued to pile on huge pressure on them, they would not have readily or capably stood up as a townie, defended themselves, and made a case that would compel us to look elsewhere. Let's be clear about this. My predawn post unequivocally states: I am actually fairly convinced that FatChunk and Orangeremi are the most likely remaining scum, and that we saw very frazzled scum in mid to late D3 in the absence of kickstart. Occam's razor says this is the simple and obvious solution (yes, in spite of me raising the possibility that there is some complex masterplan behind it). But we need an environment where we are willing to listen to orange and/or FC, whatever they choose to step out and speak about. We must not drown out what they wish to say with continued accusations and arguments against them, and we cannot simply dismiss or shut out what they are trying to tell us. We've all seen their D2 and D3 play. If we pile on the pressure, they will simply clam up, and that is not going to help us. I am not saying that we should simply accept what they tell us. But give them a chance to speak, and think on it. Also think of it as insurance in case orange or FC turns out to be a mislynch -- at least, we'll have kept the discussion going in a useful direction. Right now, I still want to push both orange and FC to be lynched, in whichever order. But let's see what they have to say, shall we? At least, FatChunk has come out, and as you can see, I'm looking to get more from him. In particular, will he commit to a vote on orangeremi? If not, then who else is more suspicious? ----- I'll be back after lunch. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 30 2012 15:41 FatChunk wrote: Will post once more with lots of time before the lynch, but it looks like its me or orangeremi. thus i will save my post on sylencia, shz, for the next days' discussion. No, you may not survive till tonight, let alone tomorrow. We might lynch you yet, or you might be killed overnight, denying us the information. Give us your content on syl and shz NOW. If you are still around tomorrow and something changed, then you can update your views at that time. But everything you have, at this time, needs to come out now, and not later -- if you are actually town, there is nothing to be gained from holding back. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 30 2012 15:27 shz wrote: @cakepie: Okay. So if I understand your post correctly: You think FC and Orange are scum, but the 1-1 theory is there to provide for discussion before hopping on a wagon with 24h to go? Yes, and also as an insurance policy to make sure that we have information to work with in case one of them turns out to be a mislynch. No one should be trying to prove the 1-1 theory. It is not a case, it is a supposition, a platform to enable useful discussion. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 30 2012 13:24 cDgCorazon wrote: I kind of felt like the 1-1 theory seemed to be true. I honestly thought that we were going with it. I apologize for not being clear about the intentions behind the 1-1 hypothesis. I thought I made it clear in my predawn that kick+orange+FC was still the simple and obvious solution. Thank you very much for your Dec 20 8:37 post, too -- lest it seems underappreciated. ----- @ FatChunk On December 30 2012 12:33 cakepie wrote: you'll need to give more reads and build better justification for your cases -- I can understand if you feel that writing more on orange would be beating a dead horse, but what of syl? ----- @ all On December 30 2012 13:32 Chromatically wrote: I think that everyone agrees that the 1-1 thingy is possible or probable. I don't think that we should focus on it today, though. We can looks a associations and the like to find the second scum once we have a red flip, which we should focus on getting today. Let's try to lynch scum today rather than worry about lynching it tomorrow. Chrom is right (emphasis is mine). While we wait on more from FC, and anything at all from orange, let's not forget to work out who we should lynch first out of the two. Personally, I am setting myself a lynch-10h deadline to see what FC gives us -- he has promised: Will post once more with lots of time before the lynch And he'd better not try to ransom his life in exchange for the information he claims to have. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 29 2012 16:53 cakepie wrote: This is setup speculation. It is intended provide information that would help decide whether it is right to role claim or not. It is not intended to guide our continuing scumhunting discussion. + Show Spoiler + 7 players remain: I see two most likely setup possibilities in my mind: - 5 town vs 2 scum, with town RB and scum RB or - 4 town vs 2 scum vs SK, with town RB, scum RB and one more blue role (I see cop more likely than X-shot vig due to framer.) Note 1: SK also aims to scumhunt early game, and wants to maintain town : mafia ratio within certain bounds while blending in. Note 2: one kill in N3 could have been an incredibly patient and confident SK, or a successful RB blocking either scum KP or SK KP. Do not discount the possibility of scum RB blocking SK. Remember, mafia start with the knowledge of alignments, but do not know the distribution of power roles to begin with. Thus far they have managed to take out mocsta, who stuck his neck out too