EPTI Swear This Is Normal Mini Mafia 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Relevant cases should still be posted in the thread some time after, but I don't see a reason why we should be trying to cut out things to do in the QT. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On July 24 2013 15:03 Z-BosoN wrote: @FirmTofu I think there is no point to the QTs if we treat people there as we would treat people here. Anonymity is much more comfortable for scum to post in because they cannot be held liable for their posts. IMO this is quite agreeable. Can you explain what you mean by "only revealing when you have dirt on them"? Do you find this to be a valid plan? @shiaoPi I disagree with you. Having someone to polish their cases with before posting it out in the open is better for scum, because it will be harder for everyone else to fish out lies and inconsistencies that would be present in the original case. However, I think discussions regarding certain people should take place before making a case, but not to the point where theh case will come from two people instead of one. Am I being clear about my meaning? What do you think? What's wrong with the part where someone from the QT posting cases made after it's been proven/given up on? As long as we still show the cases that were made, they can't hide behind anything | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On July 24 2013 16:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: That's the only thing ShiaoPi has posted, how could anything else be an issue with him? I know the claim is not alignment indicative in itself, but ShiaoPi's reasons sure are. There is a reason he said what he did, and i want to know what his reasons were. Sylencia asks people about if mason-partners should reveal their identity to each other. However he himself seems to have no stance on that. That's what caught my attention. Sylencia: Do you think mason partners should reveal their identity to each other? Why/why not? I see no reason why you'd hide the information. More info = more chances town can find hidden gems in the future. The reason why I asked was because I was caught off guard by the amount of freedom we had been given in the QTs, and having never masoned before I wasn't sure what the right move was. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On July 24 2013 21:28 Artanis[Xp] wrote: I said Rayn and Firm are scum because kenpachi gambit. That's two scum already. You guys can find the rest. Your stuff is weak. Having 2 people fall for the same gambit in such a short period seems quite unlikely. I'm pretty sure rayn has been in a game with an attempted Kenpachi gambit anyways so he would know better than to fall for it along with his teammate. Explain thx. Also, Artanis is my current partner (don't think he mentioned it) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On July 24 2013 15:20 FirmTofu wrote: I agree with rayn. The claim rubs me the wrong way. I don't understand it. Where I stand: People should NOT be anonymous in their QTs. There is no reason to do that. People should be trying to discern the alignment of their partner, but not to the point where they stifle discussion in the QT. Pressure him, but don't argue incessantly. People should not tell the thread who their partners are. If the partners are both town, we end up denying scum a TON of useful information by not saying who your partner is. It will also be useful to find mini-mason circles to confuse scum. Oh, I was under the assumption that the last point was kinda being followed. I also thought the reasoning was horrible to start, but I now completely understand that blue death will cause those linked to them to be targetted fast in the case information was given out. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On July 25 2013 03:10 Lazermonkey wrote: Regarding double lynch. If you are about to get mason-killed, then the correct play, no matter what alignment you, is to kill your mason partner before he kills you. If he flips scum, then whop-whop you are suddenly town once again. No townie would NOT do this making the move alignment unindicative (because scum would obviously do the same thing). Regarding policy lynching the mason who kills his partner and he flips town. Well, this is just bad. The same way you wouldn't lynch a vigi who kills town. Even though he might not kill scum he saves us one misslynch if he kills a top suspect. If he kills someone without a very good reason and that person flips town, then we should obviously look into that player. But policy lyncing someone who kills town is a big no-no! Man, how are people agreeing with this post, when it looks like a giant setup for a town misfire into a mislynch on a different