|
With respect, you are not listening.
From my perspective, there is no greater scum tell than lurking. This is not only because scum tend to lurk, but because the consequences of leaving it until the next day are more dire. On top of this, the percentage chance of lynching that scummy player and him actually being scum, is very low. Scum have control of the first lynch if you base it on active but scummy reads.
While XXXIII may seem an accessible counter example (we were ready to lynch a scum day one, and I intervened), this is not an accurate statistical representation. Day one scum lynch is a dream, and it is as winmore as it gets. Yes the game is easy if you catch a scum day one, but it's not likely to happen and the win-rate is to be had from planning for day two.
Also. the chance to hit scum is 25% (2/8), not 22% (2/9). When I stick with a LAL policy I do not intend on being one of those that are eligible.
|
EBWOP
@Sylencia
With respect, you are not listening.
From my perspective, there is no greater scum tell than lurking. This is not only because scum tend to lurk, but because the consequences of leaving it until the next day are more dire. On top of this, the percentage chance of lynching that scummy player and him actually being scum, is very low. Scum have control of the first lynch if you base it on active but scummy reads.
While XXXIII may seem an accessible counter example (we were ready to lynch a scum day one, and I intervened), this is not an accurate statistical representation. Day one scum lynch is a dream, and it is as winmore as it gets. Yes the game is easy if you catch a scum day one, but it's not likely to happen and the win-rate is to be had from planning for day two.
Also. the chance to hit scum is 25% (2/8), not 22% (2/9). When I stick with a LAL policy I do not intend on being one of those that are eligible.
|
On January 04 2013 00:37 jampidampi wrote:Spaghetticus + Show Spoiler +
Regarding the QT question: If he was scum, he would have gotten the QT link with his role PM. Would anyone ask something they already know of? Or was it a way to get his scumbuddy to come to the QT? It is all just speculation, but I hope everyone here would have the brains to check out the QT from their PM.
Leaning towards town
I think you misunderstand what the accusation is. Mocsta is proposing that as a scum, I asked a question that I already knew the answer to, in order to imply that I did not know the answer and therefore could not possibly be scum. He thinks I was soft claiming town.
|
On January 04 2013 16:26 jampidampi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 08:38 OmniEulogy wrote:After reading the following something feels off, it might be a language barrier thing but + Show Spoiler +From jampidampi: Regarding the QT question: If he was scum, he would have gotten the QT link with his role PM. Would anyone ask something they already know of? Or was it a way to get his scumbuddy to come to the QT? It is all just speculation, but I hope everyone here would have the brains to check out the QT from their PM.
Leaning towards town Something in that bolded area seems off to me. @Jampi could you clarify when you say everybody should check the QT link they get in their PM? The OP provided the role PMs for each role. In the scum role PMs there is a direct link to the scum QT. Anyone rational would at least check out the link and post there once to get commucating between his scumpartner going. After all, mafias greatests strength is their information and the possibility of communication. Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 13:47 Mocsta wrote:+ Show Spoiler +(1) I would like if you could answer the new questions I addressed to you: @Jampidampi You said you prefer a postcount to post quality ratio skewed in favour of post quality. Why does your post regarding these three people aid towns scumhunt? What makes this a "quality" post? The only other person you have identified in your contributions is StriX; the questions are vague at best however. - If StriX remains your primary target, I would like to see you direct more questions his way to develop your profile on him.
- If StriX has fallen down the pecking order, I would like to know what has changed your mind.
(2) What is your take on the Sylencia/zarepath exchange of words (and vote(s))? It was a post of me sharing my weak town reads. I asked the coaches if I should share weak reads, but since they were slow to answear and I was impatient, I went ahead and posted it (they said I shouldn't share weak town reads). It may help others when considering who to scumhunt. I do agree that the post lacks some quality. I will write my suspicions of/questions to StriX in a separate post to make it more clear. Zarepath may just have a little bit of tunnel vision. It's good that he's bringing those points up, but I'm statisfied with the answears Sylencia gave.
Is the following question allowed?
Do not respond until I have an answer from mod.
Jampi. You claim to have talked to a coach that was not quick to respond. Tell me when you posted and when the response came.