far, but have subsequently gone after most threatening townies, who turned out to be VTs. How effective have mafia been with their RB? And if we have a cop, did the framer make a difference? The town PRs have an incredible amount of information, but we cannot squander this too easily. We cannot afford to out the blues if we may need them still. Likewise, it is important for PRs to really step up to the responsibility that comes with their role. As long as we don't mislynch into blue, we'll be in good shape for tonight. Caveat: we might also be in a different setup than the two I raised. so caution is still the best approach. tldr: Is there a watertight plan to win with very high likelihood, in any eventuality, any setup, with any scumteam, with the information we have? If not, then it is not time to roleclaim yet. I forgot one more possibility that looks balanced: + Show Spoiler + - 5 town vs 2 scum, with town RB and scum RB, and cop and godfather. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 30 2012 16:54 cDgCorazon wrote: Maybe I'm putting too much time into this game =P You and me both, good sir. This game is an incredibly scary time sink. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Currently, Orangeremi is set to be lynched! ~12 hours remaining in day 1. That can't be right, FC has more votes. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
The possibility of SK is the only thing preventing a solution to the game at this point. If we know that it is 5:2 and not 4:2:1, a foolproof solution to the game should be possible. If there is SK and we convince mafia team to concede, does the game go to 4 town vs 1 SK, or do we still have to lynch the mafia one by one (while still threatened by mafia NK if left unblocked)? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
If there is SK and we convince mafia team to concede, does the game go to 4 town vs 1 SK, or do we still have to lynch the mafia one by one (while still threatened by mafia NK if left unblocked)? I have been told that the question is not kosher. Sorry! ----- On December 29 2012 08:54 Aquanim wrote: 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. ##Vote: orangeremi This is where I shall park my vote for the night, in case I oversleep. Don't take it too seriously. Let's see what FC has to say (although he still has yet to come in again, and it is lynch-7hrs already) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 01:20 cakepie wrote: I really really hope there is no SK in this game. I can only see the game ending in EBWOP: LYLO, not Best case, we need 2 lynches to kill 2 mafia, in that time SK kills 2 town, we end up at 2 town vs 1 SK. A cop may not be helpful, SK could have investigation immunity. Off to bed for real this time | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 07:22 cDgCorazon wrote: Orange hasn't even voted yet. What do we do if he gets modkilled (or if it looks like he will get modkilled)? We will get both orange and fatchunk dead with one dayphase, two for the price of one, why not? Just be ready for a mad switch if need be -- but it will not be because of a modkill on orange. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:12 Chromatically wrote:cakepie, why are you voting Orange? I had just wanted to park my vote overnight. ----- ##Vote: FatChunk Okay, FatChunk, here's the deal. If you are VT and will claim so honestly, I might be able to save you from the lynch with pure logical deduction and zero case analysis -- if you are not lying. If you are lying, then you deserve to die anyway. If you are going to claim something else -- I already saw it a mile away as the last possible, logical scum play by kick/orange/fc scumteam. That claim, coming so last minute is going to look ridiculously scummy. It may extend your life, but it will not help you win as scum. You may only seek to help an SK win, if there is one -- mafia team kingmaker, possibly. I am playing safe and looking for the win if possible, trying to preserve a little insurance against the small remaining possibility of SK in the game, even though general consensus is there is likely to be none. And if there is no SK in the game, kick/orange/fc is already guaranteed to lose. What is the last card in your hand? Out with it. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:27 cakepie wrote: If you are going to claim something else -- I already saw it a mile away as the last possible, logical scum play by kick/orange/fc scumteam. That claim, coming so last minute is going to look ridiculously scummy. It may extend your life, but it will not help you win as scum. You may only seek to help an SK win, if there is one -- mafia team kingmaker, possibly. EBWOP: making this last possible claim does not automatically make FC scum, it just will look very scummy coming so late. Don't preclude the possibility of FC actually being town. (Also, town wins anyway as long as there is no SK.) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:30 cDgCorazon wrote: So if you feel that way, do you think that the 1-1 theory is true? And if you do think the 1-1 theory is true, who out of the other 5 not up for lynching today would you suspect the most of being scum? Is this directed at me? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:31 cakepie wrote: Show nested quote + On December 31 2012 08:30 cDgCorazon wrote: So if you feel that way, do you think that the 1-1 theory is true? And if you do think the 1-1 theory is true, who out of the other 5 not up for lynching today would you suspect the most of being scum? Is this directed at me? On December 31 2012 08:30 cDgCorazon wrote: EBWOP: Above post was directed at Chrom. Okay, not for me. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
