|
Oh wow... NICE! While there was no way I was voting for Mocsta day two, I can step back and admit when I'm wrong. This worked out well. Hitting the Godfather first is also a biggy, as a Godfather would normally be the one playing for end-game.
Book-keeping: Why did Spag quick-switch?
Let's ignore the fact that I was blatantly wrong not to vote for Mocsta for just a second. Recall that I was:
(1) - Going to lynch one of the lurkiest players
(2) - Was going to wake up in order to control the lynch
(3) - Had already short-listed Zebezt and Troske
When I woke up at 10:00, I believe there was Acid and I on Zebezt, two on Mocsta, and two on Troske. Now, while I did not want Mocsta lynched, I did not particularly care who got lynched between Zebezt and Troske. At two votes each, I could leave it at 2/2/2, or exercise my influence on the vote, and make it 3/2/1 making it significantly less likely that Mocsta got voted.
While I was wrong, and glad I was was, as Mocsta making power plays end-game with no fear of being inspected could pretty much instawin scum the game, my reasoning is the same as pretty much every other day one/two lynch I've ever done. I don't get my first choice of lynch because I don't wield that much influence, so I need to settle for going for the next best thing: protecting the people I consider more catchable/valuable end-game.
Acid is absolutely correct to expect me to step up and start taking names, the time has truly passed for LAL. I will note that I have a commitment to my Mother to go down to my hometown and supervise some Youth reachout gig at 5pm tomorrow for an unspecified amount of time. I don't have a license and the public transport is terrifyingly bad, often taking a lot longer than it should. This will hinder my contribution somewhat, but should not be too big of a deal. I will reallocate my time spent on rousing lurkers to making cases.
I'm going to go and gorge on lasagna and cider to celebrate, this is a big win peops!
|
My Vote, Explained
by Zarepath
Trotske's Day 1 involved few contributions. Most notably, he "pressured" bringaniga, agreed with Mocsta's case on Mandalor while still defending him while still saying he'd vote for him if he acted more scummy (bandwagon ready), and then he also made a case on sno_man and wouldn't let up on trying to get everyone to talk about it:
On January 14 2013 05:24 Trotske wrote:
How do you feel about sn0_man and my case for him.
On January 14 2013 06:16 Trotske wrote:
for some reason I Thought there were more votes on laguerta
bringaniga lets assume you are not going to get modkilled please tell me why you like laguerta more than sn0_man.
On January 14 2013 08:55 Trotske wrote:
@Acid How is Zebezt a better lynch than sn0_man.
Not necessarily scum-aligned, of course. But also smacks of trying to start a bandwagon.
When looking at how Day 1 mislynch went, Trotske went out of his way to call Laguerta a bandwagon and voted for Mandalor because he was the one who started the vote for Laguerta... it seemed a little bit like trying to take credit in advance for the town's mislynch (or non-credit, as it were).
As my time was limited today, I decided that the players I'd limit my analysis to were my previous scummy reads and those with lower post counts (Shz, trotske, Acid, zebezt). Trotske stood out to me as I read Acid's case on him, as his defense wasn't exactly stellar, and his other contributions weren't that amazing, either. His vote for Mocsta seemed to be mroe of a deflection than a read.
So, prior to Mocsta flip, those were my thoughts on Trotske and my reasons for voting for him. NOw, however, we have a LOT more data with which to look at things, so I am pretty much looking at Trotske completely fresh (and almost confirmed townie, basically, considering his interactions with Mocsta, although that can't be completely assumed.)
|
Mocsta's filter is ungodly long ( ), so this will take a bit, but first I want to bring this up:
What is the scum motivation for Mocsta claiming that he was RB'd?
A few scenarios:
1) JK jk'd him, and by claiming he was RB'd, it looks like a townie providing info and assuming that only scum would target him
2) JK jk'd someone else and there is no RB (which he knows, as scum) and by claiming he was RB'd, the JK will assume that it was an RB who RB'd him (because he knows that he jk'd someone else), and will think Mocsta as town (since mafia would not RB themselves)
3) No JK, and there is an RB, but the RB did not rb anybody so Mocsta could claim that he was RB'd, and then on night 2 the RB can RB somebody else and that person is like, "Oh, there is an RB, and I"m the only one claiming RB N2 so Mocsta was telling the truth, he's town."
4) No JK, and no RB, but since Mocsta knows there's no RB he can claim he was RB'd and nobody else is the wiser; if someone claims RB as well, Mocsta can claim that one of them must have been JK'd.
In all of the above scenarios, Mocsta has an escape route, and he looks contributional for coming forward with the RB mention.