I am going to McDonalds to take advantage of their air-con, it is the hottest day ever recorded where I live, I have glanced over the thread up until now but have not taken notes. When I return I will make some more committed action. If this play is allowed it could be game breaking. If you are town you have nothing to fear so long as the mod allows a response.
|
#Vote: TeMiL
I'm still reading and writing, but upon reading the vote update I thought it best to give my vote. This vote is a pressure vote but is not to be taken lightly. My vote shall rest on you TeMiL until you give more content than the next lurkiest player. State your scum reads (not your town reads). Make arguments. Put pressure on someone. If you are town do not go survival mode. Do what you think is best for town regardless of what you think will help you survive day one, this is both better for town and better for your survival, whether you realise it or not.
This vote is conditional but deadly serious. Contribute.
|
Lol, was meaning for me to be the second vote, I don't sound nearly as intimidating when I'm by myself. Still pretty serious.
|
Quick reply @Moc
In my mind I do not contradict myself, but I often pick up lingo and have my own understanding of it. My vote is a 'pressure vote' in so far as it is meant to pressure. My vote also represents my very real intention to lynch TeMiL on the condition that TeMiL does not improve his play.
If the term 'pressure vote' is categorised mutually exclusive to 'intent to lynch', then I apologise for my misleading communication. My vote is both real and intended to pressure. I think votes that are only meant to apply pressure do not work vs good players, and weaken one's own position as rational/analytic town, and consequently, one's agenda (be that scummy or town). I do not vote without intent to lynch.
|
I just took ages to write this, copied it, hit F5, and realised it is probably less relevant than I intended. Thus, I will emphasise the part near the end where I point out that while your need is not urgent in relation to me (and now is less urgent in the eyes of the town), your response is critical to the direction town takes in day two.
+ Show Spoiler +@Zare
Your recent call for attention speaks of a confidence of action that suggests you consider yourself transparent town. This is good, but (and I haven't read your filter) my impression is that you have not contributed enough to be considered transparent. With the pressure of votes on you, I appreciate that you are keeping the town's best interest in mind when you don't spill your guts in an OMGUS defense (others take note).
It is hard to maintain composure when your scum-reads come after you, I know this all too well. If you argue against your accusers in an objective interpretation of the game, I will listen and not call you on OMGUS. Realise, however, that the onus is on you to step up and be super analytical. If you try anything less than rational you will likely be torn to shreds (a prediction, not a threat). I may be reading too far into this, as I got lynched under similar circumstances last game, but I feel that your position will be the catalyst for the outcome of day one.
I will likely not be voting for you day one, but your responses could potentially be the launchpad for a day two campaign. I will continue to LAL, which, considering the pressure you are under, will likely not include you.
|
Mocsta I will PM you after the game (Mod warning + not a good idea anywho). I could talk all day about this shit. I love it <3
|
@TeMiL
If you stick around after we're both out, I would like to talk to you also. //fluff
|
Hmmm...
While I agree with Mocsta's conclusion I arrived there by very different means. In fact, I had entirely forgotten TeMiL's English being his second language. This, coupled with Mocsta's convergent OC, makes me reconsider TeMiL in a few ways which I will need time to straighten out. I am also going through the majority of the thread again, and was planning on trawling filters, so a clear and confident position is not to be expected from me for at least a few hours.
Basically, I am thinking of switching my vote to one of the other two lurkers (Strix or Jampi). My reasoning is convoluted even to me, I'm gonna need pen and paper for this one.
My filter trawling will be looking at second guessing the presumed activity levels of certain players, to guard against the possibility of 'active lurkers' or disregarding inactive players that contribute.
As a heads up. If I do switch my vote, it will likely be to Strix. I appreciate your position as an analytic strategist, but it is best for both town and you as a player if you learn to actively contribute [b]while[b/] generating a master-stroke. I am tempted to do exactly as you do, but while I generate my reads I see the need to interact and contribute. You will get lynched if you do not participate. This (again) is not a threat but an educated prediction. Being an analyst I assume you have some reads by now, and that by allowing yourself to be more transparent it is well within your means to push the LAL vote(s) onto Jamp or back onto TeMiL.
|
Ew. I didn't realise how little time we had. I don't like Mocsta's absence, as it both deprives us of a valued player and seems to contribute to the possibility of bandwagon play. Mocsta's post would actually be really scummy if it weren't completely legitimate for his timezone. I would be looking at going to bed soon too if sleep was even a sliver of a possibility in this heat. Oh well, I guess that's good for my game XD
Mocsta, if you are still about, what do the numbers mean? How do you define 'in session'? And what is the other, bigger number? Could you please spell this out for me please?
|
Thank you Syl, I appreciate it.