----- ##Vote: FatChunk Okay, FatChunk, here's the deal. If you are VT and will claim so honestly, I might be able to save you from the lynch with pure logical deduction and zero case analysis -- if you are not lying. If you are lying, then you deserve to die anyway. If you are going to claim something else -- I already saw it a mile away as the last possible, logical scum play by kick/orange/fc scumteam. That claim, coming so last minute is going to look ridiculously scummy. It may extend your life, but it will not help you win as scum. Scum FC may only seek to help an SK win, if there is one -- mafia team kingmaker, possibly. Town FC playing like this? bad play. [edit @ all This claim does not automatically make FC scum, it just will look very scummy coming so late. Don't preclude the possibility of FC actually being town. (Anyway, town very likely wins anyway as long as there is no SK.) ] I am playing safe and looking for the win if possible, trying to preserve a little insurance against the small remaining possibility of SK in the game, even though general consensus is there is likely to be none. And if there is no SK in the game, kick/orange/fc is already guaranteed to lose. FATCHUNK: What is the last card in your hand? Out with it. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:33 FatChunk wrote: @cake Well I've been claiming town all along. so yes, I am VT. Okay, assuming that roleblocked claims are true: TOWN RB - If you detect any roleblock claims to be false, you need to step up and lynch the liar. - if the Town RB has a name starting with C -- you need to step forward and save FatChunk now. - if the Town RB does not have a name starting with C... sorry, fatchunk, you lied. Explanation coming soon. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + N1: 22 09:08 cake 22 13:36 omni 23 08:45 shz N2: 26 09:16 cake 26 18:51 orange N3: 29 15:39 syl 30 04:32 fatchunk General consensus in this game is to lynch liars -- there is no place for lying townies in a newbie game. Townies have no incentive to lie about roleblocked claims. Scum cannot afford to lie about roleblocked claims -- they could be called out for it by town RBs. ----- (0) mocsta is a jailer, omni is VT (1) N2 -> either cake and orange are both RBs, or both are not RBs. (2) N3 -> either syl and fatchunk are both RBs, or both are not RBs. (3) (0)+(1)+N1 -> both cake and shz are not RBs (4) (1)+(3) -> orange is not RB. (5) (3+4) = {cake, orange, shz} are not RBs. (6) (5)+(2) -> the only possible townRB + scumRB pairs are (syl & fatchunk) and (chrom & corazon) (H1) FatChunk claims VT to avoid being lynched (H1)+(6) only a town RB claim from chrom and corazon can save FatChunk now. ------ (more in a bit) | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
The sole danger is that they are SK fakeclaiming Town RB, to keep mafia alive a while longer, and playing for SK win. I will use variables C1 and C2 here since it could be either way round: Between Chrom and Corazon, let's say C1 claims Town RB, but C2 smells a rat. C2 as a townie must counterclaim honestly. I am betting against Chrom+Corazon being 1 mafia 1 SK, so this should be safe. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:50 Chromatically wrote: I don't follow your logic, cakepie. Why would an RB claim save FC? Because under the reasonable assumption that roleblocked claims are all truth, then for FC to be VT, then the two roleblockers must be chrom+corazon. If roleblocked claims contain faked, then all bets are off. But I don't think that is the case. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:53 Chromatically wrote: Why does this say anything about FC being Goon? VT, not Goon. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:55 cDgCorazon wrote: ##Vote: FatChunk On December 31 2012 08:56 Chromatically wrote: Lies Corazon, I am town RB, you are scum with FC. Full claim with crumbs in a sec. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
| ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:04 Sylencia wrote: OH FFS ARE YOU SERIOUS WE JUST LOST A COP WHEN WE COULD'VE JUST WON THE GAME BY DOING A ROLECHECK ON EITHER ONE OF THE ROLEBLOCKERS. THIS SO VERY MUCH. WTF! | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
Chrom, I am so glad you were on point, because I had a fatal flaw in my logic that you saw through and pointed out in time. I knew that town RB had the game won as long as he did due diligence with the roleclaim logic. But I was wrong about who town RB was (and a whole boatload of other things to boot, as Hapa would know). | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:45 Dandel Ion wrote: Show nested quote + On December 31 2012 09:42 cDgCorazon wrote: [...] How was I supposed to know Chrom was RB? You could have known by looking at roleblocks by night 3 IIRC. This. But even with this information, you could not have safely come out to save FC anyways, even with my flawed logic. And we'd have lynched FC and found you easily soon after. Don't beat yourself up over it. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