person. Normal Scenario: Scum targets partner for lynch, a wagon starts. Getting closer to the deadline, the partner decides to shoot since his mason partner turned on him, but before that happens scum shoots the partner. Miskill happens. After that, what happens? Town is in disarray as we would then only have a couple of hours to regain any sort of co-ordination, people aren't around for deadlines, and scum are in a powerful position to take control and choose the next lynch target. This results in 2 mislynches and destroys the town. Following from that, his 2nd point can be interpreted as a way to protect a scummate after the shot by saying "Don't shoot the shooter" before it happens, so that there's limited ways for us to really justify shooting. I don't buy this. On July 25 2013 03:44 Z-BosoN wrote: I want to talk about sylencia for a little bit. Here he posts asking about anonymity, demonstrating an interest in discussing such aspects of the QT mechanic. However, later on, when there was some discussion about whether or not it is worth it to mass claim the mason partners, he blatantly tells us his own: This is very inconsistent, and in my experience is much more likely to come from scum. Add to that the zero amount of scumhunting he has done. All his talk is related to game mechanics, which is very easy and comfortable for scum to talk in. Thoughts? I already explained why I asked that question, did you not read? That said, Rayn: I asked you why you found me suspicious, and you've tiptoed around the question or explaining anything about why you find me to be scum. On July 25 2013 05:18 raynpelikoneet wrote: Because to me Stutters looks way better than Sylencia. Trying to get others to start a wagon for you? So am I, the threat of being killed off everyday really gives me an adrenaline rush. Dandel is playing like Blazing did in the first I Swear, so I'm not sure if he's trying to replicate his 'success' with it but it's still aggravating -_- On July 25 2013 06:40 Lazermonkey wrote: That and that the fact that he is was actively ignoring any form of scum hunting. D1 Scum hunting is a skill I've yet to acquire, still too noob, still think your post above is suspicious though. On July 25 2013 06:47 Stutters695 wrote: I'm assuming this is what you say I'm ignoring. The bolded part: If true then he lied about sending a PM to kill someone then sending another to cancel it. This isn't likely at all from either perspective as it creates a lie that is easily verifiable and would cause his lynch/mislynch over nothing. Thus I assume he actually did send the PM. Why would he send that PM as either alignment? Town: He's taking a shot on the 3/11 probability of hitting scum. Unlikely without some other plan. It certainly wasn't to pressure a lurker since the game had been only going for a couple hours. Scum: He thinks it's a good idea to take the free KP before town uses it. Sends in the PM and tells his scum buddies. They flip their shit since their KP probably drops to 1 at 2 scum and we'd lynch him for a clearly retarded shot and they would actually lose KP so he reneged on his shot. I don't see any town explanation that comes even close to the scum one so I think he's scum unless he has a damn good reason for it 1) Killing someone isn't pressure. 2) 2KP @ 12 players (assuming 9-3 + free vig shot) is pretty strongly favoured to scum, since they can sit at 5-3 after 1 day.. My thoughts if he was scum was that he said he'd play it off as a bad townie/trigger happy play but then his scum buddies convinced him it was suicide to go down that route. But that's still all speculation (checking his filter, that reasoning pretty much would've fit this route) Anyways, for now ##Vote: Lazer | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On July 25 2013 19:56 Lazermonkey wrote: Sylencia, you are basically voting my based upon a single post, correct? And the reason you do this is because you agree with my logic, correct? I don't feel like explaining why I am right and you are wrong for the seventh time. If you really are town, check my filter and you will understand that I have already answered your questions and suspicions. But disregarding that, how does me disagreeing with you make me scum? You don't explain this at all. Also, there are alot of guys agreeing with my logic here which you even point out yourself. Why is it that I am scummy but not them? Do you seriously think scum would be the one to start the "suicidal and very stupid plan" and that a bunch of townies just sheeped it. Because I would actually argue its the other way around. Scum are very afraid of saying stuff that could cause them to look bad, like a "suicidal and very stupid plan", however if a plan like that is started by