EPT/in
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXIV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
/in | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
 | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
As for misdirection, from last game there were a few ways to do it. Finding a flaw in someone's argument and jumping on it, or by bringing up stuff in the last minute and trying to get people to bandwagon. Personally, I hated the last minute votes, so if possible can we please have everyone come forward with reads when you find them? Leaving to an hour left is pretty ridiculous considering how not everyone would be there to defend or to change their vote (assuming the info is good) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 03 2013 14:12 Spaghetticus wrote: (2) I did not want to look at the OP. I chose to elucidate it out of laziness, but also because of the small potential to generate discussion. There was no downside in my mind. Either that's pretty slack or pretty scum. The OP contains pretty important info like the possible setups, so if you choose to ignore the OP, it's pretty hard for you to be picking up clues people are leaving behind. On January 03 2013 13:32 TeMiL wrote: so here we go! pd: im going to learn a lot of english :D Welcome! Would you like to answer the questions which Corazon posted before? Since I haven't played with you before it would be nice to get your views on the game before we get down to the nitty gritty side of things. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
 In any case, StriX really needs to get in here and start communicating with us. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
1) More slack than scum. At a glance, it looks like it could be a really obvious scum play, but after looking at it again it looks like it's just laziness. 2) Pretty much all of us should be stepping it up. With only a couple of pages of discussion going on, it's really hard for any reads to come out. To all the first time players: Don't be scared to post. I was the first time because I didn't know what to write. I still don't know what to write. However, flying under the radar doesn't really do us any good, nor does it do you any good, that's why I'm aiming to post more than I did in my first two games, where I didn't exactly have the most input in the town. If you're town, then you should have nothing to hide from us, and telling us your thoughts will help us deduce who is and isn't town. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 03 2013 22:47 StriX wrote: 3. Zarepath at the moment - mainly due to his policy on no lynch. Town environment can be improved and giving a lynch which could potentially be a free scum kill away seems too steep a price to pay. Expanding on this, no lynch (especially on day 1) doesn't help us whatsoever. We get no information out of it, and we're stuck with most likely the same situation the next day, but with one less townie. Mafia obviously wouldn't care about this, and would welcome a no lynch with open arms. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 03 2013 11:42 Spaghetticus wrote: DO NOT LURK. IDGAF WHO PLAYS SCUMMY I WILL BE VOTING THE LURKIEST PLAYER DAY ONE PERIOD. Saying you're going to vote out the lurkiest player, combined with the scum qt question both add up to being a bit more suspicious than lazy (on the second part at least). FoS: Spag | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
The psychological impact it has one the other member is immense, especially on Day 1 where 1) They suddenly feel like the town can read through them and 2) they make desperate, and often times, stupid moves. Instead, you're going to lynch a lurker with a 2/9 chance that you hit scum. I can understand why you want to do it, but personally I just don't think it's justifiable to leave scum be and take them out the next day. Remember that people can change their perception of someone pretty quickly in this game, for better or for worse, as we saw with Cora last game. If his teammates were a bit more active, they could have easily taken out the game and a primary reason for that would've been the sudden change to him being town in our eyes. Same thing could easily happen here, and I don't want that to happen. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
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. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 04 2013 08:17 zarepath wrote: Sylencia's first post is a non-convicted declaration of his policy on lynching lurkers, which "changes depending upon the flow of the game," and ends with a hope that people don't wait until the last minute to vote or come out with new analysis. In doing so, he adds the caveat "(assuming their info is good)." Already trying to discredit in-depth analysis at the last minute. Mafia would hate last-minute vote changes, as they've already planned on and around another outcome. If one of their own is being targeted, a last-minute vote change wouldn't be in their favor as there wouldn't be enough people around to necessarily make it successful, and when their mafia flips red, it incriminates them as well. Also, his answer to Corazon's "how do mafia mislead us" post is a very vague, general one that basically says "when in the last game they misled us." No concrete new info, very non-committal on everything. Possibly scum. One of two things: This is no different to what I have written in any other opening policy vote. You can check my filters for my other games and you will see something similar written for them. Two: I've had experience from last game about last minute vote changes. They work, because people don't have enough time to digest what is written, and a lot of the time in our newbie games we have a lot of bandwagoners who just aren't completely sure of what to do. If people start shifting over, so will they. Also note I never said that it was the mafia who would start up the last minute vote. Anyone who finds 'new evidence' can easily sway others to join in on their cause, stopping the vote on a potential scum. Next post is involving him in the useless "should blues lie?" debate, with the "duh!" statement of "you can't expect cops to say 'yes' if someone asks them if they are a cop." And that's all he says. Contributes nothing, but went out of his way to do it. Possibly scum. That's because there was no discussion stemming from that. Mocsta made a statement, I disagreed with part of what he said, so I made a point referring to the part I thought was off. Next post he bandwagons on calling out Spaghetticus for the QT slip, and puts pressure on TemiL to post something. Next post he says "the only person we're waiting on now is Strix." This is basically a non-post that can be construed as being productive. Possibly scum. Continues pressure on Spaghetticus in a passive-aggressive way, then notes Strix's absence again. Possibly scum. Changes his mind on Spaghetticus "after looking at it again," but doesn't provide his reasoning. Suggests that all of us should be stepping it up, but has done literally zero stepping it up himself. Shifts attention from his noncontributions onto others' noncontributions. Also, he gives a thought about newbies posting more so as to