I made exactly one breadcrumb. Anyone found it? | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
In any case went back to look over what he did, and am sharing this analysis for the lessons to be taken from it -- we are all trying to learn in this game after all. Poor Orange, I really hope this game doesn't scar him for life and deter him from trying again in the future. Note: Hindsight is 20/20. This is not intended to assign blame. (We won, after all.) ----- So, I had a newbie cop read on him for the way he was behaving D1 -- patient yet uncertain, he gave me a vibe of waiting for something "concrete" and "convincing". On December 23 2012 21:16 Orangeremi wrote: However, none of my suspicions from then compare with how convinced I am with my D2 vote. After viewing Chrom's evidence towards Omni and then reviewing it myself, there's no way he's town. But he got really screwed over by the frame on OmniEulogy -- a wicked good play by scum right there. He does his due diligence based on mocsta's association case and his investigation result, but is cautious about the weakness of the case: + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 14:01 Orangeremi wrote: @cake I'm interested in his theory regarding you+OE+Chrom scum team, but I don't know how much credibility it has. And he definitely smelled the same thing that I did re:kickstart blue hunting: + Show Spoiler + On December 22 2012 17:38 Orangeremi wrote: The one thing I'm trying to figure out is his reaction to cake 'claiming blue role' and the possible implications. It's a very plausible towny reaction, but could it be something else? But he had to test the veracity of his investigation. Hence his reaction to the D2 mislynch: On December 24 2012 17:51 Orangeremi wrote: I'm flabbergasted that Omni turned town. This really puts a wrench in things for me. I did take note of how this alludes to mocsta's posts + Show Spoiler + On December 21 2012 22:21 Mocsta wrote: I do not mean this to be facetious; however I was genuinely not expecting that type of post from you. Its thrown a spanner in the works for me. I am going to have to digest this before jumping to a conclusion. Man I wish this wasn't Friday night, will look into it when I get home On December 21 2012 23:26 Mocsta wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2012 21:23 Orangeremi wrote: Couldn't the same be said for scum and possible blue roles? And what's the difference between information revealed earlier as opposed to later? It's revealed regardless. I do not mean this to be facetious; however I was genuinely not expecting that type of post from you. Its thrown a spanner in the works for me. I am going to have to digest this before jumping to a conclusion. [Sarcasm is not intended] I dismissed it as WIFOM, but was he trying to softclaim blue? In any event, by this time he had been relying too much on his PR and had not tried hard enough to do basic scumhunting in thread, and so has nothing to work with: + Show Spoiler + On December 24 2012 20:43 Orangeremi wrote: Chrom's going to come under pressure (understandably) but I do think we need to pressure the less active players come next Day phase. I'm really thrown for a loop right now and don't know what to think. Looking over filters and after recent events I'm stumped On December 24 2012 23:15 Orangeremi wrote: I'm not really looking to throw names out there if I'm not confident after that lynch. I'm sticking with my statement that lurkers need to come out before anything else. I think the existence of framer drove his reverse psychology processes into overdrive starting around this time (which I noted in my town hypothesis on him) Fatal error: still does not do any useful scumhunting over the extra-long night phase. AND gets roleblocked by Chrom. Must be feeling really screwed over about now. This is what happens when you start looking scummy from not scumhunting at all! His gut feel is so close here!: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 01:59 Orangeremi wrote: I'm really curious if that's the best course of action, Corazon. You seem to just have a hit list that ultimately will lessen the size of town more than anything. Doesn't seem all too beneficial to me. The overwhelming vote count for Kick right now leads me to believe the scum are just hopping on his wagon. If he was actually scum, wouldn't the mafia would find another player to try and start a wagon for to save him. But that isn't happening. I think we need to reevaluate. In the meantime I'm going back to one of my initial reads. ##Vote: FatChunk But: + Show Spoiler + 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. Y U NO SCUMHUNT? His guts were right, but I think he could have been leaning too much on the cop power as a crutch. So all he has are gut feelings on Kick, FatChunk, shz, and to a lesser extent, corazon. This sums up what I think was going on through his head as he switches votes -- muddled by reverse psych speculation: + Show Spoiler + On December 30 2012 01:14 cakepie wrote: When the voteswitch happens, he still really does not think scum would bus scum kick, and is convinced therefore that kick is town. But numerically, the only way to avoid kick being lynched was to hope that the alternative shz wagon would work -- the FC wagon, which he would