|
On July 21 2009 03:20 Lenwe wrote:
Is that the best you can come up with to logically prove I am mafia. A mistake I already admitted to and a bit of clue analyzis of mine, where I already admitted clue's could be found that link towards everyone. That's a bit weak even for your standards.
I won't repeat myself and hope everyone reads my previous post seriously and wonders if they should trust you again after you failed them so many times already.
(Btw, the knack for working out combinations mentioned on one of the early days could point towards your math problem that you worked out in your blog.)
Just waiting for the day to come and crack yourself with clues then.
|
On July 21 2009 03:35 Lenwe wrote:
Your plan is extremely flawed though. The mafia know where their members have placed their votes so they know where to substracts their votes. The plan means that the blue (if he is an active poster) would have to lie about his vote as well. That means the town knows less than the mafia if your plan had worked.
Unfortunately for you, your plan didn't work due to epic inactivity levels. Three people followed your plan, including yourself. We had 2 votes for sunny (HoE and you) and 1 for snow (me) as according to your plan. When inactivity hit this hurt you because one townie coming in at the last moment would screw your plan. He would vote snow and we would get snow. This would leave the town with two confirmed innocents and prove either you or HoE is mafia (and since we had far more suspicioun towards you you would have probably been lynched). We know have the same situation, but with only one confirmed innocent (better for the mafia right?). So, at the last moment you changed your vote, completely disregarding your previous plan. This turn does not hurt the mafia because it still leaves the town with a 1:1 choice of who is mafia and who is not, but only gives the town one confirmed townie, which is better than two for the mafia (and pust you up against me who has been considered a mafia member before, thus giving you a better chance to save yourself for one day longer). You realize you will have to take the hit now anyway, so decided to push the town for my lynch to save you for one more day, realizing that when I turn green you will be next.
Please stop. So if im mafia thinking that 1 more guy can come i move to snow. No man: IF IM MAFIA IM NOT PROPOSING SHIT ABOUT THIS. You screwed because pyrrhuloxia had the balls to refuse to vote, if one more townie should have voted he had to vote sunny I made it clear read the thread. CRYSTAL CLEAR. If I was mafia knowing you are inocent and HOE too I would have left my vote on sunny. If another guys comes foward voting snow i would have changed my vote (if im mafia). Why do i have to actually work to win this game if im mafia. Please... again im the one trying to win the game for the town. Im the one forcing this extralist. Is that a mafia move? What have you done for the town? What would happen if I wouldnt have made this stupidity? NOTHING GAME OVER, just as Scaramanga is claiming mafia wins. I dont, i refuse to lose if i have the chance to win. (Falcynn is mafia too btw. But first Lenwe all at his given time).
|
My best... I tried. Rest... I must. GG.
|
On July 21 2009 06:48 Falcynn wrote:Damn it, why did I have to die like that? Could've given a bit more of a fight, but no, I had to be killed by some punk kid who got a lucky jump  Edit: anyways, I hope now my play-style this game makes some sense. I still probably played badly, but hopefully it still seems justified somewhat.
Serves you right for not claiming one day back. God- mafia knew you were mystic but not townies =/.
|
On July 21 2009 15:32 Ace wrote:
Honestly though Plexa, I would have thought BC was mafia also. Lynching MBH was like a huge "I'm mafia suck my dick" move of the game. I can understand why Bockit did it.
OMG please someone at least has to believe this. BC: hey im just going on other plan because i want. WTF. Thats why i came insta all in against him. And note that the first fucktard was me ok stupidity where it belongs. Btw Plexa i want to check that weather list please. Congratulations mafia you had the game 2 days ago.
|
On July 21 2009 16:12 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2009 16:05 Malongo wrote:On July 21 2009 15:32 Ace wrote:
Honestly though Plexa, I would have thought BC was mafia also. Lynching MBH was like a huge "I'm mafia suck my dick" move of the game. I can understand why Bockit did it. OMG please someone at least has to believe this. BC: hey im just going on other plan because i want. WTF. Thats why i came insta all in against him. And note that the first fucktard was me ok stupidity where it belongs. Btw Plexa i want to check that weather list please. Congratulations mafia you had the game 2 days ago. I made some bad plays, but your final 3 mafia list was horrible. You didnt have 1 in the group of 3. None of you thought of the move logically, Maybe I would have been better off killing L/pyrr/fishball or the like, ie someone who could lead down as well. But on the off chance one of L/pyrr/mbh/fishball was red or any other bigname, mbh scares me the most. Just as if qatol or ver were in the game i would hit one of them over mbh as they both scare me more than mbh and can manipulate the game just as well. Yes, I will admit I could have used the plan on someone else, but in this game mbh, if revived, would have enough information hopefully to completely rape the mafia, almost autowinning the game.
Not too sure about that and if you are going to dependant on MBH every game please stop appearing in ALL the mayor lists. I better play RPS or roll a dice seeing if mbh turns red, green or blue. I try my best. Always. Im not playing a game following some guy because he is good, sorry i prefer 100% be the loser crazy guy. And for leader I wanted L. I voted L. You won the office. You were the leader. Trying to look for another player to take the lead just made you suspicious. Next time you want the office be the leader or let others take it.
|
On July 21 2009 17:32 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
I don't see why you are all bashing BC's idea so hard. Lynching MBH has a lot of pros and cons. It was just a matter of weighing them. IF the town managed to get even a SINGLE protect on Judge we would of lost instantly. Yes his plan had flaws, but all plans have their flaws. His benefits meant an auto win, and if he didn't kill MBH, I guarantee we would have. We all knew he was a threat and we were panicking about how to hit to make sure he didn't get rezzed. We caught the rage/berserk hint and got Judge, we had about 4 other candidates as well?
