|
I'm on mobile right now, gonna look into rels a bit more. Feel free to ask q's if you have any.
|
Oh jesus rels is involved in everything as mafia too x_x
|
Need to re-eval rels more when I actually have a pc and can compare filters. Moving him back to null/fear read though.
|
On November 05 2015 22:29 Half the Sky wrote:On the topic of Artanis, I know he said he'd free up more Thursday so I look forward to reading more from him. Can't recall if he has capoeira today though, IRL he has been on a tear with that. Which means if he drops by in the UK, his first objective will be to dropkick me. Damn it. 
Nope, I'm gonna mostly have time for the next four hours. I may drop by to dropkick you anyway though 
On November 05 2015 07:23 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2015 06:31 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Oh jesus rels is involved in everything as mafia too x_x How do you know I'm involved in everything as town as well ? I'm pretty sure we never played together ??
Two things:
A) I assume most people have far more involved town games than scumgames. My townread on you came from the fact that you seem very active and involved in almost every discussion. That's generally enough to townread most players.
B) I have seen you play town before, though I haven't played with you. I'm not sure which game I was observing anymore but I have done so.
Also C) I never called you scum. I said you're back to null because what I thought made you town is apparently not alignment indicative.
|
Rels, why did you flip your Rayn read based on things that had already happened before you townread him initially? What made you think about him again? Your argument's revolved around things he should know, but no part of your argument was new to when you said he was definitely town.
|
Like you went from calling him basically confirmed town to very suspicious in 3 hours without anything seemingly triggering you.
|
On November 05 2015 12:10 ShoCkeyy wrote:
You guys/girls are all bad at this game. It's so obvious I'm not scum by looking like scum.
This is not a very strong argument.
Also, what are your reads at? You seem to be suspicious of Rayn and Xata but you haven't really been explicit in it. I don't really understand what you're trying to do currently.
|
I'm not sure how this
On November 05 2015 08:28 Half the Sky wrote:
Meh....nvm, Artanis corrected him. Was going to say....
eh....no change on my reads on Artanis. Reading pages 3-4 of his filter and not really finding any mafia motivation in his posts. Reading his queries (993/998) on Superbia and probably will read Superbia a bit closely now...
Lines up with this:
On November 05 2015 09:03 Half the Sky wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2015 08:56 kitaman27 wrote:On November 05 2015 08:41 Half the Sky wrote:
Aiming for until 12:30am or so... (another 45m) so if anyone wants to talk, please do. You don't need give details or anything, but where would you everyone one through nine in terms of trustworthiness? With nine being most trustworthy kitaman27 6 ShoCkeyy 2 at most Rels - um, zero? Artanis[Xp] 7-8 Xatalos 7 Superbia 6 raynpelikoneet - 8-9 sicklucker 5 at most (although I'm atm trying to evaluate him on what he does have...) I am aware that Rels, you, Superbia have pretty damned capable scum games so there is some caution with some of the ratings.
When before, your read on me was this:
On November 04 2015 21:57 Half the Sky wrote:
Alright that's not a fear read (a fear read to me is a non-read on a player who outplayed as Mafia or a refusal to read someone who is difficult to read in general), which is why I misunderstood, but that last post I see what you mean. You're obviously posting so that's out the window, so the current null read can change depending on what I see.
And you never expanded on the change of your read on me. What made you confident I was town and why?
|
On November 06 2015 03:28 Xatalos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 02:18 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
Like you went from calling him basically confirmed town to very suspicious in 3 hours without anything seemingly triggering you. Maybe a justification to vote no or something...? Kind of hard to follow his reads when they jump around so fast... Especially without any events in the thread causing the changes really :/ Quite wary about including him in a team at this point, I guess.
He's already voiced suspicion on SL though, I don't think that'd be necessary. It's weird.
|
On November 06 2015 06:22 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 02:15 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 05 2015 22:29 Half the Sky wrote:On the topic of Artanis, I know he said he'd free up more Thursday so I look forward to reading more from him. Can't recall if he has capoeira today though, IRL he has been on a tear with that. Which means if he drops by in the UK, his first objective will be to dropkick me. Damn it. Nope, I'm gonna mostly have time for the next four hours. I may drop by to dropkick you anyway though On November 05 2015 07:23 Rels wrote:On November 05 2015 06:31 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Oh jesus rels is involved in everything as mafia too x_x How do you know I'm involved in everything as town as well ? I'm pretty sure we never played together ?? Two things: A) I assume most people have far more involved town games than scumgames. My townread on you came from the fact that you seem very active and involved in almost every discussion. That's generally enough to townread most players. B) I have seen you play town before, though I haven't played with you. I'm not sure which game I was observing anymore but I have done so. Also C) I never called you scum. I said you're back to null because what I thought made you town is apparently not alignment indicative. OK that makes sense. Security check: can you link me to the game in question ? All my games are in my profile so that should take you like 5 seconds. Im also pretty sure you said you would be reading my filter and evaluating me. Will you do it, or are you pulling a Hts ?
