|
EBWOP - That's most of the original quote here for readability.
On January 10 2015 23:36 Half the Sky wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2015 17:03 jarjarbinks wrote:
27% (3/10 +/- 3%) is the lowest % you can have. I'm attaching mini-normal % increases based on how the dead voted and giving myself a 3% buffer for on my opinions of their play so far.
1. LS- 46%. 14% increase based on dead votes and a 2% increase based on today's play and the day 1 claim. I still sympathize with LS, but that's why I'm using equations over my feelings. One of the cases I saw with LS in also had everyone on LS's balls for almost the whole game (at least based off votes).
2. Shining- 39%. 9% increase based on dead votes. 0% on my opinions of the 2 days play.
[...] JJB, a few more questions on your equations and how you applied them. You scumread LS based on the (I assume?) VT claim. Did his post-lynch comments have any bearing on your rating? Shining question I asked before, but will ask again, he's since posted, and you're saying you have no alignment indicative information?
|
On January 11 2015 10:28 ExO_ wrote:
Silverate has posted next to nothing.
As I said before, I have expectations there are some developments in her arguments. She has answered all my questions, but I have to wonder now at D3 (and later) she needs to be doing more. Tube made an excellent point on this earlier on her.
On January 11 2015 10:28 ExO_ wrote:
Jarjar is impossible for me to read: He isn't very articulate and I've largely ignored what he has to say. But my impression as of this moment without filter diving isn't that he's scum, it's that he's just pretty "meh" town.
My concern with JJB is just making sure he isn't hiding behind the numbers and that I can follow what he is doing where and that his reads match up with how he feels. He claimed that his current formulas were based on this:
On January 11 2015 03:44 jarjarbinks wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2015 03:17 rsoultin wrote:
JarJar, please answer my question on ExO.
Also, why are you exclusively focusing on who the dead townies voted for?
[...] I did this because it was the key to getting that scum guy I found our first game that no one thought was scum.
I thought it could translate to this game and others. I looked through some other cases and found that it could be rather significant.
My problem with this is that he is not considering mechanics and rules. Every mafia game is different, roles/mechanics are different, and even the community is different here from where ever he has played. So that is my problem, however if he can qualify his reads in a way people can follow the logic, I will feel better about him.
Admittedly he is one of my top scumreads, but especially as we are in lylo, I want to vet his understanding top to bottom to make sure I know what's going on and there's no misleading or hiding behind the numbers. If I can understand and feel comfortable with this, he will not be my lynch vote.
On January 11 2015 10:28 ExO_ wrote:
Shining had a lot of suspicion on him day 1. Day 2 I seemed to think he was just playing poorly on day 1, and wasn't scum. But now his case needs to seriously be looked at.
Diving that case and his filter right now in addition to the other stuff I need to catch up on.
On January 11 2015 10:28 ExO_ wrote:
Until I go filter diving, it'll be hard for me to push somebody. I feel like because we let the inactives chill so much, we're really paying for it now. I think in future games I'll be more likely to go for inactives early on, so that I won't have to wonder "is that player with almost no posts a mafia? or an inactive town?".
Well that's usually what I rely on a vigilante for, but it appears there was no such role in this game.
And one trait of scum is also hanging back whilst the town v town squabbles occur, granted some of these people had RL scheduling issues, but we still need to review the content they do have.
|
On January 11 2015 10:41 Tubesock wrote:
Scott comes in with 2 posts and at first I think I can easily sheep him. Then I think that -Celestial- who is still alive, and I think is super scummy, built a case on Shining.
Rsoultin towned Jarjar who was my "strongest" scum behind Celestial minus his un-CC claim.
This leaves as the mafia team:
Celestial, Silverarte, and Scott/Gumdrops.
Rsoultin died because she's the most important player to town. For me, this gives credence to towning Jarjar. It also would theoretically set up a mlynch of ExO_.
Regarding Shining, there are three different people that are scumreading him. Review the reasons why, review also when they are scumreading as their views could have changed. Scott has the (obviously) most recent case. Rasputin who is confirmed town has her reasons, and we need to crosscheck against Shining's filter for that.