help town out more. A little out of his way and a little sweet for my taste, especially considering the substance of what he's posted. Possibly scum. I want to hear what everyone has to say. If they are lurking, then calling them out would/should encourage them to post. There is no reason why we should completely ignore them and let them be on 0 posts, without someone explicitly saying 'get in here, you need to talk to us'. With regards to my pressure on Spag, I am confused by his words and by his actions. By mentioning conflicting views on certain issues, it means that there's possibly something more behind his game plan. If he's not being honest, it's not benefiting town at all. Next post he essentially takes credit for Mocsta's post, saying "I was going to say that same thing but I was busy reading! Good one!" This is the equivalent of a "+1". Taking credit for others' contributions without having to contribute anything, and all of these pseudo-contributions are aimed towards Spaghetticus, along with the caveat that "after looking at it again it could have just been a slip," given with no reasoning. So on the flip he has a backdoor. Possibly scum. Next post he closes that backdoor and uses a non-tell on Spaghetticus to FoS him -- his dramatic quote about lynching lurkers even if there's a good scum tell. Saying you're going to vote out the lurkiest player, especially that dramatically, is hardly a scum tell at all; and if it were, it would be a big, enormous one because it was so emphatic, and would warrant a vote over an FoS if Sylencia really believed it. During the first two days, I usually do not vote on the first 24 hours. I gave the FoS when I read what Spag said but before he defended anything he said. I give people chances to defend themselves before throwing out votes. Next post is just him saying he won't talk to Spag in real life about it -- unnecessary, flooding the thread with non-contributions. Not a relevant post to the game, but the context was about knowing Strix in real life, and was not directed at Spag. Final post is entirely on theory and policy, at a time when more than enough names are being tossed around for him to contribute something much more concrete. A waste of effort and discussion, and scummy. I'm still questioning Spag in my last post, based on (as I said before), what I believe to be conflicting statements made by him. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 04 2013 12:32 OmniEulogy wrote: How do you feel about Mocsta leading discussion and his vote on Cora? How do you feel Cora responded to the vote. How has he given himself any credibility as town afterwards. (Cora please feel free to answer this one as well) I think Cora responded pretty appropriately with regards to the sudden vote against him early on. It's fair play to base some accusations off previous behaviours, but I think Mocsta was definitely getting ahead of himself doing it when Cora had barely posted anything yet. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
(1) Which you rather choose to lynch. An active participant with a scummy vibe; or a participant who is low count poster, but each post contains a vote for someone? (2) StriX post style reminds me a bit of "Threesr". How do you think StriX should be approached to develop his story further? Please lead the discussion. 1) Your question is a very vague situation, which has the potential to be interpreted multiple ways. It needs further definition. Does the low count poster provide reasoning to each vote? Is he bandwagoning with each vote? What is the active participant doing that gives off a scummy vibe? The question you gave doesn't have an answer that cannot be interpreted many ways by different people. 2) Strix is a highly analytical player, but he is the type who prefers the 'grand reveal' style of play. He analyses posts well, and can make a compelling case - however this is all done with the rest in the dark until the time he posts. Having experience playing with him outside of TL, that is the way I have seen him play. One thing that differentiates him from threesr though is the fact he doesn't flame everyone and call them bad. Calls himself god sometimes, but no flames. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 04 2013 14:16 OmniEulogy wrote: The non-commitment and fear of putting himself out there even after making a decent case makes him the scummiest player in the game at the moment in my eyes. Is this in reference to me? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 04 2013 13:56 Mocsta wrote: In essence, I DO have firm thoughts on what happened. My revised questions to others reflects my opinion on the matter (in a subtle manner). If we have the courtesy of answering your questions straight, could you do us a favour and answer our questions straight as well? Otherwise we're just feeding you information while we get nothing back - or it's left up to us to interpret. Not what you want, especially when it can be twisted so easily. On January 04 2013 14:36 zarepath wrote: Additionally, how is asking someone to participate more scummy? That is decidedly pro-town behavior Half the points you made on me were about me trying to get people to participate. It was followed each time with "Possibly scummy." What? On January 04 2013 14:19 zarepath wrote: I still have an #FoS on Sylencia; he's answered my case at each point, but it doesn't change the tone and vibe of all of his posts put together for the first 24 hours. You gave 5-6 points as to why I was potentially scummy - one of them included the fact that I 'didn't believe' in my own read, so I didn't vote Spag. Yet you do exactly the same thing and just give an FoS on me rather than voting me outright. Your tendency to act against what you say about others really grinds me, and it's a fairly clear tell when you've done it multiple times today. ##Vote zarepath | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 04 2013 19:55 Mocsta wrote: Comments to me. + Show Spoiler + (1) Im disapointed you think the information is one-way. The information goes to all readers of the thread, this is an interesting perspective you have? (2) A lot of people in the thread are saying "I agree with Mocsta".. I think this implies I need to take a step back, and let people think for themselves. Do you not agree? Obviously not.. because the quote you put in your response, actually takes out the part I just said about taking a step back....."See here for post" Once again.. interesting perspective Sylencia.... P.S. Feel free to twist my words the way you want It takes two to tango, and I am more than willing to accept your offer to dance  Comments to zarepath + Show Spoiler + This is heading towards OMGUS very quickly. (1) In general to both, I am not a fan of ##FoS... what does it actually achieve? (OoOoO I am shaking in my boots because of a FoS) (2) I need to re-read your filter Sylencia.. but my opinion of zarepath is that he is not a threat. When I read his filter, I am currently interpretting his motives as town aligned. [Note.. I am not establishing him as a town read... this would go against what I was advising prior] (3) I am not going bother commenting on this situation in general... I think there are higher priority targets for Day 1 lynch; If you want to continue with zarepath as your vote, go ahead, its your decision. I ask that you re-evaluate his filter, do you see town motivations? If so, I suggest you start thinking of an alternative person to scum hunt. Regarding your posts, it's just the way you answered that question specifically though, where you decided to say you already had - but subtly, that I didn't like. Maybe I read the wrong post, looking for what you meant (the one with all the questions) but I didn't seem to quite understand your view on that issue. In regards to taking a step back and letting others get stuff in, of course, go ahead, it was just the issue of not knowing where you stood there that agitated me. For the issue with zarepath, I'll wait and see where it leads from here, but at the moment I'm sticking on my vote. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 04 2013 19:59 Spaghetticus wrote: 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. IIRC from NMM XXXII, we were told not to talk about talking to coaches. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 04 2013 22:41 TeMiL wrote: answering mocsta questions: (1) So far your post count reads as useless fluff. Why should I not vote for you? am a really newbie in this game, i you check others mafia games you wouldnt find me anywhere. if i get voted maybe i can loose any interest of this game but in the other case i will learn more and be more active. Saying you are a newbie doesn't get far in this game. We are all newbies. It doesn't really help you if you (semi-)threaten us about your interest in the game if we vote you out first. thanks :D actually i didnt lurker at all if u consider lurker a gamer that only entered 3 times. right now am reading everything and with my phone back ill be writing every minute A lurker is someone who is in the game, but isn't posting much. People want to have discussions with everyone, so if you aren't posting, people don't know what to think of you. On January 04 2013 23:14 TeMiL wrote: u have something agains australians or isjust causality to target him? looks like you now how to analyse a gamer. its a good brief of course and thanks to made me read it again. Most of us (5 or 6) are Australians? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
(Mocsta, this really does remind me of Axle) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 05 2013 00:28 Spaghetticus wrote: 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? Since he's in bed, I'll answer this first: Big number next to your name: total posts Small number (in session): amount of posts you made in between the two times he set. Session 3 From: 04-Jan: 0930 To: 04-Jan: 2130 So you see there's the to and from, and so I posted 4 times between those two times. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
If this is leading anywhere, you need to tell us what it is now because otherwise it is just all fluff which is considered scummy (causes confusion and it makes things harder for people to read and understand) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 03 2013 22:46 jampidampi wrote: As to why you shouldn't lynch the current me: I prefer only to post if it has a meaning. Answearing questing and asking them. Sharing my reads on someone. Unnecessary spam just clutters the thread and hides important post. This is the reason you have given us for a lack of posts. It's one of your first posts, so it's actually more of a pre-emptive explanation of why you would be lurking. You have answered the questions presented, but you do not give us your insight unless asked. This gives me the impression you have to formulate thoughts before giving the answer. If you are a townie, there needs to be more spontaneous input when you observe something that strikes you as being off. You posted some of your town reads, but a lot of it was based on some meta-reads and the logic behind them was still a little flawed. (The reason why the QT was brought up as a potential scum play was because it feigns ignorance, not sure if this was explained.) (Mentioning your scum play from last game doesn't make you more town, it can also be used to distance yourself from your previous game, and thus give the illusion of playing more town) After that, you start to zero in on Strix. Your suspicion only came to light once Mocsta had come and asked you about Strix. This strikes me as suspicious, because it really comes out of nowhere. This is why I would say if you were town, you would bring it up when you saw fit to. Ask questions about it earlier. Instead, there's a sudden accusation followed by a few points made about his posts. In one of your points, you mention how he targets the biggest lurker we have in the group, even though he said in his policy statement he wants to LAL. If anything, that only reinforces the fact he was, at the time since he did end up retracting the vote, following what he said. Your second last statement essentially says 'what I stated against you could be town or could be scum', essentially being on the fence about whether or not he is scum. If he flips, you have some insurance if he is town by saying 'looks like it was town motivated.' Basically, your posts give the impression you're on the fence about whether he is scum or not, you say he is contributing nothing, but you do not provide cases for anyone else and choose to tunnel on Strix. ##Vote jampi | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 05 2013 03:42 Spaghetticus wrote: As above, but @Sylencia You're being just responsive enough to fly under the radar. I can't see much that you've contributed pertaining to the outcome of this game, you've responded when prompted which suggests that while you are wanting to appear active, you aren't actually doing any of the background research that leads to OC or cases. This is scummy. As I said to Strix, show me some original content you have contributed, or even better, present some you've been holding back. Wait, I've been trying to present cases for my votes, and that's going under the radar? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 05 2013 09:12 cDgCorazon wrote: Moc, why are you giving this to us an hour before the vote? Why not give this out after the lynch D1, instead of creating more confusion right around the deadline? I'm not saying you are wrong (I need to read it over again, it's so long that it is making my head hurt), but why this timing? To add on to this, since I suspected this move would be pulled, doesn't this go against what you said/agreed with? On January 04 2013 22:54 Mocsta wrote: Lastly, if you do build a case against anyone.. please take Sylencia advice, and try to post at least 4 hrs (preferably 8hrs) before lynch deadline. People should have an opportunity to defend themselves. You've posted a big case, it's compelling on first read since I only skim read it first, but you're really not giving too much time for Omni to defend against all these points. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