Student Mafia XVI. I was a coach there too.
I did kinda evaluate you, though not as thoroughly yet as I need to. I also want to know why you suddenly decided to re-eval Rayn.
|
On November 06 2015 06:28 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 02:17 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
Rels, why did you flip your Rayn read based on things that had already happened before you townread him initially? What made you think about him again? Your argument's revolved around things he should know, but no part of your argument was new to when you said he was definitely town. I'm on phone so no quote: read my big post. The first line is something like "I thought he was confirmed because he made a very similar post about noobking in newbie XIII". But actually its super suspicious that he uses this game to prove that my case are boring, when my play D1 this game was boring. Now he defends himself saying "But its not THIS kind of boring!", when he clearly said in example of me being town " look how he's always looking for something new on noobking". I get that this is not very clear without quote; read my big post and the reactions after it to understand.
Yeah but what made you think about this? He hadn't said anything new since your last post.
|
I'm kind of around but at work. Not much to say until we find out if the mission passes or not honestly. If it does, I'm obviously nominating myself with the other three. Don't want to say too much about it before the pass/fail happens to not give any clues to any spy whether they should sabotage or not.
@Rels/HtS your explanations were satisfactory, though I'd still like to hear from HtS what exactly changed her mind on me when she's on a pc.
|
On November 06 2015 18:13 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 08:00 Tictock wrote:
Day 1
Xatalos Nomination (Xatalos, rayn, sicklucker)
Vote Result
Half the Sky - YES
Xatalos - YES
Artanis[Xp] - YES
raynpelikoneet - YES
ShoCkeyy - NO
Rels - NO
sicklucker - YES
kitaman27 - NO
Superbia - NO
MISSION IS APPROVED
Xatalos, raynpelikoneet, and sicklucker will be embarking on Mission 1
Mission will be completed in at 23:00 GMT (+00:00) on 6 November 2015. Suuuuper interesting! With such a close vote, we'll have a lot of infos depending on how the team does. Let's see. If the team pass there are two solutions: - it's a clean team; then there have to be 2 mafias in Shockey / kita / Superbia. Maybe 3, but it's possible one mafia went for the towncred instead if he thought the team would pass even if he voted no; since in this case, he's not on the team, it would be HTS or Arta. Given how HTS posted about her opinions on the vote, I don't see her voting "yes" in that situation when she had the perfect opportunity to vote "no" to a clean team. So if one mafia voted "yes" to a clean team, it would be Arta. - there is 1 (or more) scum in the team but he didn't make the mission failed: unlikely. The goal of the game is to win three missions for both team; exchanging town cred for 1 failure out of 3 doesn't seem to be worth it. It that happens, I think it makes Artanis town, since the plan would be to make Arta pick the same team + himself, fail the mission, and put the blame on him. So if the team passes the mission, then fails the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, it probably means Arta's alignment will be determinent to solving the game; it's either Arta being mafia going for the towncred; or Arta being town on which mafia are trying to put the blame. Figuring this out in this case will be crucial. If the team passes the mission, then passes the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, there are all town and the game is won. That would be cool. (= If the team fails: There is one confirmed mafia in Xata / rayn / SL, maybe 2. There has to be at least 2 mafias in Xata / rayn / SL / HTS / Arta, probably 3 since, as said above, the towncred lost by voting a failure team is more than compensated by the 1 win out of 3 needed. That doesn't apply if one scum thought the team would pass even if he voted "no" though. That's where I'm at. Not going further until tomorrow.