@Jampi
I will go through your filter before I make a decision to switch, Strix claims a similar position and I will treat you equally.
While I have not yet gone through your filter, my impression is that regardless of your post quality, it is not enough. Remember, your first (but not only) priority is to confirm yourself as town. If you confirm yourself as town we will not mislynch you. In order to accurately appraise you we need information, and that is achieved by you providing input. From the rest of town's perspective, your inactivity is suspicious. Town is an emotional beast that is subject to the machinations of a calculating minority. By not contributing actively you are giving scum the opportunity to mislynch you before you can complete your perfect case. Do not give them that chance. Spend time securing short term goals in order to actualise long term ones.
|
TeMiL drop the countries connection. Nobody will listen (for a reason), and it might get you lynched. Any correlation between countries and pressure or roles is entirely coincidental. The only exception I can think of is you. You are coming under fire due to your English communication skills, which is strongly associated to where you come from. Freude would have a field day speculating as to whether your approach to Mafia is some sort of preemptive damage control.
Drop the countries thing.
|
Well... this is embarrassing. I had these two posts in my word document ready to go, and almost deleted them before I realised I probably hadn't posted them yet.
|
I'm pretty sure this was in reply to Sylencia, I could be mistaken
Spag: What is to stop scum from controlling which lurker gets voted? Couldn't you argue that they would actually have more power, since they know which lurker, if any, is the other member of their team, and then just push for whichever other candidates there are?
________________________________________
On January 04 2013 00:20 Spaghetticus wrote:
I play for the long game, and think little of the chance of day one scum lynches.
________________________________________
Why do you push for a random lynch on day 1 over something such as no lynch (even though I explained earlier, does not give information)? You want to play for the long game, but killing off random players pushes the game into a faster pace, where we could end up losing on Night 3 if all goes wrong (all mislynches, a night kill per night). Rereading what I just wrote from this sentence, I have a feeling I'm misinterpreting what you're saying here, so feel free to correct me, but it just sounds rather contradictory to me to have these two actions.
It is not a random lynch. Lurking benefits scum, and is therefore not pro-town behaviour. Lurking is scummy, though town can do it too. The chances of a scum read off other factors are lower [I think, this is not a known statistic to me]. Scum want lurkers alive day two, as they are an easy mislynch when under pressure, it’s akin to having a ‘get out of jail free’ card. Getting a kill on two active towns before day two comes round is the scum dream, and by lynching active players you are walking straight into this likely trap, making their best case scenario a likelihood.
“Hypothetical” Scenario:
Three lurkers
Three moderately active players
Three active players
An active player is lynched day one, and active player is NKed night one. That leaves 1-3 ‘free’ mislynches and one threat that will possibly be eliminated night two (depending on medic availability and competence). This is a strongly scum favoured scenario and by leaving lurkers until day two you are making this possibility a probability.
There is at best a 25% chance to lynch scum day one if going for an active townie (my estimate is a lot less). The chances of a successful NK action on night one are pretty high too.
Note that regardless of where the two scum fall within the lurker spectrum, this position is fantastic for them. They always have the option to ‘improve’ when required to keep ahead of lazy town lurkers, just like Corazon did in XXXIII. Your day two lurker lynch will also be pretty unproductive, and a successful NK on night two would seal the deal.
You might say that this is a lot of mights (haha). This is true. But make serious considerations of the math behind it and you will realise that playing for an successful lynch day one is a gambit where you don’t know which pieces do what, or even which pieces belong to whom. You have at best a 25% chance of a positive outcome (not better than a LAL vote), and every other conceivable outcome is inferior for town when compared to LAL.
