EPTIf you have a problem with sevryn why don't you vote him? Or at least analyze and compare his play to sylencia's for the entire game, not just that small part of the game.
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXVII - Page 12
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
If you have a problem with sevryn why don't you vote him? Or at least analyze and compare his play to sylencia's for the entire game, not just that small part of the game. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.grandpatucker.com/images/st-whale.gif) wecome back sn0~ | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
So why should we lynch sevryn instead of sylencia? | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
I think you missed my point. I'm not saying sevryn is town, but he responded better to our requests for his scumreads (by actually listing a few) than sylencia. I just don't see what sylencia has been doing, especially recently, to be helping town lynch scum. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 19 2013 09:14 Mandalor wrote: ##Vote: No-lynch I'll be explaining myself tomorrow. I am now the IT security branch at my company when we were four guys last month. Also my girlfriend of 4 years kinda broke up with me. I have tons of stuff to do and this game, sadly, has to be at the bottom of my agenda. If you knew you were not able to play, you should have requested a replacement. Mandalore posted once in 4 days. Can you please replace or modkill him? For reference, here are the timestamps for his last two posts: February 15 2013 07:57 February 19 2013 09:14 According to the rules, players must post once per day and night cycle, and I believe Mandalor failed to post during N2. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
And I agree, this is a stupid game. If mandalor got modkilled for inactivity (and I don't see how posting twice in 97 hours can be construed as activity) and flips town then it would be a fittingly stupid end. I don't want to just give up, but it's really frustrating  | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
For 96 hours, only 3 out of (original) 13 players actually played the game properly, and 2 halfway. That is bullshit and the game is pretty much ruined already. Zarepath, Sn0_man, how would you like it if I stopped posting for 96 hours? Apparently I can without breaking the rules. The weekend is when you have fun. Mafia is a game. You have fun playing games. If you do not have fun playing mafia, then you're doing it wrong. If you do not have fun on a 3 day weekend, you are doing it wrong. If whatever you do with your family for an entire 3-day weekend is more fun than mafia, the you are doing it wrong. You are either doing it wrong by being a dull person who does not understand how to have fun, or you are doing it wrong by signing up for mafia when it's either not a game you enjoy playing, or you have much more interesting things to do with your time. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
 | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
I nominate Acrofales and Dandel Ion for Best Newbie Mafia Hosting Archon of 2013. That last flavor video was great lol Also big thanks to the coaches. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
I was certain one of the active players was scum, but I was leaning more towards sn0_man and zarepath since they boogied out for all of D3 like that. I wanted to be suspicious of Mocsta, but I don't know how I would have convinced Corazon to go along. And nobody else in town was interested in lynching an active player D2 or D3 (or doing much of anything at all). I feel this was more a failure of town than a victory due to the effort of scum. Not to say that Mocsta didn't play really well. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
I think a big town mistake in this game (that I made as well) was the lack of effort to hunt scum among active players on D2 and D3. Lynching lurkers is cool but that doesn't mean we should sit around whining for 24 hours about how lurky the lurkers are. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 20 2013 05:27 Mocsta wrote: Can understand the pain. Hurts when u think one of your own has been actively hindering your thought processes all game. :; I'm not angry over your play at all, just how terrible the town was this game. You played well, but it was like watching a guy in a brand new VW Jetta race against 8 Fiat Maluchs, 5 of which have quadriplegic drivers and no engine. I would have loved to try to vote Mocsta D3 (since I had been pursuing him the whole game) but then Mocsta could have lead Cora into a mislynch on me. I actually put effort into hunting Mocsta (etc), but I got literally zero interest from any player except TestSubject, who was then night killed. e: although it was a terrible mistake on my part to trust mocsta at all on d3 (specifically his reasoning around sylencia). | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
I admit I got frustrated after it looked like Mocsta might push a D1 mislynch on me, but if he hadn't been so successful with that I don't see what else I did to make you feel that way. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
IMO Mocsta didn't win this game, nearly as much as town lost it. For most of D2 onwards the game was 2.5 towns (Corazon, soon-to-be-dead TS, and myself) vs Mocsta, Mocsta's active lurker puppet. Town had already lost at the beginning of D2 when we all agreed to stop hunting scum, and especially N2 and D3 when most of town just AFK'd and we were literally 2:2 with the scum. If I ever host a mini game, I certainly will take a more proactive stance towards replacing or modkilling people who fail to play the game for extended periods, and even more so as the game progresses. I feel these mid-game mass lurk scenarios can really imbalance the game towards mafia (eg when a majority of the living townies fail to play for full day and night cycles vs a scum who checks in every 10 hours to post what his buddy tells him to). It's nice that Mocsta was able to control the 2 active towns using his 2 scum accounts (eg, posts 237 and 238 in the scum QT) for the large majority of D3, but IMO this is hardly an accomplishment, or even good scum play in a game with a functional town -- as evidenced by the fact that he lost the last time he tried these tactics. Mocsta 02-18-2013 03:19 PM ET (US) /m272 kk. i be asleep by then.. Good luck /m271 yeah.. WB is gonna be SO SO SO pissed when he reads this lol so is Sn0 he actually figured everything out LOL (that I was writing ya cases etec haha) I'm not pissed at Mocsta at all. I do think his attitude is rather loutish and unsporting at times, but nobody's perfect. I am mad at the town in this game, myself included, however it's just a game and I'll get over it. I just wish I had the guts this game to go after my #1 scum read -- which was Mocsta, as you can see in my filter before D3, when I basically gave up because I realized the rest of town was making zero effort. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 21 2013 08:33 Mocsta wrote: Town losing so badly (I.e. flawless victory to scum) had nothing to do with bad town however, and that is the point u r missing. Oh, I see the point you're making and I disagree. You had such an easy time of it (town basically gave up) that I don't see how you can imply you actually played all that well. I give you much more credit for your loss in '35, when you actually played well against serious opponents. I wanted to try to lynch you so bad D3, but who would have gone with me? You and sevryn? Sylencia and Corazon thought I was scum. Everyone else was inactive until the last minute. You literally had a free ride. I agree about your point that it's like a cheese or rush build, to the extent that neither party really showed any skill worth commenting on -- except in the rare cases of a master cheeser. And I'm explicitly saying you're not at this level yet, although this isn't even a bad thing because cheesy play sucks  I definitely look forward to playing with you again at some point, but next time I hope I get to night kill you on N3 for the easy win  | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
But that's the point, Mocsta went for a cheesy scum style that relied on most of town failing to do anything for extended periods of time. It didn't work the first time he did it, but it worked this time, probably because this time half of the town decided not to play for nearly half of the game. It's a valid strategy, and he shows some skill executing it against such incredibly meek opposition. But to extend the metaphor, I'm still in the position of having been cannon rushed, and when I went to pull my probes and defend (eg, attack Mocsta) the probes just sat around doing nothing or attacking my nexus instead. But hey, at least I tried. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 21 2013 11:00 Mocsta wrote: This is the last I will say, because, I can not help you see, what you can not see (yet; perhaps due to pride or experience, not sure). The irony of the well-executed con is that only the instigator can see the beauty that unfolds. I can forgive you for not getting it, because the strings were pulled very smoothly. Yes - I agree - many things fell in my favour (i.e. lurking); but to suggest it was a free ride is very naive. The lurking simply allowed me to become more forceful in achieving flawless victory; I had the intention to bus Sev/Man by leading their vote if required. If you want to pretend you had the goods to get me lynched; then you need to re-evaluate your D3 filter where I was constantly referenced among the "active town" and thus, was considered as "town" - this is undeniable. To suggest that was achieved by a free ride due to lurkers is just silly: because Sn0_Man was still considered "confirmed town" even after he commenced lurking. =================== If you want some *hints* of the con; many ideas taking off in the thread *I believe* stemmed from ideas I introduced. If you want an early example; corazon case on warbaby all originated from a post I made prior highlighting your deficiencies. corazon simply fleshed it out for me. (The points he raised were almost all mine to a tee) If you want a late example; you guys were all over Sevryn; many calling him scum directly, and Sylencia 50/50. It is not chance that you suddenly went 180', stood up for Sevyrn, and aided town to unanimously voted Sylencia. (And by unanimous I do not suggest sheeping: zarepath/Sn0 suggested they read the content leading up to the Sylencia vote, and thus made a conscious decision to lynch Sylencia, not a sheep vote... they understood it would lead to MYLO if wrong) As I said before, Sylencia defense wasn't the best; but it was still quite townie in nature/mindset. There is are several reasons his lynch fell into place so smoothly; lurking is one of them; but not the sole or most critical one. His lynch was certainly not a free ride. ============= As I said before, I am not asking for praise. I am actually trying to help, because you seem keen to improve. (and it is also helping me with my town game) In my opinion, an important takeaway from this game is: How did I establish sufficient innocence to then push my agenda. Was I considered town for reasons that are actually "NULL"; or did I actually replicate genuine town tells? In my opinion, Mandalor should NEVER have been considered town; all his posts were "NULL" at best, and with the lurking, should have been insta-lynched based on contribution quality and quantity. Another example; Sevryn abused the lurker situation by "standing up in the crowds" and voicing his opinion on Glurio.. twice. I constantly suggested in the thread, this was a townie tell, and I believe nobody questioned it. However.. is it really a townie tell? (Obviously not..) It is simply just something you do not expect from a scum lurker. The crux: we need to constantly update/adapt our heuristics with placing 'value' on tells to decide town or scum. ==================== This is why I said in earlier posts, next town game I play, my main scum hunt emphasis is going to be on breaking down others case logic. I have a much better understanding now of worse-case logic generated by scum; and worse-case logic generated by tunneled townie. =================== Sorry for the wall of text. This is really the last I will say Peace OutI guess you don't believe that I gave up at the start of D3. I literally had no interest in putting effort into playing the game at that point, and you can see this in the deterioration of the quality of my posts. You think you were tricking people, but you were simply abusing your number and volume advantage to push the game in the direction you wanted. You even said it yourself -- the fact that nobody was doing anything D3 means scum was happy with the turn of events. But the turn of events themselves were directed by the scum. You literally had equal day votes to the town. You had already won on D3. You succeeded, but not because of your own efforts, only a lack of effort by others. I don't mean to cheapen your effort, because you did make a lot, but I honestly don't think you'll ever win a game as scum against a decent town if you don't change your tactics (just like a good cheeser will get demolished by calm, coordinated opposition). On February 21 2013 01:41 Promethelax wrote: +10 points for the correct (post-game) attitude. Zarepath was not the only lazy one in this game. I tried making effort at the end of D2, and on N2, and just gave up, because nobody did fucking anything at all. So I'm also guilty of just being lazy and let the game slide. Sorry Mocsta, you are mostly right, but there are a few points I think your ego won't let you understand. If you're ever scum and I have a capable town to work with, you will lose with these tactics. | ||
| ||
