|
On January 05 2012 05:16 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:42 Xeris wrote:
I don't favor randomly lynching people in the first night -- unless there is some actual suspicion. Statistically, maybe it's better to random lynch, but I feel like the chances you might randomly kill a cop // medic make it not worth it.
I prefer using the first day to try to get reads on people, then wait until Day 2 to use the information gained in Day 1, based on who ends up dying / etc to make a more reasoned/educated prediction about who might be mafia.
Randomly lynching is a really stupid idea. I agree on random lynching is bad, and I won't participate in a random lynch. But a lynch on the most suspicious player on day one I am all for. So please clearify for me, would you prefer a no-lynch day 1 over a lynch on someone who is slightly scummy?
If there are legitimate concerns about someone on the first day, sure, I'd probably participate in a lynch. But I don't really see how you can determine that on the first day when you have basically NO information to go off. Further, because this is online mafia, you can't even read people the same way... I don't see how you can possibly get a good enough ready on someone in the first day, before any action has happened, enough to confidently lynch someone.
|
@gonzaw I haven't voted for Gretorp because I thought we weren't supposed to vote until near the end of D1. Throwing a vote out with so many hours left to use for reads isn't very smart. Plus I was waiting for his response, as well as the first posts of Xeris and the return of Blurry, who seems to have fallen off the face of the Earth.
|
On January 05 2012 05:21 Jitsu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:54 gonzaw wrote:EBWOP: On January 05 2012 04:42 Xeris wrote:
I don't favor randomly lynching people in the first night -- unless there is some actual suspicion. Statistically, maybe it's better to random lynch, but I feel like the chances you might randomly kill a cop // medic make it not worth it.
I prefer using the first day to try to get reads on people, then wait until Day 2 to use the information gained in Day 1, based on who ends up dying / etc to make a more reasoned/educated prediction about who might be mafia.
Randomly lynching is a really stupid idea. Nobody mentioned RL yet, why did you? Anyways, just so we get the RNG lynch our of the way, this is what I think of it (feel free to ignore it if you want though, it doesn't really add anything new to the discussion): I think the point of random lynch is, first, to have EVERYBODY ABSOLUTELY AGREE to lynch whoever is chosen. Then, we somehow randomly choose someone (we can make everybody RNG someone, and the one that comes up the most is chosen). Although scum will surely choose themselves, and will surely not choose a fellow scum member for the lynch, so this gives us info too. Then, we decide to lynch the guy. If nobody objects and completely agrees, then we can be sure that player is town (scum would flip their shit if their team member is RLed on Day 1). If somebody objects, then maybe he's scum (and his scumbuddies are objecting), or it's just a townie changing his mind. In any case, you don't lynch anybody, you use it as a ruse to get information and get confirmed townies and stuff. The gist of it is not mentioning this to anyone though. Anyways, I don't know if this can work or not, so maybe in Post-Game (or now if you want) we can discuss it more thoroughly. RNG is a bad idea. This is a game about limited information. No real information is gleaned from RNG a lynch. What happens if you nail a mafia member? Nice! What happens if you nail a townie. You just learn that that individual player was green. Glean information from posts, sort it, filter it, analyze it. Posting and lynching based on evidence is a better theory than randomly trying to pull numbers out of a hat and hopefully snag mafia. I hope by Day 2, people will have enough reads and analysis where a random lynch wouldn't even have to be mentioned. I'd still like to hear from CookieMaker and AnxiousHippo. For one who posted with a lot early activity, and the other who preached it, they surely have dropped off the radar.
Yes, that's the point.
You ACT like if you were going to make a lynch based on RNG, but in fact you don't.
It's used to get info.
If the guy chosen by the RNG is scum, I'm sure scum members will freak out.
If the guy is townie, I'm sure nobody will freak out (except that guy obviously).
After the guy to lynch is decided, and everybody voices their opinions, you just say "lol jk I wont' random lynch him" and just play normally.
Of course I think this may be best suited for a Mayor for instance, since I think those choose the lynch on Day 1, or some similar role (it would be kind of impossible to pull this off in a normal setup).
|
On January 05 2012 05:34 Xeris wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 05:16 Tunkeg wrote:On January 05 2012 04:42 Xeris wrote:
I don't favor randomly lynching people in the first night -- unless there is some actual suspicion. Statistically, maybe it's better to random lynch, but I feel like the chances you might randomly kill a cop // medic make it not worth it.
I prefer using the first day to try to get reads on people, then wait until Day 2 to use the information gained in Day 1, based on who ends up dying / etc to make a more reasoned/educated prediction about who might be mafia.
Randomly lynching is a really stupid idea. I agree on random lynching is bad, and I won't participate in a random lynch. But a lynch on the most suspicious player on day one I am all for. So please clearify for me, would you prefer a no-lynch day 1 over a lynch on someone who is slightly scummy? If there are legitimate concerns about someone on the first day, sure, I'd probably participate in a lynch. But I don't really see how you can determine that on the first day when you have basically NO information to go off. Further, because this is online mafia, you can't even read people the same way... I don't see how you can possibly get a good enough ready on someone in the first day, before any action has happened, enough to confidently lynch someone.
Well, you don't really have that much more information going into day 2. If you want to base your lynches off who was killed by scum night one you are entering deep into WIFOM country, and all sorts of wierd speculations to why scum killed the one they did. This sort of analysis is worthless IMO, as no one know why scum did as they did (except themselves). Did they try to throw us of with the kill, did they kill someone who was onto them, did they chose a target that that they were sure wouldn't get a protected (if there is a doc in this set up) etc etc.