a townie then they could very well be sheeping that. I've already read it, and I explained how the post is literally setup to help scum. The reason why people agree is because it sounds sensible. Someone's about to die, and so they'll take the shot because they think their partner is scum. Sounds great in theory, but if you think about how it's done in practice it's a crappy idea. Also, plans aren't about how suicidal they are, it's about how well you can sell the idea. It's the same with pushing for a lynch - if you're convincing enough you'll push the wagon all the way and everyone will hop on. In any case, completely brushing off the possibility that one team can perform an action because it's high risk is silly, I prefer to keep an open mind about things. On July 25 2013 20:03 raynpelikoneet wrote: ##Vote: Sylencia Only setup speculation. He has not done anything else in the whole game. ANYTHING ELSE, and it's been over a day since the game started. He is not interested in finding mafia. Only thing that comes even close to scumhunting is his case against Lazer, which is one big assumtion and bad. Great, you know this happens in most of the games I'm in already having played with me a few times, where I find it difficult to properly find reads. Rather than rehashing the same argument over and over again, how about you target someone you know isn't lynchbait every game. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##Vote Malongo Weirdest play -> AFK lynch seems decent to me. One thing that bugs me about Artanis is how unuseful he's been in the QT  Artanis 07-25-2013 01:25 PM ET (US) I think Shiao Firm and Dandel are prob town. I'm still too lazy to reread shit. Artanis 07-25-2013 10:08 AM ET (US) I need to read Rayn's filter before I can answer you on that. I'm too lazy to do that right now tho. Artanis 07-24-2013 07:04 PM ET (US) -Kenpachi cases are an easy way to put pressure on someone and see if they slip up further. Firm's stepping up his posting so I'm pleased with that for now. Rayn's response has been meh. Worth looking at more but cba atm. -Guessing Malongo's shot was fake since nothing happened yet. -Damn, you got me already Artanis 07-24-2013 07:59 PM ET (US) Actually Lazer is just posting a lot in general, nvm. REFOCUSSING How to get reads without reading over things <3 you Artanis, don't shoot me~ | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
07-24-2013 11:41 AM ET (US) As I said in my first few posts - I prefer to have my initial reads here for now, just so that I can see if anything develops overnight. - I need to go over Lazer's posts regarding setup speculation again to see if there's any slips in logic that he's made - it'd be a weak case but I don't like the Kenpachi cases  - Malongo with his apparent shot is either some weird gambit, he managed to cancel or he only informed Cora of. If it's the last case then I'd honestly want to just lynch him on the spot since it's the dumbest thing a townie could do. - artanis obv scum etc Pretty null on the rest atm since I need to go deeper with the posts first. Feel free to add/disagree while I sleep 9 ArtanisPerson was signed in when posted 07-24-2013 07:04 PM ET (US) -Kenpachi cases are an easy way to put pressure on someone and see if they slip up further. Firm's stepping up his posting so I'm pleased with that for now. Rayn's response has been meh. Worth looking at more but cba atm. -Guessing Malongo's shot was fake since nothing happened yet. -Damn, you got me already What do you think of Rayn atm? I don't like Lazer much either. Seems very defensive and posting a lot about policy. 10 ArtanisPerson was signed in when posted 07-24-2013 07:59 PM ET (US) Actually Lazer is just posting a lot in general, nvm. REFOCUSSING 11 Sylencia 07-25-2013 06:47 AM ET (US) rayn confuses me, because he's called me scummy twice with no reasoning while pushing for others to say I'm more scummy than stutters. who's looking scummy to you atm since you seem to have relaxed on FT, and idk if you're that on board about rayn potentially being scummy. 12 ArtanisPerson was signed in when posted 07-25-2013 10:08 AM ET (US) I need to read Rayn's filter before I can answer you on that. I'm too lazy to do that right now tho.Edited 07-25-2013 10:08 AM 13 Sylencia 07-25-2013 10:57 AM ET (US) do you have any reads at all atm <.< 14 ArtanisPerson was signed in when posted 07-25-2013 01:25 PM ET (US) I think Shiao Firm and Dandel are prob town. I'm still too lazy to reread shit. cbf edit | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Malongo over Artanis because we can still glean information in the future from Artanis, whereas you get nothing from someone who posts nothing | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
| ||