My vote will not go to Omni, because this has happened too many times in the past, where things get brought up in the last hour, and everyone rushes to change - causing a bandwagon that makes it hard to tell what the hell happened. It would not change who would be lynched, but it is better to be left fully analysed after the lynch rather than before. My vote will stay on jampi because 1) I want to reinforce that he cannot continue posting once per 12 hours (exaggeration, obviously) and expect to get away with it. 2) For future votes, at least this can be noted for the future if that is the case that is required. Also, just on this point: On January 05 2013 09:28 Spaghetticus wrote: Please note that I believe StriX' most recent action is purely for survival. He perceives the stagnant state of the Jamp wagon, but sees new hope in the spontaneous Omni wagon. It is his only option, because he cannot vote for himself if he wants to leave, and so the only action is to go to the person with the most votes. It isn't necessarily telling of anything, because everyone would do the same thing. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Temil is a loose cannon. I thought he would just bandwagon onto votes, but he doesn't read the cases anyone has made. This might be due to the second language barrier that prevents him from understanding everything properly, but we cannot expect a proper vote from him. Question is: Do we have to cut him loose or do we have to pursue the matters that came up the last hour first? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 05 2013 10:11 OmniEulogy wrote: result wouldn't have changed. same guy would be lynched regardless. Not necessarily, Cora and I might have changed if there was time given for that case to be properly analysed. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Because he stated it himself. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 05 2013 10:19 OmniEulogy wrote: he stated mocsta didn't give me enough time to defend myself. thats far from what you are implying. And depending on your defense, Cora might have switched if it was posted earlier. I do not see this to be any different to what I said, seeing as how I didn't say Cora and I would definitely change votes. In any case, why are we arguing over this? This is not what we should be concentrating on. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
If I voted Strix, same result. If I voted OE, same result. If I had voted OE, there would be a very low chance of any votes shifting as well. Why? Most people already stated why they voted for one or the other. If Strix was scum, there would be wagoning over to the other side, but he was not, so the result would have ended up the same in either case. I stated the reason why I stayed on jampi, but did not elaborate on it very much. Using the one instance where he gave town reads out (and said that he shouldn't have) as a case where he has spontaneously contributed is not a strong defense. It does not provide anything when the reads are also very weak. If it was something more concrete, then I would take the statement more seriously, but it wasn't. Also On January 05 2013 03:08 jampidampi wrote: My case on StriX may be "weak" but nothing to me suggest that a better case can made for now. If he has such a weak case, why couldn't he have strengthened it any more by asking more questions, as he said he would in his first few posts. Instead, all that we get are answers to questions and accusations. It's not exactly good enough to say you have little to no information to go off, and leave it be and vote. It's slack, and it's scummy because it shows you don't care about the consequences of tunneling a player. As for Temil, I have no idea what he is doing or saying, but my prediction remains at a dartboard randomised vote. This is an issue we need to consider for Day 2, because I do not want to be in the situation where we could have 1 pretty scummy guy + 1 not as scummy guy sitting on 3-3. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 05 2013 10:50 Spaghetticus wrote: @Zare Good post. I do have solid reasoning for my switches, but would prefer not to post them now if people can figure them out themselves. I invite the scrutiny (it's inevitable). I like the direction of this analysis. I want Syl pushed, and am very happy with this information as a foundation. I will most likely post an explanation of my behaviour later, but this should not stop you analysing my motives now. Your switch doesn't seem particularly scummy to me, but I have reason for bias in that I believe I changed for similar reasons. I do not like this as a platform for analysis on TeMiL. He spouts nonsense and is in my eyes an empty slot. Nothing he has said has been influential, and thus if he is scum he is entirely ineffective at promoting his agenda. This does make me feel a little cross saying this, as I'd have liked him mod-killed, but if TeMiL is scum you won't catch him by analysing his posts, and by ignoring him you would be creating a town environment of 6/1, which is town favoured. If he is town then you are wasting your time on him, and the current numbers would be 5/2 regardless. My understanding gives no explanation of how I intend on actually catching him if he is scum, I guess I'm hoping that over time, we will have more information to work with. If anyone wants to attack TeMiL, then I would request that they first address my reasoning above. My conclusion is that regardless of his alignment, there is currently no point in pursuing a case against TeMiL. If Temil is scum, there is another teammate to worry about. All that needs to happen is that Temil listens to them, and bandwagon to the appropriate vote. It is not 6/1 as you say it is, it would still be 6/2. You have to remember that while he has no influence in our discussions, he still holds a vote. If he is scum, that is a potentially powerful vote. If Temil is town, no one is guiding him. He will not be voting in a very rational manner, he will not be reading our posts and cases, instead making his own (as you can see from his posts, he has made a few random accusations at you and Jampi) and voting off that. This is NOT the situation we want to be in, because if we reach a stalemate during the next vote, we would have to see how Temil votes. Assuming we have 2 scum and a townie on one person, and townies voting on town, we would be leaving it up to a 50/50 chance he understands the situation, and votes the right one. Not the best odds. Taking it further if he is town: He probably won't be killed because he is a liability to town. You're now in a 3-2 situation. Do you want to have Temil be the decider of the game? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Firstly, we have Strix's unvote, which comes after his defense of jampi, and saying that his vote on Temil was based on a pressure play. To the majority of the group, it looked like a scummy move because he was trying to possibly rectify his mistake, but I think he felt pressured to take it off so that is what he did. Jampi says his vote will not change because of his read on Strix, this is due to the lack of town motive behind it. When I asked jampi about this first though, I was under the impression that this post didn't make for a case against him because it didn't actually say he was scum, and could actually be town motivated. Mocsta makes a big case against having Temil around. A lot of it is quite logical, but having it done day 1 over someone else seemed to me like a non-standard choice, since it wasn't so much scum hunting as kicking someone from the game. Doing an analysis on posting this now, given we know what happened afterwards also makes me wonder why it needed to be brought up in the first place. Having suspected OE (as stated in the future post) before going to bed, why was he encouraging us to vote for someone then try to get us all to change later? (I have a feeling I know the answer to this, but if Mocsta, you would like to elaborate that would be great) Next page (Pg. 18) Starts off with the conclusion of what would be the Temil-country theory. Interestingly enough, Spag decides to move against what he had said before of "I will vote for the lurkiest player", to one of the other two lurkers. The reason for possibly changing to Strix is given, but at that point in time, the reasoning for moving away from Temil was not (convoluted, possibly). Jampi makes a post after Mocsta has left, explaining the reasoning behind his low quantity of posts. This is mostly done in response to Spag's potential vote change. Page 19 Spag's reasoning for not voting for Temil are given here, but despite the negativity given in the post, to me this confuses me as to why he might not be voted for. At this point in time, Corazon deters more people from voting Temil by saying they would be lazy in doing so. This is what I think lead to the slow beginning into shifting forces onto Strix. With people who did not vote Temil yet being pre-emptively called out for it, they would have to find another avenue to go down. At this point it was likely to be one of the other two lurkers - jampi and Strix. Strix was a lot easier target simply because there was possible scum motivation behind his words and lack of contribution. Interesting thing to note is the Unvote happening from Omni at this point in time. With tides turning towards others in the votes, the only explanation given is that he felt Zare had contributed more. This is while still being 3-4 pages behind in the posts, which is weird - because he didn't know what was next. It was a very random unvote in my eyes. Page 20. Despite saying he wants to see Strix hang around till Day 2, and that everyone except Zare should not be voted, it is decided that Strix would be voted for due to his lack of insightful posts which I guess I am partly to blame for for making people expect it (since that was the description I gave for his usual play) However, it is odd that there is a backtrack in the statements so quickly. His explanation on his vote for Strix then says he is OE's top scum read. If Strix was your top scum read, why did you say you wanted to leave him till day 2? I'm not sure what I am to make of this change of heart and decision to vote Strix. Going back to the point I made earlier about Corazon's post, I feel this might have come into play regarding the decision to vote for him. Since I don't think he was ready to make a case against one of the more active players, I think in the case the 'don't vote temil if you're not lazy' post was not made, Temil would've been the target of OE's vote. Zare targets temil for his first vote, for a few reasons given by Mocsta, and the idea of having temil replaced not being a good idea is fair enough. Page 21. I think when Strix posts at the start of the day, he ends up burying himself further, since he admits he won't be contributing anything in terms of long analysis for the rest of the day (with 2 hours left) and what looked to be a deflection onto OE. At the point Dandel Ion makes the 1 hour remaining vote count, I think all the foundations that were setup for Strix to make the fall were made. He had people already suspecting him, he did not improve his case the next day and there was already a hint from Mocsta stating he would be moving his votes. The post after this would be the be start of the vote shift which eventually lead to Strix's mislynch. With the Temil train quickly derailing, Mocsta's post served as a catalyst for those on board it to quickly move to another target. He made a post about OE, and changed his vote to him, and we then had Zare quietly follow up with a second vote quickly. Spag, being the only one left of Temil, decided it would be better to move onto Strix, as he had said the previous night. Corazon, being the fourth vote on Strix, decided on it due to the case made by OE. With another convinced, and what I now realise to be a lack of defense made by Strix, he was set to be lynched. I choose not to change my vote, which may have had an impact on who got eliminated due to Temil's vote coming out of nowhere. Why I did not change is answered at the end, since I think I saw it was a question I was asked. -- Overall, there were a few reasons why I think that this lynch happened: - People were deterred from voting for Temil after Corazon's explicit message saying that people were lazy to vote for Temil. - Omni's choice of lynch was technically the 3rd to do so, and it was noted by Strix himself that it was quite a bandwagoning, due to the weird set of statements he had made just before voting for Strix. - Strix did not defend himself from the second case against (OE's case against him) and it did not help his cause whatsoever. His actions during the last few hours were also quite suspicious when read, and that may have been the tipping point for the fourth vote from Corazon. Unfortunately for me, this analysis I made turned out a lot poorer than I expected, maybe due to the time of night I ended up starting this, maybe I didn't have as much to say as I thought I did, but I tried doing it the way. On January 05 2013 19:14 Mocsta wrote: I am bringing this back to attention. Sylencia since you are here, what are your thoughts on the feedback zarepath has issued? I can only speak for myself obviously, but at the time I was not completely satisfied with the response given by jampi regarding what I had asked him. I have explained it further in a past post. My thoughts on OE were at the time not exactly very well set in stone. I had not completely read through the post that Mocsta had written, and I wasn't going to bandwagon onto it just because others were. My read on Strix was still fairly null before the last hours of day 1, maybe partly due to some bias of my knowledge of how he behaves in real life, and how he plays these games in real life, I didn't see anything that deviated from what he normally did anyways when he played either side. So the decision I was made to make was a fairly null read vs. a sudden case against someone who I had not looked deeply into with about half an hour or so to choose. Thus, voting for either of them would be a pretty stupid decision I think and so I chose to stick with the person I had suspected from the night before and stuck with it. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:22 Mocsta wrote: Excuse me... @Sylencia, I hope you have commented on this, (still reading through the thread).. as you did with zarepath. I don't understand what you're saying I should be saying about this. Honestly, I don't understand how keeping a vote on Temil leads to a no-lynch read, since that was never going to be happening? If it's regarding why I kept my own vote, I had already explained that, and if you think further than that situation, if I did switch my vote, I would only be leaving myself up to scum manipulation if I am questioned about vote switching and the only answer I can truly give is "No, I don't necessarily think he is scummy, but I was just bandwagoning because I didn't want to be the only one voting jampi." | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 13:18 Mocsta wrote: Maybe I got confused.. i thought you called out zarepath for wanting to no-lynch.. perhaps it was Omni. if so, the question then applies to Omni. I only gave the reasons why no lynch was bad to him. When I voted for him, it was a slight influence, as well as what I had also written, but as I just said before, I don't understand how not changing from Temil suggests no lynch. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 16:14 Spaghetticus wrote: Wow there has barely been any discussion at all... Mocsta I am confused as to what is happening in your dialogue with Sylencia, so I'll butt out and let this run it's course. When you want an explanation just holla. I hope the rest of you are reading the thread or sleeping, because this much activity after an NK is sort of unacceptable. We have a lot of information to sift through (more than ever before!), why would everyone be inactive? Alright, can I ask you for the explanation behind that statement? I said it twice before, but I don't understand how you got to the conclusion that if you didn't change your vote from Temil, it would mean your intention was a no lynch. With regards to the roleblocking move, perhaps someone read this post and acted on it? On January 05 2013 14:25 Spaghetticus wrote: We have a 50% chance of there actually being a JK, then that JK has to correctly identify the scum that will carry out the NK without being roleblocked. This was what came to my mind when Omni claimed the roleblock. If we look at it being there being a Jailkeeper who wasn't sure what to do, they would most likely find this piece of advice and use it. What this means is that if it's a Town JK, they are one who suspects OE as scum. If it was a scum RB, it was either to block a blue move, or an attempt to clear his name via roleblock. (Possible for him to be roleblocked by the other mafia member, and then claim it - both actions killing and roleblocking performed by the same person.) I'm not sure if they would risk that kind of move though, because if there is a scum RB, there would've been a 50% chance for there to be a JK+Cop too, so a day 1 move like that would be quite unlikely. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 22:48 jampidampi wrote: By the third setup do you mean the one with only a jailkeeper? And I'm not sure if I understand the meaning behind your 2nd sentence, do you mean a cop is likely to check on him? But there is no cop in the 3rd setup... Sorry, second setup with the Cop only. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 22:48 Spaghetticus wrote: Ew did I actually write that? I probably thought at that point that a JK was only the town version of a roleblocker. That would explain a lot though. Okay so it doesn't seem like Mocsta was making the play I thought. I'll reveal. If you have your vote on someone and that person has no chance of being lynched, your vote is not actually doing anything. Functionally, it is the same as voting for a no-lynch, as everyone else will go an lynch someone without your input. When you stayed on jamp, there was no way he was getting lynched, and so not changing you denied us your input on who got lynched. This means we cannot blame you for a mislynch, it's complete disassociation from the actual lynch. Now that I think on it, that means if you flip scum you were probably happy with an Omni or StriX lynch, which would increase the town read on Omni. It does not mean that you are actually wanting a no-lynch. A no-lynch will hardly ever get off the ground in a newbie game. When I described your vote as the equivalent of a no-lynch, I probably should have said it was the equivalent of a no-vote. Right, but then as I've said previously how am I supposed to honestly reply to a question such as "What was the reasoning behind voting Strix?" without sounding like I've just jumped onto the wagon without him having a scum image in mind? That was why I didn't change my vote in the previous day, and I think if I did it would've caused more problems during today because there would be a high chance that I would be killed off for changing my vote on someone I didn't have any reasoning behind. @Spag Was my train of thought wrong, and should I have switched my vote despite my internal thoughts on the situation? If I had done it, would you have reacted the way I thought everyone would regarding a random switch in vote? If you disagree with my thoughts, I want to hear what you would have done/suggest. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 22:53 jampidampi wrote: So what you are saying that in the event he is lying, a cop will check on him? If that is so then I understand. Yes because without the Roleblocker on the scum team (only 1 RB got claimed), the Cop and JK do not co-exist. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
The time given to read and make a rational decision based on that post was very small. I had just woken up and when I saw that post, and I only got to skim read it because I was going through it so slowly. Since the finer points of the argument weren't read properly, I was not going to vote for him. If others want to make a comment about this, I'll be happy to answer, but if not, I think there are other things we can concentrate on. @Mocsta: You were annoyed that most of us were not on during the evening of tonight, and you placed a vote on Jampi. Was there a reason behind it, and is there a reason you did not choose to pursue OE with a vote on him instead? My guess is that the roleblock claim had something to do with it, but since there's a lack of discussion going on, I want to know where this vote is coming from. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Our discussion has gotten nowhere today, and at this rate, we have potentially 2 kills going down if Temil doesn't come. The worst thing would be if two townies just died at this point because that would actually just end the game right there. (Unless Temil gets replaced assuming he does not vote) If we are to prevent this, then we can actually cut our losses and vote for Temil, losing only 1 person who was already a detriment to town as it was. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Assuming no replacement, and he does not vote: Temil Town, Mislynch: 2-2 after night action, we lose. Temil Town, Scum lynch: 3-1 after night action, MYLO. Temil Scum, Mislynch: 3-1 after night action, MYLO. Temil Scum, Scum lynch: We win (probably wishful thinking at this point) If we lynch Temil: Town: 3-2, MYLO Scum: 4-1 You say that the MYLO situation makes us lose automatically, but playing the odds we have 75% chance to lose if we don't lynch him and 50% chance to lose if we do. All of this is assuming he does not vote, so things change if he does. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Temil Town, Scum lynch: 3-1 after night action, MYLO. Temil Scum, Mislynch: 3-1 after night action, MYLO. Temil Scum, Scum lynch: We win (probably wishful thinking at this point) If we lynch Temil: Town: 3-2, MYLO Scum: 4-1 I personally don't think this recalculation is worth it because he will be replaced if he doesn't vote, but since you asked: Assuming probability of a mislynch is 5/6 if Temil is scum and 4/6 if Temil is Town (aka completely random): Temil Town, Mislynch: 5/7*4/6 = 20/42 Temil Town, lynch: 5/7*2/6 = 10/42 Temil Scum, mislynch: 2/7*5/6 = 10/42 Temil Scum, lynch: 2/7*1/6: 2/42 40/42 chance we lose? I'm not 100% if my calculation is right there, but that's a damn high percentage if you take it like that. Also, I'm not even sure if this calculation is relevant anymore, because he will be replaced if he doesn't vote. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