Personally, my thoughts on ExO at face value (prior to the exchange with Rasputin and exploring a world where he could be scum) are that he's a low-post high content type player. To me, postcount is NOT alignment indicative in of itself, but some people here make the argument that scum tend to drop off in posting over the course of the game, which is a valid concern.
I don't know ExO's play style/meta, etc. but prior to today's exchange I did not feel any problems with him.
Additionally, in the Carol post-game, I can't remember which vet it was, but someone said there are multiple ways of scumhunting. Regardless I'm going to review the exchange between him and Rasputin and see if there are any red flags. If there are, I will point them out and simply ask.
Regarding Scott, a replacement player should always start as null until they make an impression. Gumdrop posted even less than Silverarte, but it's a new player now. and from what I can tell, I assume you are scumreading him based on POE.
I am going to judge Scott on content and if I don't like his case I will question it.
|
On January 11 2015 11:29 jarjarbinks wrote:
HTS on the equation thing
added 2% scum based on what I was thinking his quotes were at the time
I remember telling myself, I will laugh wen all of us think he's scum and he turns town. Not as funny now that we are in trouble of losing without even getting 1 right.
I'm busy but I will spin my equation stuff up and post my thoughts. Based on knowledge of it I would guess exo and shining are top 2 with a very large dropoff before #3
That's fine. Cheers. In addition to your numbers I would really like to hear your reasoning in words please for you thinking ExO and Shining are scum, I am in the process of reviewing the exchanges and Scott's case.
|
On January 11 2015 11:29 Tubesock wrote:
ExO has been very upfront with the fact he would have hammered WarWaffle if people shenanied off. In what world would mafia admit that?
If he did, this is a town quality in my opinion, scum want to split the votes, town usually want to consolidate reasonably.
|
On January 11 2015 11:26 Tubesock wrote:
I'm less concerned with his methodology, but I want to know at what % is someone lynch worthy? I mean at his last post it was 46% for his lead. Is that high or low or what? Why couldn't someone take away from that that he had essentially all town reads since they are less than 50% chance of being scum?
I'm not going to put words in JJB's mouth, but my understanding it just reading his posts was by sheer ranking - LS was nr 1 so he got the vote regardless of the percentage. But I will let JJB speak for his methodology.
I want context to those numbers, trust me I am having most of the same issue you are.
|
On January 11 2015 12:26 jarjarbinks wrote:
Exo looks doubly bad for the vote LS had on him. Looks worse with the Rsoultin pseudo vote before she died. That will probably give him the most points
Shining looks bad because of the trfel vote.
Do you have anything from their forum content (besides the votes) that can back this up?
|
Scott, some comments on your case.
The voting parts are parts that made sense. I know Rasputin had already commented on his first vote. The point on the association reads vote is a very good one, unflipped association reads are never a way to go. It looks to me as if he's trying to find a random reason to just park his vote there and I don't like his explanation, regardless of what he thinks of the VT claim.
On January 08 2015 12:03 The Shining wrote:
As for LS and Jar Jar, I've only ever played with Jar Jar once or twice, in much more inactive games, as we all know. So yes, the walls of text posts are out of character to me, as well. I don't like that he tried to direct today with basically no follow through, either. You can't just hint at Trfel's voting me as being the reason he died, then offer absolutely nothing else up.
And my vote is staying on LS until I hear a defense. Even then, I'm pretty sure I'll keep it there. I don't believe in the VT claim and I've already stated my reasons for my vote.
You're supposed to be questioning the guy you plan on lynching and this wording tells me he is looking to park his vote somewhere without making the extra effort; it doesn't show town-driven thinking.
However, the second part about meta, I'm not sure I understand. He's not using a meta case, simply saying he doesn't understand the meta of Rasputin. There is some fluff, but not so much you can't follow - for example in that second passage he's questioning ExO's vote switching because he doesn't understand it.
As for his reads, you have somewhat of a point, the debatable part comes in his presentation. A lot of people in this forum do not prefer list posts, and some people do provide them, but to me, providing your scum reads at minimum is generally okay. I could follow where he was scumreading people, so he was providing town some sort of guidance on his lynch thoughts. I saw maybe 1-2 town reads in there max, but his scum reads were fairly clear and if his presentation of reads is different I cannot necessarily fault him for this.
Rasputin in my opinion, however, has a much more substantial case (that will be longer) that I am in the process of fully looking through. With some luck I can have this done sometime midday Sunday.