On top of this, LAL is not random, as you claim. Lurking is anti-town behaviour whether it is displayed by town or scum. Everyone knows it, even the newbies. There is no interpretation here. If a town lurks, he knows he is damaging town, there is no wriggle room. Anything that damages town’s chances is scummy, making lurking a very clear scumsign, one superior to other scumsigns as a read in many ways.
|
@Mocsta in response to his question[/b]
(1) Your response to Session 2. Q2
________________________________________
Strong scum reads have already revealed a lot about themselves, and you can expect pressure on them later.
________________________________________
Care to develop this further (I do understand you said real life commitments would plague you today)
From your other posts, I am guessing you have aligned yourself along similar thoughts, but I will go through this motion for the sake of transparent play and for anyone not thinking along similar lines.
Strong scum reads only come from active players. If a player is inactive they cannot give strong reads (which is one reason why scum like to be inactive). When I refer to a strong scum read, I use this as one category under the umbrella of active player. No lurker is a ‘strong’ scum read. All active players contribute information on themselves, including their interpretation of events. The more information a person contributes, the more chances to make mistakes or contradictions exist, and thus over time, an active mafia is likely to be caught. If someone is an active player that is also a ‘strong’ scum read, you can expect that over time their guilt will compound into fool-proof cases, and they will be caught.
Lurker scum have a strength trend that is almost the opposite of this. Lurker scum that are not dealt with early get stronger. By sitting in the background a lurker scum develops an understanding of the atmosphere (in combination with his information advantage) in order to better manipulate it. He has made zero commitment to a playstyle (excluding meta information) and can thus adjust his style in order to make town mislynch. Improvements in his activity will be applauded by town (again, see XXXIII Corazon). There is no information on him so as long as people prioritise ‘strong’ scum reads over lurky scum reads, town will decapitate themselves leaving only moderately active/lurky players plus scum, which is a [b]TERRIBLE position for town. This is why I LAL, and unless you have a logical reason to disagree, you should to. I do not want a debate about this. If you have a reason to not LAL, I don’t need to hear it, as it will clutter the board, and take emphasis off of scum-hunting. We can discuss this via PM after the game if you feel you have a stronger understanding. Your vote is your own, so if you disagree with me, use your vote as you see fit.
|
TeMiL
I agree with Mocsta on TeMiL, though maybe not on whether he should be lynched for it.
- TeMiL does not have sufficient mastery of the English language to effectively play this game.
- TeMiL does not therefore have useful analysis skills, as these stem from effective interpretation of communication.
- TeMiL is therefore unable to help town. It is unfortunate but true.
- I have a complete null read on TeMiL (25% scum) other than one read: I cannot think of a possible town motive for TeMiL to talk about countries. I can think of a plausible scum explanation that pairs nicely with his communication difficulties.
TeMiL read a guide or listened to a coach when he was told that scum are supposed to mislead town with irrelevant information. For someone having difficulty with the nuances of English, talking about a geographic component to mafia fits this description perfectly.
|
@Strix
You look like you’re half way between lurking and posting fluff posts. When I skim over your filter I see nothing that looks like contribution. I am almost certainly heavily biased. If you have the time you may want to prove me wrong by highlighting some actual content from your filter? I will absolutely demand it of you come night presuming we are both still kickin’. I understand if you have other more important content to post, it is nearing lynching time so time is of the essence. Either way I expect either new content OR a defense, preferably the former.
|
@Corazon
Anything addressed to Mocsta will likely not be answered until night.
I have spoken at length about why I feel the way I do about lurky behaviour. That you have somehow missed this gargantuan effort on my part and attributed two out of the three most active player's voting actions to laziness speaks volumes to me about the depth of your efforts. Admittedly, you are the one completing the trifecta, so this is more of a riposte than an in depth analysis.
Just so you know, I have a note in my word pad about your efforts to preserve lurkers. I think our disagreement in this regard is of consequence, do not attribute my voting action to laziness.
That being said, I approve of your suspicion of Mocsta's final words before bed. I have scrutinised this action and it comes off as RL problems, but I could be biased. Is there any more that you wish to add to concerning Mocsta's scummy behaviour? It does remind me a lot of your scummy tunneling in XXXIII. Mocsta may seem untouchable now but anything you can force from him when he does make a slip such as now could be vital later on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