There's no incentive for a JK to reveal that they JK'd Mocsta at this point because that would just give mafia info.
|
Thought I Was going to get lynched, thanks guys who listened to the cases that were made and changed onto mocsta. I won't be back on until after 3 est tomorrow but plan to give it my full attention come up with some good discussions.
good job guys.
|
Mocsta's Associations
in order of appearance
Calls Sno_man paranoid, tells him to shape up and stop contributing to bad town atmosphere
Same for Oats, but a lot more
Calls out Acid, Shz, Glurio for not contributing
Tells bringa to start contributing
Criticizes Mandalor in his Questions Post, and asks others to look into him
Unvotes Oats when no one else is biting
Votes for Sno_Man
Unvotes Sno_Man, votes Mandalor
Compliments OE
Defends shz from OE by mentioning shz's schedule
Reacts very defensively to Acid, tries to sick OE on him
Unvotes Mandalor, votes Laguerta
Says sno_man is "laying suspicious behavior we can look into N1/D2"
Defends zebezt while presenting sno_man
asks everyone if glurio is scummy when he shows up
"agrees" with glurio and switches to Mandalor
kind of criticizes zebezt's analysis
Slightly disagrees with Acid's analysis of zebezt
Defends zebezt from Oats
Defends himself from Shz for like forever
Tries to deflect Shz's attention onto Oats
calls Shz out on confirmation bias
tells people to support Oats right before Oats gets NK'd
tells people to engage the lurkers
zarepath is his top scum read N1
calls he was RB'd
Asks Trotske why he's against Spag calling out lurkers
Encourages Spag to discuss his list of lurkers
Restates case against zarepath
"Go F yourself" to Spag
Aks sno_man to analyze his case on zarepath
tells snoman to post his cases NOW
Wants Shz's thoughts on his case on zarepath
Asks Shz about his being roleblocked
Doesn't think Trotske's response to his quesiton is good enough
Of 5 people Oats voted for, thinks zebezt is most likely to be scum that felt the pressure
calls Laguerta bad townie
pressures zebezt for why he isn't after snoman anymore
calls shz his prime interrogator
calls acid king of lurkers
calls OE a lurker
asks acid if he's sure zebezt is best candidate for lynch if zarepath defends himself adequately
backs off analysis of zarepath after his defense
calls acid's case of trotske "many points suspicious indeed"
willing to put serious consideration into trotske if his own reads don't gain traction
big ol' case on OE
unvotes OE and votes for trotske
calls for everyone to pressure the heck out of laguerta, hsi prime read
says it's odd that trotske is always defending laguerta
says acid has been gunning most active townie since day 1
|
Sorry, that was way more wall-of-textier than I thought it would be. Should've used spoiler tags
|
People Mocsta Hardly Ever Mentions:
bringaniga
People Mocsta Voted For (in order):
Oats
sno_man
Mandalor
Laguerta
OE
trotske
Most Antagonistic With:
Oats
sno_man
Acid
Shz
Biggest Cases Against:
zarepath
OE
Some parts of these lists are subjective ("antagonistic" and "biggest cases"); feel free to add/correct.
|
Voted for Mocsta:
Acid, Trotske, Sno_Man, shz
Voted with Mocsta:
zarepath, spag, (sno_man did, then switched)
Voted elsewhere/didn't vote:
Zebezt, JacobStrangeLove, OE
(worth mentioning that Zebezt brought up several points against Mocsta a little before Acid busted out his case against Mocsta)
|
I have been thinking about the game in general. While I may have read all 40 pages if you don't think about the information you have then it is pointless and it takes a while to sort. I think I have a general idea of where everyone stands and how they act.
I am kinda on the edge about Zarepath. You have done a whole lot of work bringing up rb theory and associations but you haven't given your opinion on what you think the associations mean. (although wow you just posted more this is actually quite helpful for me especially being a replacement) It's like go town make mis-lynches for me muhaha style of play. It could be just you haven't gotten around to it though. Also you post lists and lists suck
Although we should not start list discussion as that is counter productive as well but I hated seeing a phase of lists like half way though the game.
Another think I would like to note that his day two play was very... minimal? Comparing activity between the two days is odd. For example he posted 1.5 pages on day one down to half a page for the night and day 2. With his largest post being purely defense. I am not sure if you suddenly had time issues I just found with more information you talking less was odd...
although I admit your defense of your vote was kinda ok but if you could answer these points it would be good.
|
Oh and that is another thing I forgot. Something is happening sunday(your Saturday probably) If I did the maths right the lynch is on that day at 10 I should be around to 8:30/9 I didn't bother thinking about it when I signed up as I thought lynch was 12.