If you don't mind, then voting someone else is the better option. If you do mind though, you'd have to consider the probability you win after keeping him to day 3. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Stop having in-fights, it's hurting us more than it's helping. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 20:30 jampidampi wrote: This is curious. Why would OmniEulogy be roleblocked? A jailkeeper would target someone he believes will be killed. Scum had no motivation to kill Omni, because he was the other suspicious player D1 and thus would be pressured at least N1, if not D2 potentially leading to another misslynch. Many pointed that if StriX flips town (which he did), Omni would be very suspicious. A jailkeeper could also potentially target a scumread in hopes that a) he is scum and b) he carries out the nightkill. Even if he was 100% sure that Omni was scum, that would still only lead to 50/50 chance of blocking the kill. Thus I don't this is likely. A scum roleblocker would target Omni if he thought he had a blue role. A scum roleblocker might target Omni in hopes that he claims and someone suspects this claim. @All Should townies always claim being roleblocked in this setup? Do you think the scum roleblocker would target Omni? Or do think he faked the claim? Or do you have any better reasoning for a jailkeeper to target Omni? This is attempted analysis, but it doesn't say anything at all. Doesn't state if he thinks it's a RB or JK, it's just statements which could have been drawn pretty easily by anyone. The case on Mocsta is the only other big post on day 2, it's not really a solid case either. It honestly rates about the same level as Strix's case he posted which I said was weak on Day 1 as well. On January 03 2013 16:25 jampidampi wrote: By not being suspicious. If they are careful and appear as townies, we don't have a way of identifying them as scum. Just flying under the radar while townies aggressively blame eachother leading to a misslynch is a perfect mafia D1. Jampi, you're flying under the radar more than pretty much anyone here. Are you following your own advice or are you just playing badly? --- Omni: Again, from day 1 I wasn't happy with the combination of sentences here: On January 05 2013 05:46 OmniEulogy wrote: Alright, I'm not sure if I can get the whole thing out in under an hour so I'm going to make a summary for you Jampi so we can talk about it a bit while I continue to write up the bigger one. I'll start with the people I don't think we should vote for in this lynch. I believe Mocsta and Spag should be free of suspicion for this lynch entirely. TeMiL and StriX I believe we should wait until D2 TeMiL I think is just bad town and I don't think a vote on him is the BEST we could do. StriX says he makes long analytical posts. I'm waiting to see one. He hasn't delivered in 48 hours and I am most likely going to put my vote on him. Makes absolutely no sense, not sure if he suddenly forgot he was going to vote Strix from the start. On January 05 2013 09:29 OmniEulogy wrote: I should also add on, and I fking HATE to say this but I need to. If I am right about StriX and he is scum. This is EXACTLY what his scum buddy would need to do to get him off the firing line. Create massive confusion with an hour left in D1 and save his mafia buddy. On January 05 2013 09:47 OmniEulogy wrote: @Syl I know, I really wanted to avoid even mentioning an association case. Why even bring up the association case then? It's like a weak way to reinforce Strix's guilt onto others, and it was completely avoidable by simply saying "I think Mocsta did this to confuse everyone and cause an easy mislynch." After the mislynch, I don't understand why he thinks there was no chance of him being voted out - the case against him could've easily swayed town to vote, and unless the numbers weren't going to add up to his lynching - this could be a slip. But, I don't see how one could guarantee that, so probably not. Day 2, roleblocking time. Mod question asked, pretty sure it's a useless question because there is no real reason for OE to be RB'd unless he made blue slips - didn't see any. JK I can understand if they followed Spag's advice from the previous night. Having no fear of being lynched D1 is not a blue tell, because you are just as vulnerable to being lynched as anyone else. The worst thing about being blue in that situation is that if you do reveal your role - you're not saved, you're dead that night. Next up is the useless question of asking about a Cop. 2 things are what this looks like: 1) Bait for if there is a cop, 2) A way to fluff up any discussion. There wasn't anything going on, but there's nothing to discuss about a cop. It's not something we needed to discuss, and it doesn't provide any useful hints for town, only scum (if they suspected there was a cop). On January 07 2013 05:24 OmniEulogy wrote: We don't even know if there is a cop, and if everybody gives their speculation I highly doubt it helps scum very much, especially as multiple people would have the same opinions. This is more about the way people are thinking at the moment not You ARE the cop. Clearly being 2 townies down and having a 3rd on the way to being lynched isn't bothering you very much. Plus we're only looking for 2 scum. If we can (and we need to) lynch scum tonight we'll hopefully have a JK and possibly a cop (best case scenario) N2. Why are you so against giving out your thoughts on the matter? You already have a vote on you, clear up some of the concerns voiced and give us your opinion. It still helps them, and you're not saying anything about how it could possibly help town. Pretty much at this point I'm seeing this as a way to publicly work out if/who is the cop. Again, NOT helpful for town. We don't need to know about it until it's a critical moment where the game can be won, or if there's a chance they are dead. On January 07 2013 16:36 OmniEulogy wrote: Personally I think Jampi looks like the easiest target for the lynch. Town don't look for easy lynches, scum do. Wake up. We search for scum. On January 07 2013 17:03 OmniEulogy wrote: ##Vote: Jampidampi I'll go over it more in a few hours but yeah. Also I never really noticed this but if you look at Jampi's filter the person he responded to the most and was pressured by the most was Cora. Cora gets killed before there is any real conclusion. Anyway I'm off to bed cya. Not a case, lol. Scum have all the information, and can abuse this pretty easily. If zare died last night, I'm scum because he pressured me early on in Day 1? No, unlikely as that's a move that is clear as day for anyone with half a brain. Of course though, they want everyone to see that and ignoring everything else, and essentially target the person that the person who got killed targetted. (Probably a less wordy way to say that). -- Basically, jampi still looks suspicious as hell, no real contribution, trying to fly under the radar in Day 2 - still giving no real clues to his being town (if he is at all), but the last few posts Omni have made while what seems to be half-asleep really makes me wonder if he just slipped up. Lesson learned from NMM33: People make slips. If you ignore them, you could lose the game from it. ##Vote OmniEulogy | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##Vote OmniEulogy Sorry, forgot to unvote. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
