|
On November 06 2015 19:03 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
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 19:12 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +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; Show nested quote +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.
|
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.
|
Arta, what is your read on HTS now that she has answered your questions ?
|
On November 06 2015 18:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
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.
'cause this is super non-commital I feel.
|
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 19:20 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
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 18:39 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 14:55 sicklucker wrote:
This "qeustion" so dumb I dont know what angle your trying to pull here but it does not make me scum.
Artanis/me/rayn is the team I wanted and xata is the team I got. I explained why I somewhat townread xata and was happy with voting. The question is clear and has nothing to do with what you just said: Show nested quote +On November 05 2015 23:17 kitaman27 wrote:On November 05 2015 18:36 sicklucker wrote:
when i said the team is all town i ment me/rayn/artanis there.. On November 05 2015 08:03 Superbia wrote:
This one is probably going to get rejected straight out bc there's a good chance SL will just continue to lurk. =/ Artanis would've gotten some votes. On November 05 2015 08:09 sicklucker wrote:
super likely mafia. Im positive he has no reason to scum read me he just needs an excuse not to vote the all town team So these were the posts that came within 6 minutes of each other. Super said the team would get rejected with SL, but Artanis would have gotten votes instead. Now how could you think the team was SL/rayn/artanis if super is stating that artanis should have been included in the same exact post that you respond that he is scum?
then i just dont understand english
|
On November 06 2015 19:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +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:On November 06 2015 18:13 Rels wrote:
[quote]
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.
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.
|
On November 06 2015 19:33 sicklucker wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 18:39 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 14:55 sicklucker wrote:
This "qeustion" so dumb I dont know what angle your trying to pull here but it does not make me scum.
Artanis/me/rayn is the team I wanted and xata is the team I got. I explained why I somewhat townread xata and was happy with voting. The question is clear and has nothing to do with what you just said: On November 05 2015 23:17 kitaman27 wrote:On November 05 2015 18:36 sicklucker wrote:
when i said the team is all town i ment me/rayn/artanis there.. On November 05 2015 08:03 Superbia wrote:
This one is probably going to get rejected straight out bc there's a good chance SL will just continue to lurk. =/ Artanis would've gotten some votes. On November 05 2015 08:09 sicklucker wrote:
super likely mafia. Im positive he has no reason to scum read me he just needs an excuse not to vote the all town team So these were the posts that came within 6 minutes of each other. Super said the team would get rejected with SL, but Artanis would have gotten votes instead. Now how could you think the team was SL/rayn/artanis if super is stating that artanis should have been included in the same exact post that you respond that he is scum? then i just dont understand english
Then reread it (=
Lunch time, will try to reformulate if you still don't understand when I get back
|
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 19:45 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +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:On November 06 2015 19:01 Rels wrote:
[quote]
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.
You're a little shit =D
|
On November 06 2015 19:43 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 19:33 sicklucker wrote:On November 06 2015 18:39 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 14:55 sicklucker wrote:
This "qeustion" so dumb I dont know what angle your trying to pull here but it does not make me scum.
Artanis/me/rayn is the team I wanted and xata is the team I got. I explained why I somewhat townread xata and was happy with voting. The question is clear and has nothing to do with what you just said: On November 05 2015 23:17 kitaman27 wrote:On November 05 2015 18:36 sicklucker wrote:
when i said the team is all town i ment me/rayn/artanis there.. On November 05 2015 08:03 Superbia wrote:
This one is probably going to get rejected straight out bc there's a good chance SL will just continue to lurk. =/ Artanis would've gotten some votes. On November 05 2015 08:09 sicklucker wrote:
super likely mafia. Im positive he has no reason to scum read me he just needs an excuse not to vote the all town team So these were the posts that came within 6 minutes of each other. Super said the team would get rejected with SL, but Artanis would have gotten votes instead. Now how could you think the team was SL/rayn/artanis if super is stating that artanis should have been included in the same exact post that you respond that he is scum? then i just dont understand english Then reread it (= Lunch time, will try to reformulate if you still don't understand when I get back
Alright it's super easy. Let's start from the beginning, even if you ve already answered.
On November 05 2015 08:09 sicklucker wrote:
super likely mafia. Im positive he has no reason to scum read me he just needs an excuse not to vote the all town team
What is the "all town team" you had in mind when writing this post ?
|
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!
|
On November 06 2015 21:11 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 20:56 Rels wrote: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:
[quote]
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 Thanks for playing!
Pretty cool (=
I'm picturing you with your folder of "funny and town-looking images", waiting for the perfect opportunity to post one
|
On November 06 2015 21:18 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 21:11 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 20:56 Rels wrote: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:
[quote]
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;
[quote]
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 Thanks for playing! Pretty cool (= I'm picturing you with your folder of "funny and town-looking images", waiting for the perfect opportunity to post one
Is that an indirect way of calling me mafia?
|
On November 06 2015 21:20 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 21:18 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 21:11 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 20:56 Rels wrote: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:
[quote]
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 Thanks for playing! Pretty cool (= I'm picturing you with your folder of "funny and town-looking images", waiting for the perfect opportunity to post one Is that an indirect way of calling me mafia?
No. Did you feel attacked by that post ?
|
On November 06 2015 21:22 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2015 21:20 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 21:18 Rels wrote:On November 06 2015 21:11 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On November 06 2015 20:56 Rels wrote: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:
[quote]
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 Thanks for playing! Pretty cool (= I'm picturing you with your folder of "funny and town-looking images", waiting for the perfect opportunity to post one Is that an indirect way of calling me mafia? No. Did you feel attacked by that post ?
The way you phrased it made me think you were scumreading me, yes. Generally people don't feel the need to specify "town-looking images" when they're talking about people they are in fact townreading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