It's 4:30am here so I am headed to bed, but will continue on this when I return.
|
JJB, Silverarte and Shining, we need reads as soon as possible.
|
Scott, I realise you were late to the party when all the ruckus was about with Celestial.
Do you understand the game mechanics as to why Celestial is not a viable lynch today?
|
CASE STUDY: WHY THE SHINING IS MAFIA
Introduction
This is largely Rasputin's case folks, in terms of ideas and original thought. I have pulled the relevant quotes and/or given references for complete support. I have also added commentary and a few additional points on my own.
From her passage N3, in her own words:
On January 11 2015 08:59 rsoultin wrote:
[...]
- Shining (70% certain) for his start that I think I've mentioned a few times now, but also this oddity of completely dropping any pressure on ExO after WW flipped for no apparent reason...even goes so far as to say that there might be scum on the LS wagon but still gives ExO a bye when the only other one there was WW, says he's taking the game seriously after Day 2 but mostly just posts defensive posts and a push on -Celestial-, then finally ends with his only post of Night 2: a WIFOM game balance argument that Celeste must be scum cause this game can't possibly have a doctor (why when we don't know the set-up at all?)
[...]
Pulling the argument piece by piece
Relevant quotes from the filter:
1 "for his start that I think I've mentioned a few times now"
On January 05 2015 10:44 The Shining wrote:
On the other hand, Soultin has already let it go and is now moved on to Silver. How am I to know you're not just going to question every one of us in the hopes of a slip or something that gives away a role?
The above comment, to be fair, TS has responded to this. But I believe she might have been taking this in aggregate with everything else. I had called him out on the first part of the second sentence myself. Regarding the second part, we obviously know that she is town, and even I had not seen any evidence of bluehunting, which I questioned myself.
2 "but also this oddity of completely dropping any pressure on ExO after WW flipped for no apparent reason...even goes so far as to say that there might be scum on the LS wagon but still gives ExO a bye when the only other one there was WW"
On January 07 2015 08:29 The Shining wrote:
[...]
I need WW to elaborate on his claim before I can believe him but I also can not in good conscience vote to lynch. LS was leaning scum with the "let's all be town" theories until he provided examples of his town meta. That, along with ExO voting to kill LS but still "being ok with the WW lynch", shows me that ExO doesn't care who dies. And if ExO thinks someone should die, they probably shouldn't, I won't vote with him.
##Vote: ExO_
Post flip:
On January 08 2015 07:31 The Shining wrote:
I have already explained my train of thought on ExO. Let's remember that ExO had WW as a scumread, as well. Where's he been since the flip?
Rasputin has a point with this. I see no visible logic for shifting off ExO in the filter. In fact there was no comment on his thought on ExO since the comment copied above.
On January 08 2015 09:52 The Shining wrote:
Also, Mafia like to throw away votes once the main lynch is secured. WW's wagon caught momentum fast. This leaves the LS wagon, which only has WW and ExO, a blue role and a guy who I'm still unsure about but might be willing to give him benefit of the doubt. [...]
3 "says he's taking the game seriously after Day 2 but mostly just posts defensive posts and a push on -Celestial-"
On January 08 2015 12:03 The Shining wrote:
I can see where that would be an issue for you, the lying and being consistent but that's why I'm taking D2 now so seriously. Think on me as long as you need to and ask me anything you need to. You'll see, especially with my last few posts, that all I'm trying to do is help town.
The defensive posts are taking questions for the most part, and that can be vouched for on page 2. Same for the push on Celestial. To me, the push on Celestial in of itself isn't scum like behaviour but lack of reads, and progression and scumhunting etc is what might have been the issue. As in, he is not helping town.
4 then finally ends with his only post of Night 2: a WIFOM game balance argument that Celeste must be scum cause this game can't possibly have a doctor (why when we don't know the set-up at all?)
On January 10 2015 12:51 The Shining wrote:
Okay guys, look. It is impossible for there to be a doc and a vet in a newbie game, or really any normal mini game. The idea of a vet and doc in the game breaks the balance in Town's favor. Mafia night one would have a 2/9 CHANCE of not having their shot count. After they hit vet their shot could still be blocked by doc putting them into an unwinnable situation. So just balance-wise, it's impossible to have both a doc and vet.