So, uh, what conclusions have you actually drawn from this? You won't find out if it's a clean team or not even if it passes. It seems your entire post is speculation without any substance, other than it being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible, therefore not really being a conclusion at all.
|
On November 06 2015 19:01 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 18:53 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 18:13 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 08:00 Tictock wrote:
Day 1
Xatalos Nomination (Xatalos, rayn, sicklucker)
Vote Result
Half the Sky - YES
Xatalos - YES
Artanis[Xp] - YES
raynpelikoneet - YES
ShoCkeyy - NO
Rels - NO
sicklucker - YES
kitaman27 - NO
Superbia - NO
MISSION IS APPROVED
Xatalos, raynpelikoneet, and sicklucker will be embarking on Mission 1
Mission will be completed in at 23:00 GMT (+00:00) on 6 November 2015. Suuuuper interesting! With such a close vote, we'll have a lot of infos depending on how the team does. Let's see. If the team pass there are two solutions: - it's a clean team; then there have to be 2 mafias in Shockey / kita / Superbia. Maybe 3, but it's possible one mafia went for the towncred instead if he thought the team would pass even if he voted no; since in this case, he's not on the team, it would be HTS or Arta. Given how HTS posted about her opinions on the vote, I don't see her voting "yes" in that situation when she had the perfect opportunity to vote "no" to a clean team. So if one mafia voted "yes" to a clean team, it would be Arta. - there is 1 (or more) scum in the team but he didn't make the mission failed: unlikely. The goal of the game is to win three missions for both team; exchanging town cred for 1 failure out of 3 doesn't seem to be worth it. It that happens, I think it makes Artanis town, since the plan would be to make Arta pick the same team + himself, fail the mission, and put the blame on him. So if the team passes the mission, then fails the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, it probably means Arta's alignment will be determinent to solving the game; it's either Arta being mafia going for the towncred; or Arta being town on which mafia are trying to put the blame. Figuring this out in this case will be crucial. If the team passes the mission, then passes the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, there are all town and the game is won. That would be cool. (= If the team fails: There is one confirmed mafia in Xata / rayn / SL, maybe 2. There has to be at least 2 mafias in Xata / rayn / SL / HTS / Arta, probably 3 since, as said above, the towncred lost by voting a failure team is more than compensated by the 1 win out of 3 needed. That doesn't apply if one scum thought the team would pass even if he voted "no" though. That's where I'm at. Not going further until tomorrow. So, uh, what conclusions have you actually drawn from this? You won't find out if it's a clean team or not even if it passes. It seems your entire post is speculation without any substance, other than it being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible, therefore not really being a conclusion at all. Why do you expect a conclusion when we don't know what will happen ? I will do a proper vote analysis when we know the result. What I'm thinking above is independant from my reads, so it will be interesting to match vote analysis with reads.
Because I just don't understand the point of the post you made.
|
On November 06 2015 19:08 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 19:03 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:01 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 18:53 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 18:13 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 08:00 Tictock wrote:
Day 1
Xatalos Nomination (Xatalos, rayn, sicklucker)
Vote Result
Half the Sky - YES
Xatalos - YES
Artanis[Xp] - YES
raynpelikoneet - YES
ShoCkeyy - NO
Rels - NO
sicklucker - YES
kitaman27 - NO
Superbia - NO
MISSION IS APPROVED
Xatalos, raynpelikoneet, and sicklucker will be embarking on Mission 1
Mission will be completed in at 23:00 GMT (+00:00) on 6 November 2015. Suuuuper interesting! With such a close vote, we'll have a lot of infos depending on how the team does. Let's see. If the team pass there are two solutions: - it's a clean team; then there have to be 2 mafias in Shockey / kita / Superbia. Maybe 3, but it's possible one mafia went for the towncred instead if he thought the team would pass even if he voted no; since in this case, he's not on the team, it would be HTS or Arta. Given how HTS posted about her opinions on the vote, I don't see her voting "yes" in that situation when she had the perfect opportunity to vote "no" to a clean team. So if one mafia voted "yes" to a clean team, it would be Arta. - there is 1 (or more) scum in the team but he didn't make the mission failed: unlikely. The goal of the game is to win three missions for both team; exchanging town cred for 1 failure out of 3 doesn't seem to be worth it. It that happens, I think it makes Artanis town, since the plan would be to make Arta pick the same team + himself, fail the mission, and put the blame on him. So if the team passes the mission, then fails the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, it probably means Arta's alignment will be determinent to solving the game; it's either Arta being mafia going for the towncred; or Arta being town on which mafia are trying to put the blame. Figuring this out in this case will be crucial. If the team passes the mission, then passes the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, there are all town and the game is won. That would be cool. (= If the team fails: There is one confirmed mafia in Xata / rayn / SL, maybe 2. There has to be at least 2 mafias in Xata / rayn / SL / HTS / Arta, probably 3 since, as said above, the towncred lost by voting a failure team is more than compensated by the 1 win out of 3 needed. That doesn't apply if one scum thought the team would pass even if he voted "no" though. That's where I'm at. Not going further until tomorrow. So, uh, what conclusions have you actually drawn from this? You won't find out if it's a clean team or not even if it passes. It seems your entire post is speculation without any substance, other than it being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible, therefore not really being a conclusion at all. Why do you expect a conclusion when we don't know what will happen ? I will do a proper vote analysis when we know the result. What I'm thinking above is independant from my reads, so it will be interesting to match vote analysis with reads. Because I just don't understand the point of the post you made. Thinking about the different possible scenarios that could happen from that vote pattern, regardless of what I think of the players myself, so it's easier to understand what's going on when we get the result.