(Also, I thought close the game out meant losing, but it means winning? I don't even know) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 08 2013 01:31 OmniEulogy wrote: You claim Jampi is ONLY the easiest lynch? I didn't claim it, you did. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
You could have used "most correct lynch", "most scummy player", "scummiest". Why did you use "easiest"? It's actually a horrible word to use when town when talking about lynches, and if you were saying he's easily the scummiest player, the sentence did not exactly convey that meaning. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Since the slip doesn't seem so much like a slip as opposed to horrible wording, I will be switching to jampi as stated in my previous posts. ##Unvote ##Vote jampidampi | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Second scenario seems super unlikely as there is no reason anyone would waste their role on him, and the first one also seems unlikely unless jk followed spags advice and the roleblocker thought omni was blue. I don't know what to do though, if we are wrong we could be killing any hope we have to win this game... | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
If he was cop, he did not give us any hints in regards to a zare check. On January 08 2013 00:22 Spaghetticus wrote: I would prefer any of the other three (including Jamp), but would not be entirely opposed to lynching Zare. I think there are better targets. @Zare Closing the game out for town. Closing town out of the game. On January 08 2013 01:59 Spaghetticus wrote: I am going to bed. My preferred candidates are Omni, Zare, and TeMiL, and I will settle for any of them. I'll try and get up in three hours so I can influence the lynch if it is not going the way I intend. I have certain changes to my plan if particular events happen. . Zare preferred candidate, even though proven? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##vote spag | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 09 2013 09:25 Mocsta wrote: OK Guys.. there are now 2 confirmed townies..... Omni targeted me and the kill happened (TeMiL was dead, so couldnt put an action in.. thus.. only 1 mafia existed for kill) Not necessarily, I read the scum QT from last game, only 1 person needs to put in an action for everyone. http://www.quicktopic.com/48/H/xQZSPrrUqHPF - Scum QT from last game around post 60 you'll see they discuss who is performing what action. But in any case, I didn't think you were scum, and now I have to make another case against jampi. In addition, did you actually get roleblocked or not, because if you did get roleblocked another person got roleblocked. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
We now know that Temil was scum, and so you look at the interactions between the accused and the known scum. In this case though, literally nothing directly mentions Temil, except for one point in his post against Mocsta saying that his cases against OE and Temil were bs. Why is there such extreme distancing between yourself and Temil? Distancing is a scummy trait. Temil votes Jampi day 1. Since Temil was actually around during Day 1, I can only assume that he's made a calculated move, whether or not he was told to do it I don't know but he voted at the very end of the day. If you assume that he was told to vote for Jampi, it could've been a nice play (if he didn't get modkilled). Since this point will also be brought up by jampi, here is my defense for it: If I was scum, why on earth would I tell him or let him vote for the same person as I am, where we are the only ones voting for you? That causes some pretty easy targetting if one of us got killed, and it's just overall horrible scum play. If you still have questions about this, feel free to bring it up. ##Vote jampi | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 10 2013 16:51 Mocsta wrote: @Sylencia I have 1 question for you. (1) + Show Spoiler [Spaghetticus concerns] + On January 07 2013 15:16 Spaghetticus wrote: ... Syl and Mocsta are now being read because I know that they are both capable of gaining town status as scum. ... Syl sits on the line of activity that I would call 'optimal scum activity'. He is not a lurker, and he has not need to lie or mislead town. Town has mislead themselves, so his near riskless play puts him in a perfect survival state where all he has to do is post analytic truths and town will detonate on their own. ... Spaghetticus raises valid points. Please address these. The part which you have quoted is rather difficult to prove. It is a truth that I have not lied or mislead because that is not what you do to scumhunt. What I have done during this game are presented cases, voted on them and acted according to what I have felt was right. While I would agree that my level of activity is 'optimal scum activity', it has been about the level I was able to raise it to comfortably, coming into the game with a lot of lurking in the previous 2 games. I had decided I wanted to step it up further this time and not be a lurker again because last game I said "it feels like I'm a ghost here". The reason mainly being because I had not been as involved in the game as others, so not only did the others have more influence, they also had more information because of what they questioned from others. Since I wanted to have more information to make more decisions this time around, I became more active but not to the extremely active side which you and Spag were at. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Some of the things which people were questioning during the game: My roleblocking choices were chosen to make it look more like a JK rather than a RB (following Spag's advice from N1). The idea was that I would roleblock the kill N2 and then claim it D3, but then everything kind of went too fast because Temil went afk. After Spag got revealed as cop I had to kill OE off since there wasn't a second RB claim he had to be JK. In retrospect I wish I kept the Roleblock on Spag because it would've made my D/N2 plans a lot clearer in a sense, but who knows My attempted bussing of Temil happened at the end of D1 because I realised he wasn't looking at the scum QT at all, and I got awfully nervous when he voted the same person I did. | ||
| ||