Also, the way Celestial claimed doc is very scum-favored. It diverts a lynch without having to prove anything. There was no hinting or bread crumbing, or even pushing another lynch(why would you? You knew the other wagon was town). This is an open game and Doc is the easiest thing to claim to save yourself from a lynch. Add this to the fact that our vet already flipped and it leads me to believe that there IS no doc.
Celestial HAS to be the lynch tomorrow.
If I'm understanding #2 correctly, there is an inconsistency in following why Shining exempts one of the smaller wagons but not another. Which I can see a double standard as problematic.
To add my input to #4, the problem I have with this is not only that it's WIFOM but upon review, Celestial actually showed some of the signs of breadcrumbing. From my interpretation of Celestial's filter, relevant quotes are below, operative words in bold.
I have before maintained that it is very possible to do this using an example I gave to Tubesock from the Carol game. In a newbie game, I would say the chances are more likely.
On January 07 2015 01:43 -Celestial- wrote:
I think I'm still somewhat tainted by rsoultin's original impression on me. I really, really didn't like what appeared to be bluehunting (the reasoning for which I posted a little while back, I can quote it if you like). Though she has improved somewhat since that I'm still wary.
On January 07 2015 23:17 -Celestial- wrote:
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt for now despite all of this because I have my own suspicions on Shining and if you're going that angle I'd quite like to see your full impressions of him over D2. Assuming I even survive the night. But if we do lynch Shining D2 his flip is going to be very, very interesting.
Another point I want to add is that scum posting tend to fall off towards late game. This is a general statement admittedly, and by itself isn't indicative, as people can lurk all game, but when taken into consideration with other evidence, could be a further issue. The fact he said he'd step it up and didn't is a problem.
Finally, when you throw in Scott's individual point about voting on unflipped association (which I've reviewed separately), it does make him look even worse.
Feedback from anyone at this point would be appreciated.
On aggregate, I feel he is, indeed, a viable lynch.
|
On January 12 2015 03:08 scott31337 wrote:
You mean since he's an uncounterclaimed medic?
Yes. And that we have had to entertain the possibility that scum, if they have an RB, would leave him alive and just neutralise him whilst going for more prime targets, with the next day, trying to make him an easy lynch in mylo today simply because he didn't die.
Therefore the plan is to not lynch him and keep him aside until all townies are confirmed of those left.
(Sorry for the delay, I just posted the case against Shining)
|
Rasputin's case v Shining has been compiled and posted. I need thoughts, I need feedback/defences, and questions if any.
We need to put it out there folks. We are in mylo (that's mislynch and lose for the new players) everyone, all town hands on deck.
We need to put our heads together and sort this out.
I will continue to review more material on ExO, plus my own scumreads after dinner.
|
Silverarte, balance is speculative. Rasputin and Tubesock have already made that point actually.
This is an open setup. An open setup means that you don't know how much of the roles are guaranteed or if there are at all.
This is a newbie game, but newbie games have coaches, and Tube already has some sort of meta read on Sicklucker which actually makes sense.
1 Scum can RB the medic, effectively neutralising him
2 Because the medic is alive, people will assume to lynch him.
We are in mylo, mislynch or lose. This means that scum only need us to mislynch once and we lose the game.
Guess who is the easiest mislynch and the easiest route to victory for scum?
If you are looking at balance, you also need to consider the scum roles in the setup, and mafia need some sort of disabler at the very least. No scum have flipped. If the roleblocker was gone, then the argument is completely valid and Celestial would be the lynch.
If Mafia RB Celestial, that actually makes it easier for them to push a mislynch on him. That is why the best option is to actually leave him alone until either two scum have flipped or the rest are effectively town.
As you say, this is a newbie game, but Tubesock made the argument that there are coaches, and we don't know what parts of the game here have been coached.
I don't dispute your checks, Silverarte, and I'm glad you claimed in mylo, that clears a few names for sure. We just need to be very careful and scum I think are relying on people to immediately dispose of Celestial.
|
These are the quotes to support what I have just said:
On January 10 2015 17:32 Tubesock wrote:
I want to push mafia to night kill celetial tonight. Why the fuck would I want that?