Also something else might happen that day as well still talking to someone about arrangements but at that point it will be night so it won't matter so much.
|
Also why on earth did I think lynch was 12?
|
The lists are useful as you said Jacob. I have already found the first one useful in adjusting my read of Mocsta's JK claim, and you have noted finding at least one useful in your catchup. I have argued the utility of lists, and I can do it again, but I think for the sake of keeping the thread clear I should just give you my conclusion, which is that posting lists is not scummy if the info is useful and the 'perpetrator' does not limit his contribution to lists. It is town play that is too easy to gain towncred for, but is helpful to town so the presence of lists alone should not be pinging your scumdar.
Your point about his small filter is already a known.
Transport has been resolved for my commitment tomorrow, so it shouldn't be too big an obstacle to my continued contribution. I'm going to go to the gym and think. I'll try and pursue my reads when I get back in 2-3 hours.
|
Hell yes!
this game is getting to me. I dreamt Jacob was lynched and he flipped town and everyone was pointing fingers at me.
Reality is a lot better.
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting.
|
On January 17 2013 15:56 zebezt wrote:
Hell yes!
this game is getting to me. I dreamt Jacob was lynched and he flipped town and everyone was pointing fingers at me.
This could still happen you realise...
Have you looked at second half of my original post?
|
Germany2686 Posts
On January 17 2013 15:56 zebezt wrote:
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting.
This is plain dumb. This attitude leads to nowhere.
On January 17 2013 11:29 zarepath wrote:What is the scum motivation for Mocsta claiming that he was RB'd?
Town does not lie. If you are RB'd you should say so. If you don't, someone will know that you didn't, this leads to you being suspected. You should always claim RB.
|
On January 17 2013 17:10 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 15:56 zebezt wrote:
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting. This is plain dumb. This attitude leads to nowhere.
It's dumb to be happy?
I'm not saying we should sit back and relax. But in my eyes the next lynch is 100% clear.
It's sad for Jacob because he didnt get to play much, but Laguerta and mocsta set him up.
Evidence against Jacob
First there is Laguerta saying he is not gonna "no vote" and then he "no vote"s. LIE
Second there is is Mocsta's voting behaviour. During day 1 he is super late to get on the Laguerta voting train. When that train is looking like it's going to derail, Mocsta gives it the final push by jumping ship and voting Mand.
There is no reason for Mocsta to make this switch UNLESS HE IS PROTECTING HIS SCUM BUDDY.
Later on Mocsta claims he is 100% sure that Laguerta is scum. Yet he does not vote for him. Instead voting for somebody else. Not once, but TWICE. This looks to me like Mocsta is distancing himself from Laguerta, knowing his lie is out. However he tries to distract the vote away from Laguerta.
Any comparison with Temil is useless. This is more than enough PROOF THAT JACOB IS SCUM.
I therefore strongly suggest that if we have a roleblocker he RB's Jacob tonight.
|
Germany2686 Posts
On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 17:10 shz wrote:On January 17 2013 15:56 zebezt wrote:
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting. This is plain dumb. This attitude leads to nowhere. It's dumb to be happy? I'm not saying we should sit back and relax. But in my eyes the next lynch is 100% clear. It's sad for Jacob because he didnt get to play much, but Laguerta and mocsta set him up. Evidence against JacobFirst there is Laguerta saying he is not gonna "no vote" and then he "no vote"s. LIESecond there is is Mocsta's voting behaviour. During day 1 he is super late to get on the Laguerta voting train. When that train is looking like it's going to derail, Mocsta gives it the final push by jumping ship and voting Mand. There is no reason for Mocsta to make this switch UNLESS HE IS PROTECTING HIS SCUM BUDDY. Later on Mocsta claims he is 100% sure that Laguerta is scum. Yet he does not vote for him. Instead voting for somebody else. Not once, but TWICE. This looks to me like Mocsta is distancing himself from Laguerta, knowing his lie is out. However he tries to distract the vote away from Laguerta. Any comparison with Temil is useless. This is more than enough PROOF THAT JACOB IS SCUM. I therefore strongly suggest that if we have a roleblocker he RB's Jacob tonight.
Your attitude is bad. Don't just say "laguerta 100% kk go". No one will take it serious, and if you are wrong, that doesn't look good.