have preferred, certainly wasn't going anywhere. This explains his exasperation at Chrom for moving from FC to shz. Which is a terrible shame, really, since it was the last straw that attracted all the attention onto himself, in addition to his incredible lack of scumhunting. He calls attention to the framer flip: On December 28 2012 09:07 Orangeremi wrote: And tries to confirm a cop in play:On December 28 2012 09:48 Orangeremi wrote: It goes unnoticed, and would be WIFOM anyway.Show nested quote + On December 28 2012 09:45 Sylencia wrote: Having a framer in play suggests there's a Cop in play, right? That would only make sense On December 28 2012 10:01 Orangeremi wrote: We have a night to go through, and the options to lynch will shrink. It might be simpler to decide then. "Hey, without a framer around, I'll be able to do whatever I want and carry town to victory, right?" Wrong. Incredibly on point here: On December 28 2012 11:44 Orangeremi wrote: I'm not that stupid. I don't think any of the combinations are correct, but FC is most likely. But his partner ? As we now all know, he knew that he could not simply check FC, and then come out with his investigation on FC as basis to lynch FC. He did not have anything to back the case up with, and did not have the towncred to pull it off, plus he risked being killed in the nightphase for his cop claim. So he actually did the best that he could: try to find FC's scum partner: + Show Spoiler + On December 28 2012 22:20 Orangeremi wrote: Show nested quote + On December 28 2012 12:12 cakepie wrote: @orange: Assume not all scum is stupidly trying to swing onto shz. Who is scum initiating/moving with Kickstart onto shz: chrom, FC, or neither? And where in the Kick wagon is the remaining scum hiding? If both FC and chrom are misguided townies, what was Kickstart up to? How has he managed to misdirect both FC and yourself onto chrom's case? And who among the Kick wagon would you finger as the two likely scum, looking to gain town cred off of Kickstart's 'sacrifice' play? 1) I'm leaning towards neither, unless it's just bad scum play. If I had to choose, it'd be FC since he hopped on last and could use that fact as an excuse. 2) I wouldn't say I'm on chrom's case. I am suspicious because of that move, but his motives seem sound. I don't understand what Kickstart was doing AT ALL. The only thing I can think is that the rest of the mafia planned this lynch to avoid their own suspicion. The wagoners? I don't know, Syl and Aqua seemed to hop on that train with little initiative and rode it undercover. With what they've contributed, I'm surprised they haven't been nk'd yet. I still want to wait to see who gets killed tonight. I'm really curious who they'll pick. It was pretty clear to everyone that Aqua was going to get killed if he was town. So he checked Syl, and was prepared to finger Aquanim, if aquanim somehow lived. Too bad that his reverse psychology didn't work out correctly. Corazon had done a really good job of being hidden. And despite my townie hypothesis to support him coming out, he could not -- he had nothing! ----- I feel like if I had further developed my cop hypothesis, I might have found something. But that is pure speculation with the benefit of hindsight. Truth is, I did not have the clarity of vision to want to try to develop an Orange cop hypothesis, because a) I did not want to out blues, b) I had another competing cop read, c) I knew that in the absence of SK, town RB already wins the game for us. It's a good thing scum stuck to killing Aqua and not me. I don't even want to imagine the WIFOM if Aqua lived and orange fingered him. I can totally see Aqua and Corazon piling on to orange for the OMGUS value, and I don't know if Chrom would have enough clout to prevent a mislych of Orange. ----- GG orange. You tried to do what you could in N3, but it was too late. I hope we all learn from what happened here, and I hope it does not scare you from playing again. And we would all do well to remember not to rely too much on powers. Information gained from powers cannot be revealed openly until late in the game when a roleclaim becomes necessary. Fundamental scumhunting is bread and butter for town and blue alike, in order to build strong cases. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 12:49 cakepie wrote: Fundamental scumhunting is bread and butter for town and blue alike, in order to build strong cases. Also brush and floss daily! So cheesy when I read it again. ----- I know I'm just a boring VT, but if anyone would go over my play and critique specific bits I would really appreciate it! I already know my logical flaw, which Chrom caught: FC could be anything other than RB and still lead to Chrom+Cora RB pair. I was tunneling too hard at FC as one of (scum RB, town RB, or VT) with confirmation bias from Syl's roleblock accounting attempts (town RB read) to see the other possibilities. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 31 2012 13:06 Hapahauli wrote: Also, while I really liked your roleblock analysis, be careful of making too many assumptions in your analysis. You had Syl pegged as the "town RB" and it was pretty clearly wrong. Try to avoid setup/blue-role speculation without very concrete and straightforward information. The game is more about scum-hunting than anything else. Yeah, that was a really awful flaw in the logic. Although I had thoroughly convinced myself that a town RB who had responsibly accounted for the roleblocked claims would clearly know who the scum RB was and could win the game out, I did not check off all the possible role-speculation possibilities, and relied too heavily on unreliable reads to peg the roles. With the benefit of scum QT I can now see the insane self-propagating bias that arose out of me asking FC for his reasoning, prompting his case against syl that only added more confirmation bias to my FC+syl RB pair read. Still a confirmation bias problem, even after pointing it out myself earlier in the game. =/ Before-lynch thought process:
----- On December 31 2012 13:28 Dandel Ion wrote: Sure, the mafia could have deduced him too, even earlier. But they didn't and there's really no reason to point their attention towards it. Some things you don't need to immedeatly share with everyone. This. Hapa kept reminding me that scum may not have figured everything out yet, with this being a newbie game. He was right. I kept assuming the worst, which was that scum had already figured the roleblockers out. They didn't, and we won based on that. I am acutely aware that I could have lost us a won game right there. If I had come out earlier with this BS logic, I think scumteam could have digested the information and tried to WIFOM play around it. Chrom might have ended up having a hard time convincing us (shz, sylencia and myself) given the suspicion that had been thrown his way for shepherding the shz voteswitch. So the timing was fortituous, in that scum did not have time to digest the information. Clearly, the effort is a step in the right direction, I just need to direct my efforts more carefully and efficiently. This game will serve as a reminder to myself to do just that. ----- On roleblocked claims: Coming out with the analysis too early was a mistake, but am I right to say that in general it is a good policy for roleblocked claims to be aired out openly? If townies don't lie about it, then scum are also forced to honestly declare when they are roleblocked... right? Is there any circumstance in which town would want to lie about roleblocks? I imagine it would be convoluted and would involve multiple powers, like in a theme game perhaps. The obvious downside is that the information is open for both town and scum to see, and I'm sure in a non-newbie game scum would have figured out our blues easily from the information available as of D4. | ||
cakepie
985 Posts
On January 23 2013 16:19 Aquanim wrote: Show nested quote + 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 I'm fairly certain we'd still have tried to lynch Kickstart on D3 without Yamato replacing in -- I know that was my intention after reflecting on D2 -- but I can't be certain that we'd manage to take him down without the added impetus that Yamato provided. As it was it did come down to the wire; we very nearly mislynched Shz. Also if Threesr did not get replaced out but stayed in the game, I think he would have been a distracting, if not destructive presence, and it would be quite likely for us to waste a lynch on him at some point in days 3~5. Seriously, replacement OP. As for solving the game based on cop checks, I don't think it would have been likely at all -- investigations were very effectively stifled N1+2, and Orange certainly could not come out with a cop claim on D4 since he had hardly any useful information, plus the fact that we'd already lost our only protective role, the JK, when mocsta died N1. Also note that this hinges greatly on a successful lynch of Kickstart D3, otherwise the cop checks could not be trusted -- Orange himself knew there was a framer in play based on the Omni mislynch. Furthermore, Orange had pretty poor towncred by D4, due to voting with Kickstart, it would have been really hard to turn that sentiment around, he'd have had to step up his play incredibly to pull it off. On the other hand if things happened differently he might not have been under such heavy suspicion on D4, so who knows? Rather than Cop powers, I think it was roleblocks that played a far greater role in this game. In any case, Threesr staying in game would have given us quite a different dynamic, so it is really hard to speculate about what might have happened in that case. Last thing: you give me waaay too much credit, I nearly screwed us over with that last minute stuff. Seriously, Chromaticity had Corazon nailed even before I did, plus he used his role well; he really should get more props for that. | ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
Rogue vs CreatorLIVE!
Rogue vs Reynor
Reynor vs Solar
Reynor vs Dark
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games Organizations StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • Berry_CruncH80 StarCraft: Brood War• practicex 47 • aXEnki • intothetv • Gussbus • Kozan • IndyKCrew • LaughNgamez Trovo • Laughngamez YouTube • Migwel • Poblha League of Legends |
Online Event
ESL Pro Tour
OSC
OSC
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
TerrOr vs Sziky
Nyoken vs Zhanhum
DaveTesta Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
[ Show More ] BSL
Bonyth vs StRyKeR
DragOn vs MiStrZZZ
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
PassionCraft
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
Korean StarCraft League
|
|