The plan has its pros and cons, a bad bit of luck combined with mafia skill and town ineptitude resulted in the cons far exceeding the pros.
I thought you were on vacation  . First i didnt found the plan "that" suspicious, i found it bad, but not automatically mafia-like. It was the conception: first a supposed list of people where to take a lynch, then from a moment to other: hey change of plans!!. That is mafia like. Nobody, absolutely nobody had a word about the plan or why suddenly BC changes the direction. This wasnt a primary plan, it just poped from BC. Should this had been in the BCs to do list I would have told imo bad plan. The way it was played absolutely mafia like. And its not because its BC, anyone that changes plans at the last moment without caring a shit about the office rol is calling to get lynched.
|
On July 21 2009 18:10 Ver wrote:
I think the biggest argument for killing MBH early is that if he is mafia he is virtually guaranteed to kill the priest by day 2 and the priest is such a broken role that it can singlehandedly win the game. Furthermore MBH is really the only superstrong behavior analyst in the game, so if he is out of the picture you don't have to worry about the priest getting sniped early. There were definitely better plans available to abuse the priest further (or hell just lynch a mafia), but BC's was okay. It's like a DT drop PvT, if it works you auto win, if not you still have a solid shot at victory.
As it stood mafia ended up getting priest by clues which thwarted everything, but it's impossible to predict that the priest would end up having obvious clues to them the day before.
Oh one other thing. Number one rule of behavior analysis:
Kill the guy trying to seem not suspicious, not the guy who makes himself suspicious on his own.
Town early on always goes for the guys who look guilty but are really innocent while the mafia hides in the background. It's really really easy to fall victim to; I still have trouble avoiding the lure of the easy target.
If I'm mafia I won't want to draw attention to myself by coin flipping my lynch target because I'm too tired/sick to think. Similarly, if BC was mafia he would make it his plan from the start to avoid drawing any unnecessary attention instead of doing a last minute switch.
But either way BC should never have died because he controlled the double lynch.
I can buy your argument about not lynching the guys too suspicious at the beggining up to certain level but it fails to apply on the guy in the lead. I mean under this assumption we shouldnt have killed Qatol when he was mafia mayor. The fact is that this fail olympically to apply to mayors/kings/emperors w.e. because once mafia takes the leader place what he wants the most is to create as much chaos as he can before getting lynched (and in fact he wants to get lynched because that means more chaos). Never, not even once a mafia mayor has tried to be in alive for more than 4 days.
|
On July 21 2009 18:37 Ver wrote:
You're looking at it the wrong way and/or I explained it poorly.
Qatol was doing his best to appear as an ordinary townie. He made the medic lists, tried to organize 'traps' to bait the mafia, and made logical sounding posts.
On the other hand you had Quickstriker, inertinept, Versatile, and Ace, who all made themselves suspicious on their own. Of course there were other aspects to that game but it was a great example of this principle. Then just look at last game; both Ace and I made ourselves extremely suspicious on our own and we both wanted to kill each other because of it, yet the real mafia were the ones posting in ways to avoid getting noticed.
I'm not saying the innocents played correctly (indeed part of their goal is to communicate their innocence) but this is a really common pattern that is rarely broken.
Yeah i think i can understand your point: mafia doesnt want to be in the eye at anytime of the game and less at the start. On the other side there are always uncooperative townies that try hard to look suspicious or make weird moves. However if theres one guy that should be trying (even more than mafia if he is townie) not to look suspicious in any posible way is the mayor. The mayor is the guy that will stay alive longer, the guy that proposed a plan of action and the guy that has a known power. After reviewing this game and last game I dont regret the lynchs for a moment. Thats why I was so shocked after BC. Im not asking the guy in charge to pull a miracle first lynch or come with the most impressive one post analysis for every player or first day clue analysis. I just ask him to be consequent: dont make fancy moves, dont change the plan at last moment, dont make like you are fishing, because that make the guys with no power doubt. Look at the "best" mayor we had: sog. Sure he was lucky with a dt role, first day lynch and a first day rolecheck. But look at his posting too: "dont roleclaim to me", "dont vote with be blindly", "you know what? im going to abstain for now because i dont want to create bandwagon", "im going to be 100% transparent". The central point here is that every small doubt you can add to a player's real intentions in the game is multiplied x10 when we talk about the leader: he "is" the voice, he "is" the one pulling the strings publicly or the one you can at least "suspect" has a blue role or knows something you dont for the good of the town. I agree that my logic can be not a general rule or may be extremately flawed, however the fact that 3 times the mayor was lynched tells me it has a degree of logic to be that way, maybe it is not 100% logic but empiric in last instance. Look at Bockit, I think L would have lynched BC too. Look at last game L, Ace and who knows how many more: we were actually convinced enough to lynch the leaders because they were simply not solid, they had a small amount of doubt on them even with other townies making stupid moves or more suspicious moves. As I said to Qatol when he was mafia mayor: you dont fish or do weird moves as mayor: that just create chaos and inestability when you are actualy the face of stability, if you do that you are asking yourself to get lynched
|
On July 21 2009 21:37 Ace wrote:Malongo how do you make such good posts and analysis but always have weird decisions in game?
Cause ima crazy townie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