I'm not sure yet how Mocsta tried to play. So you would say that he set this all up to help laugerta? Even if Mocsta couldn't have known that he is gonna lynched? Why help someone with saying "You are 100% scum", even if he didn't vote for him?
|
On January 17 2013 17:49 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:On January 17 2013 17:10 shz wrote:On January 17 2013 15:56 zebezt wrote:
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting. This is plain dumb. This attitude leads to nowhere. It's dumb to be happy? I'm not saying we should sit back and relax. But in my eyes the next lynch is 100% clear. It's sad for Jacob because he didnt get to play much, but Laguerta and mocsta set him up. Evidence against JacobFirst there is Laguerta saying he is not gonna "no vote" and then he "no vote"s. LIESecond there is is Mocsta's voting behaviour. During day 1 he is super late to get on the Laguerta voting train. When that train is looking like it's going to derail, Mocsta gives it the final push by jumping ship and voting Mand. There is no reason for Mocsta to make this switch UNLESS HE IS PROTECTING HIS SCUM BUDDY. Later on Mocsta claims he is 100% sure that Laguerta is scum. Yet he does not vote for him. Instead voting for somebody else. Not once, but TWICE. This looks to me like Mocsta is distancing himself from Laguerta, knowing his lie is out. However he tries to distract the vote away from Laguerta. Any comparison with Temil is useless. This is more than enough PROOF THAT JACOB IS SCUM. I therefore strongly suggest that if we have a roleblocker he RB's Jacob tonight. Your attitude is bad. Don't just say "laguerta 100% kk go". No one will take it serious, and if you are wrong, that doesn't look good. I'm not sure yet how Mocsta tried to play. So you would say that he set this all up to help laugerta? Even if Mocsta couldn't have known that he is gonna lynched? Why help someone with saying "You are 100% scum", even if he didn't vote for him?
My attitude is just fine. I'm just wary of people of people that will try to confuse the situation and a scum will get away.
They almost succeeded last night.
I'm sure Jacob is scum.
I'm sure enough to bet my townie life on it.
Could you think of another reason why Mocsta would draw attention to himself by switching votes on day 1?
Could you think of another reason why Mocsta would not vote for someone he says he is 100% sure is scum? The fact that he didn't vote Jacob was one of the biggest tells that gave him away.
I'm being extra vocal about this since I think because I don't post as much as some, my opinion gets overlooked. I also risk getting nightkilled, so I wanna get my point across before that happens.
I'm not saying we can sit back. We can already start trying to find the third scum.
|
On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:
It's dumb to be happy?
I'm not saying we should sit back and relax. But in my eyes the next lynch is 100% clear.
It's sad for Jacob because he didnt get to play much, but Laguerta and mocsta set him up.
Evidence against Jacob
First there is Laguerta saying he is not gonna "no vote" and then he "no vote"s. LIE
Oh don’t feel bad, even if I get lynched in 2 days time am playing till the very end mark my words.
Yes he lied... I don’t even know if he remembered what he said. I would like to say it’s more likely for scum to keep promises because they make them in order to appear town. However he basically wasn’t in this game so I can’t and it sucks. But saying the next lynch is 100% clear? Honestly?
On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:
Second there is is Mocsta's voting behaviour. During day 1 he is super late to get on the Laguerta voting train. When that train is looking like it's going to derail, Mocsta gives it the final push by jumping ship and voting Mand.
There is no reason for Mocsta to make this switch UNLESS HE IS PROTECTING HIS SCUM BUDDY.
Later on Mocsta claims he is 100% sure that Laguerta is scum. Yet he does not vote for him. Instead voting for somebody else. Not once, but TWICE. This looks to me like Mocsta is distancing himself from Laguerta, knowing his lie is out. However he tries to distract the vote away from Laguerta.
Ok I was theorising about this, and as I said before I know there was a double mis-lynch happening on day one. By changing he puts suspicion on me when the lynch goes bad and he probably assumed he would survive day 2 with me dying putting him in good stead. I don’t know why his voting was so funny however. Maybe he wanted to join someone elses train so he wouldn’t look so bad when I went down? Maybe he thought he could get me day 3?
Or maybe he did it because hey why not? Omni isn’t here so I wonder why the vote initially was on him. It could be he wanted to get omni and then me because at that point I was likely to get modkilled? I don’t have a clue the problem is you are seeing black and white, the situation is almost never black and white it is a dynamic of really evil colours that sometimes combine for the heck of it.
On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:
Any comparison with Temil is useless. This is more than enough PROOF THAT JACOB IS SCUM.
Would like to point out the comparison with TemiL is in my favour... I already pointed out that as far as bad lurker scum go there are several differences in behaviour.
On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:
I therefore strongly suggest that if we have a roleblocker he RB's Jacob tonight.
Heh, sure thing.
|
Germany2686 Posts
Okay, noted. I would still like to try to find other associations and I'm not sure if that flip confirmed my suspicion on Jacob. I will think about it, for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