I just don't really get why you're going into scenario's where you'll never be able to discern which is which though. Like I said;
being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible
You list the possible scenarios, but I'm pretty sure everyone's already figured that if the 3-person mission passes and the 4-person mission fails, it is in fact possible for one of the people in the 3-person mission to still be a spy.
|
On November 06 2015 19:15 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 19:12 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:08 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:03 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:01 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 18:53 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 18:13 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 08:00 Tictock wrote:
Day 1
Xatalos Nomination (Xatalos, rayn, sicklucker)
Vote Result
Half the Sky - YES
Xatalos - YES
Artanis[Xp] - YES
raynpelikoneet - YES
ShoCkeyy - NO
Rels - NO
sicklucker - YES
kitaman27 - NO
Superbia - NO
MISSION IS APPROVED
Xatalos, raynpelikoneet, and sicklucker will be embarking on Mission 1
Mission will be completed in at 23:00 GMT (+00:00) on 6 November 2015. Suuuuper interesting! With such a close vote, we'll have a lot of infos depending on how the team does. Let's see. If the team pass there are two solutions: - it's a clean team; then there have to be 2 mafias in Shockey / kita / Superbia. Maybe 3, but it's possible one mafia went for the towncred instead if he thought the team would pass even if he voted no; since in this case, he's not on the team, it would be HTS or Arta. Given how HTS posted about her opinions on the vote, I don't see her voting "yes" in that situation when she had the perfect opportunity to vote "no" to a clean team. So if one mafia voted "yes" to a clean team, it would be Arta. - there is 1 (or more) scum in the team but he didn't make the mission failed: unlikely. The goal of the game is to win three missions for both team; exchanging town cred for 1 failure out of 3 doesn't seem to be worth it. It that happens, I think it makes Artanis town, since the plan would be to make Arta pick the same team + himself, fail the mission, and put the blame on him. So if the team passes the mission, then fails the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, it probably means Arta's alignment will be determinent to solving the game; it's either Arta being mafia going for the towncred; or Arta being town on which mafia are trying to put the blame. Figuring this out in this case will be crucial. If the team passes the mission, then passes the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, there are all town and the game is won. That would be cool. (= If the team fails: There is one confirmed mafia in Xata / rayn / SL, maybe 2. There has to be at least 2 mafias in Xata / rayn / SL / HTS / Arta, probably 3 since, as said above, the towncred lost by voting a failure team is more than compensated by the 1 win out of 3 needed. That doesn't apply if one scum thought the team would pass even if he voted "no" though. That's where I'm at. Not going further until tomorrow. So, uh, what conclusions have you actually drawn from this? You won't find out if it's a clean team or not even if it passes. It seems your entire post is speculation without any substance, other than it being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible, therefore not really being a conclusion at all. Why do you expect a conclusion when we don't know what will happen ? I will do a proper vote analysis when we know the result. What I'm thinking above is independant from my reads, so it will be interesting to match vote analysis with reads. Because I just don't understand the point of the post you made. Thinking about the different possible scenarios that could happen from that vote pattern, regardless of what I think of the players myself, so it's easier to understand what's going on when we get the result. I just don't really get why you're going into scenario's where you'll never be able to discern which is which though. Like I said; being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible You list the possible scenarios, but I'm pretty sure everyone's already figured that if the 3-person mission passes and the 4-person mission fails, it is in fact possible for one of the people in the 3-person mission to still be a spy. Cause I want it to be clear in my head. And that worked; I discovered that if success-then-fail happened, determining your alignment via behaviour will solve a big part of the game.