The world I see, the play I would make IF and only IF mafia has a roleblocker AND it's obvious town WILL LYNCH Celestial I would not waste my night kill on Celestial. Sicklucker is a smart crafty bastard. If he has those two conditions (which he easily could) why nk Celestial? The doc gets save blocked at 100% chance to succeed due to guaranteed roleblock. WIFOM us with a vegi who kills the roleblocker (low fucking odds).
They gain another free kill, and town gains 0 information. Let's prevent that play. It's easy and risk free. He lives to daytime, you bet your ass he dies that day. Or do you? Do you? Do I?
Just "claim" you won't lynch Celestial. I totally won't. Or will I?
Tin foil hat people. Tin fucking foil hat.
On January 11 2015 06:36 rsoultin wrote:
Lol, I'm less certain about Celestial than I was. I want to call him scum so bad, because I think his town play was crap if he was town...sorry, I should probably be nicer about it, but, eh...I do think he actually breadcrumbed (advertently or inadvertently) his role to some extent if he was doctor.
For instance, he was super concerned about being NKd, kept going on about it. The concern about bluehunting in the beginning I think was over the top, unless he was concerned because he had a blue role and so was paranoid about it. And then there's how his discussion of the NKs was so doctor focused. He kept going back to players who were likely to be doc saves being the explanation for why Trfel (not a likely doc save) was killed.
To me that seems that if he was scum at the very least his mind was on what the doctor was doing, or he was deliberately trying to breadcrumb. I think there's way too much doubt without a CC and the breadcrumbing to justify a Celestial lynch unless you're down to the last scum and are sold on everyone else being town.
On January 11 2015 08:59 rsoultin wrote:
Final Comment: With the breadcrumbing, I think that Celestial is a likely mislynch. Please, if I am not here to provide my input, whatever you decide, be really certain before you lynch an un-CCd role.
|
Well we're still waiting on some of the others to respond. There are three scum here, and I'm still waiting for JJB to get back to me on things.
|
On January 12 2015 05:59 Tubesock wrote:
I need to rethink things yet again.
If everyone is willing to lynch Shining, that makes me scared.
To be fair, I think he's a viable candidate...is he the best candidate? That's a different question. I did disagree with some of the points in Scott's case, but Rasputin's points I thought were much more detailed and lined up with what I looked through. That said, there are three scum, so the hunting does not stop after today.
Shining was scummed for his weak case on LS. Well, all of us should get scum for that.
It is true that most of us were on LS D2. I think what differentiates Shining is the reasoning he voted LS and the steps he took to do so. Some people went to further lengths to make sure he was or wasn't scum, and ExO did that, and so did I. Usually the argument is that scum won't question as much, and that's where Rasputin was talking about making sure that people are or are not scumhunting. Using unflipped association shows he didn't do the work before voting LS.
The differentiation comes down to not so much THAT you were wrong, it's WHY you were wrong.
Shining was also scummed for using meta somewhere. Well, everyone in this game is guilty of that. Not everyone can be scum.
I disagreed with the meta point as well.
|
EBWOP - I believe Rasputin also mentioned that whilst Shining IS new to the site, he's not new to mafia.
|
ExO - The issues I understood as follows:
JJB - issues with calculations and making sure he's not hiding behind the numbers. I see Tube has touched on a few points, I also have some followup as well.
Shining - There were issues on his activity, reads on you, his start to the game, etc. To be fair, he's answered the case, however I do have some followup with him as well.
|
Shining - Regarding point #2 on ExO, I have a few followups:
1 First regarding his votes - he was on the smaller counterwagon with WW, having voted LS D1. At that time you said you were willing to give him the BOTD. Can you explain what differentiated him (at that time) throwing his vote away vs the solo voters, after you say scum like to throw away the vote after the main lynch is secured?
2 Through D2, you appeared to have townread him as you voted LS, but chalked it up to your newb play and meta reads. Today in your response to me you say you never stopped suspecting him, and you brought up the tinfoil conspiracy theory as you cited Rasputin's thoughts on him. Now Rasputin had a 90% rating on him, was there anything that jumped out at you in that exchange between those two before the daypost?
I looked at the exchanges myself, some things did appear a red flag (and I will follow up with him), some things did not to me.
I am trying and failing to follow your logic after reading, which is why I'm asking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