Well yes, determining the alignment of the 4th player when there's a 3-success then 4-fail is probably important. It just seems like you went for a pretty.. roundabout way of approaching it?
Eh, whatever, it's not that important I guess. I kinda wanna hear more from you about Rayn and SL, but I think it's best to wait for the results first.
|
On November 06 2015 19:20 Rels wrote:
Arta, what is your read on HTS now that she has answered your questions ?
Still mildly leaning scum.
|
On November 06 2015 19:25 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 19:20 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:15 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:12 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:08 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:03 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:01 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 18:53 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 18:13 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 08:00 Tictock wrote:
Day 1
Xatalos Nomination (Xatalos, rayn, sicklucker)
Vote Result
Half the Sky - YES
Xatalos - YES
Artanis[Xp] - YES
raynpelikoneet - YES
ShoCkeyy - NO
Rels - NO
sicklucker - YES
kitaman27 - NO
Superbia - NO
MISSION IS APPROVED
Xatalos, raynpelikoneet, and sicklucker will be embarking on Mission 1
Mission will be completed in at 23:00 GMT (+00:00) on 6 November 2015. Suuuuper interesting! With such a close vote, we'll have a lot of infos depending on how the team does. Let's see. If the team pass there are two solutions: - it's a clean team; then there have to be 2 mafias in Shockey / kita / Superbia. Maybe 3, but it's possible one mafia went for the towncred instead if he thought the team would pass even if he voted no; since in this case, he's not on the team, it would be HTS or Arta. Given how HTS posted about her opinions on the vote, I don't see her voting "yes" in that situation when she had the perfect opportunity to vote "no" to a clean team. So if one mafia voted "yes" to a clean team, it would be Arta. - there is 1 (or more) scum in the team but he didn't make the mission failed: unlikely. The goal of the game is to win three missions for both team; exchanging town cred for 1 failure out of 3 doesn't seem to be worth it. It that happens, I think it makes Artanis town, since the plan would be to make Arta pick the same team + himself, fail the mission, and put the blame on him. So if the team passes the mission, then fails the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, it probably means Arta's alignment will be determinent to solving the game; it's either Arta being mafia going for the towncred; or Arta being town on which mafia are trying to put the blame. Figuring this out in this case will be crucial. If the team passes the mission, then passes the next with SL / rayn / Xata / Arta, there are all town and the game is won. That would be cool. (= If the team fails: There is one confirmed mafia in Xata / rayn / SL, maybe 2. There has to be at least 2 mafias in Xata / rayn / SL / HTS / Arta, probably 3 since, as said above, the towncred lost by voting a failure team is more than compensated by the 1 win out of 3 needed. That doesn't apply if one scum thought the team would pass even if he voted "no" though. That's where I'm at. Not going further until tomorrow. So, uh, what conclusions have you actually drawn from this? You won't find out if it's a clean team or not even if it passes. It seems your entire post is speculation without any substance, other than it being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible, therefore not really being a conclusion at all. Why do you expect a conclusion when we don't know what will happen ? I will do a proper vote analysis when we know the result. What I'm thinking above is independant from my reads, so it will be interesting to match vote analysis with reads. Because I just don't understand the point of the post you made. Thinking about the different possible scenarios that could happen from that vote pattern, regardless of what I think of the players myself, so it's easier to understand what's going on when we get the result. I just don't really get why you're going into scenario's where you'll never be able to discern which is which though. Like I said; being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible You list the possible scenarios, but I'm pretty sure everyone's already figured that if the 3-person mission passes and the 4-person mission fails, it is in fact possible for one of the people in the 3-person mission to still be a spy. Cause I want it to be clear in my head. And that worked; I discovered that if success-then-fail happened, determining your alignment via behaviour will solve a big part of the game. Well yes, determining the alignment of the 4th player when there's a 3-success then 4-fail is probably important. It just seems like you went for a pretty.. roundabout way of approaching it? Eh, whatever, it's not that important I guess. I kinda wanna hear more from you about Rayn and SL, but I think it's best to wait for the results first. LOL OK said like that it's sound super dumb. (= It has something else to do with voting though: if the team is clean, the scum team is probably shockey / Superbia / kita. If one of them is wrong, you have to be the last scum, since the team is clean and HTS could have voted "no" super easily with what she was saying just before deadline.
How are you ever going to determine if the team is clean though? This is what I didn't get from your analysis.
|
On November 06 2015 19:42 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 19:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:25 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:20 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:15 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:12 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:08 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:03 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:01 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 18:53 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
[quote]
So, uh, what conclusions have you actually drawn from this? You won't find out if it's a clean team or not even if it passes. It seems your entire post is speculation without any substance, other than it being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible, therefore not really being a conclusion at all. Why do you expect a conclusion when we don't know what will happen ? I will do a proper vote analysis when we know the result. What I'm thinking above is independant from my reads, so it will be interesting to match vote analysis with reads. Because I just don't understand the point of the post you made. Thinking about the different possible scenarios that could happen from that vote pattern, regardless of what I think of the players myself, so it's easier to understand what's going on when we get the result. I just don't really get why you're going into scenario's where you'll never be able to discern which is which though. Like I said; being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible You list the possible scenarios, but I'm pretty sure everyone's already figured that if the 3-person mission passes and the 4-person mission fails, it is in fact possible for one of the people in the 3-person mission to still be a spy. Cause I want it to be clear in my head. And that worked; I discovered that if success-then-fail happened, determining your alignment via behaviour will solve a big part of the game. Well yes, determining the alignment of the 4th player when there's a 3-success then 4-fail is probably important. It just seems like you went for a pretty.. roundabout way of approaching it? Eh, whatever, it's not that important I guess. I kinda wanna hear more from you about Rayn and SL, but I think it's best to wait for the results first. LOL OK said like that it's sound super dumb. (= It has something else to do with voting though: if the team is clean, the scum team is probably shockey / Superbia / kita. If one of them is wrong, you have to be the last scum, since the team is clean and HTS could have voted "no" super easily with what she was saying just before deadline. How are you ever going to determine if the team is clean though? This is what I didn't get from your analysis. Well, by playing the game. There is no way to know for sure: we'll have to use behaviour analysis, vote analysis, etc. I like having all the different scenarios in my head, so I can see which one is more likely; like if I cross this analysis with my reads, I'm pretty sure the team is not clean, 'cause that would either mean that kita / shockey / Superbia are the scums or that you are scum and voted for a clean team.
So, your analysis decided that if a 3-player team passes and a 4-player team fails, we need behaviour and vote analysis to determine whether the 4th player is scum or town, and thus decide whether the 3-player team is clean or not.
I think you may be on to something here.
|
On November 06 2015 20:56 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 19:45 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:42 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:25 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:20 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:15 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:12 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 19:08 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 19:03 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
[quote]
Because I just don't understand the point of the post you made. Thinking about the different possible scenarios that could happen from that vote pattern, regardless of what I think of the players myself, so it's easier to understand what's going on when we get the result. I just don't really get why you're going into scenario's where you'll never be able to discern which is which though. Like I said; being "unlikely" that they'd pass a mission with a mafia in it only to follow it up with the fact that it is possible You list the possible scenarios, but I'm pretty sure everyone's already figured that if the 3-person mission passes and the 4-person mission fails, it is in fact possible for one of the people in the 3-person mission to still be a spy. Cause I want it to be clear in my head. And that worked; I discovered that if success-then-fail happened, determining your alignment via behaviour will solve a big part of the game. Well yes, determining the alignment of the 4th player when there's a 3-success then 4-fail is probably important. It just seems like you went for a pretty.. roundabout way of approaching it? Eh, whatever, it's not that important I guess. I kinda wanna hear more from you about Rayn and SL, but I think it's best to wait for the results first. LOL OK said like that it's sound super dumb. (= It has something else to do with voting though: if the team is clean, the scum team is probably shockey / Superbia / kita. If one of them is wrong, you have to be the last scum, since the team is clean and HTS could have voted "no" super easily with what she was saying just before deadline. How are you ever going to determine if the team is clean though? This is what I didn't get from your analysis. Well, by playing the game. There is no way to know for sure: we'll have to use behaviour analysis, vote analysis, etc. I like having all the different scenarios in my head, so I can see which one is more likely; like if I cross this analysis with my reads, I'm pretty sure the team is not clean, 'cause that would either mean that kita / shockey / Superbia are the scums or that you are scum and voted for a clean team. So, your analysis decided that if a 3-player team passes and a 4-player team fails, we need behaviour and vote analysis to determine whether the 4th player is scum or town, and thus decide whether the 3-player team is clean or not. I think you may be on to something here. You're a little shit =D
![[image loading]](http://qc.createdebate.com/img/blog_article_images/disagreement-hierarchy.jpg)
Thanks for playing!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