The reason why we need to lynch day one is so that everyone have to justify their votes. If they use bad logic or just are following someone else they will be put under heavy scrutiny on day 2. If someone choses to vote for someone to have a no-lynch they will have to have a damn good reason why not to vote for someone who where up for the lynch (these good reasons beeing they had town read on them, and reasoning behind that townread).
|
EBWOP:
+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2012 05:37 CatsnHats wrote:
@gonzaw I haven't voted for Gretorp because I thought we weren't supposed to vote until near the end of D1. Throwing a vote out with so many hours left to use for reads isn't very smart. Plus I was waiting for his response, as well as the first posts of Xeris and the return of Blurry, who seems to have fallen off the face of the Earth.
Votes can also be used for pressure, and to see the reactions of other players (and the one you voted obviously).
Specially on Day 1.
Although if you are certain the guy is scum, then vote for him with all your courage and try to convince other people of so.
Although okay then, that's fine.I expect you to make some "reads" on Gretorp/Xeris/etc soon though.
Also, yeah Blurry hasn't come here yet.
He's from Switzerland though? What time is it there?
Hell, this is why I wanted the whole timezone thing (maybe the timezones should be put next to each player's username just like the Nationality, although again maybe that's for Post-Game or another time).
+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2012 05:34 Xeris wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 05:16 Tunkeg wrote:On January 05 2012 04:42 Xeris wrote:
I don't favor randomly lynching people in the first night -- unless there is some actual suspicion. Statistically, maybe it's better to random lynch, but I feel like the chances you might randomly kill a cop // medic make it not worth it.
I prefer using the first day to try to get reads on people, then wait until Day 2 to use the information gained in Day 1, based on who ends up dying / etc to make a more reasoned/educated prediction about who might be mafia.
Randomly lynching is a really stupid idea. I agree on random lynching is bad, and I won't participate in a random lynch. But a lynch on the most suspicious player on day one I am all for. So please clearify for me, would you prefer a no-lynch day 1 over a lynch on someone who is slightly scummy? If there are legitimate concerns about someone on the first day, sure, I'd probably participate in a lynch. But I don't really see how you can determine that on the first day when you have basically NO information to go off. Further, because this is online mafia, you can't even read people the same way... I don't see how you can possibly get a good enough ready on someone in the first day, before any action has happened, enough to confidently lynch someone.
Are you seriously telling me there's nothing to go on by now?
Also you haven't responded to my posts, nor reacted to me voting you, you are basicly ignoring me.
|
@gonzaw
I belive Blurry is on CET time just as I am, which no is 21:52. So thats KST -8 (KST is displayed up in your right corner)-
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2012 05:37 gonzaw wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 05:21 Jitsu wrote:On January 05 2012 04:54 gonzaw wrote:EBWOP: On January 05 2012 04:42 Xeris wrote:
I don't favor randomly lynching people in the first night -- unless there is some actual suspicion. Statistically, maybe it's better to random lynch, but I feel like the chances you might randomly kill a cop // medic make it not worth it.
I prefer using the first day to try to get reads on people, then wait until Day 2 to use the information gained in Day 1, based on who ends up dying / etc to make a more reasoned/educated prediction about who might be mafia.
Randomly lynching is a really stupid idea. Nobody mentioned RL yet, why did you? Anyways, just so we get the RNG lynch our of the way, this is what I think of it (feel free to ignore it if you want though, it doesn't really add anything new to the discussion): I think the point of random lynch is, first, to have EVERYBODY ABSOLUTELY AGREE to lynch whoever is chosen. Then, we somehow randomly choose someone (we can make everybody RNG someone, and the one that comes up the most is chosen). Although scum will surely choose themselves, and will surely not choose a fellow scum member for the lynch, so this gives us info too. Then, we decide to lynch the guy. If nobody objects and completely agrees, then we can be sure that player is town (scum would flip their shit if their team member is RLed on Day 1). If somebody objects, then maybe he's scum (and his scumbuddies are objecting), or it's just a townie changing his mind. In any case, you don't lynch anybody, you use it as a ruse to get information and get confirmed townies and stuff. The gist of it is not mentioning this to anyone though. Anyways, I don't know if this can work or not, so maybe in Post-Game (or now if you want) we can discuss it more thoroughly. RNG is a bad idea. This is a game about limited information. No real information is gleaned from RNG a lynch. What happens if you nail a mafia member? Nice! What happens if you nail a townie. You just learn that that individual player was green. Glean information from posts, sort it, filter it, analyze it. Posting and lynching based on evidence is a better theory than randomly trying to pull numbers out of a hat and hopefully snag mafia. I hope by Day 2, people will have enough reads and analysis where a random lynch wouldn't even have to be mentioned. I'd still like to hear from CookieMaker and AnxiousHippo. For one who posted with a lot early activity, and the other who preached it, they surely have dropped off the radar. Yes, that's the point. You ACT like if you were going to make a lynch based on RNG, but in fact you don't. It's used to get info. If the guy chosen by the RNG is scum, I'm sure scum members will freak out. If the guy is townie, I'm sure nobody will freak out (except that guy obviously). After the guy to lynch is decided, and everybody voices their opinions, you just say "lol jk I wont' random lynch him" and just play normally. Of course I think this may be best suited for a Mayor for instance, since I think those choose the lynch on Day 1, or some similar role (it would be kind of impossible to pull this off in a normal setup).
RE: Gonzaw/RNG:
I understand the idea of it, but in a newbie game, I think you are thinking to hard into it. Also, especially now, I think it would be too hard to effectively play that way, simply because scum now know that if one of them RNG's, that guy is dead weight and will probably be killed regardless. Alternatively, RNG'ing a blue might force a reveal, which might be equally as bad. I like the idea a little. I like backing up lynches with logically posts a lot.
We have two days from the beginning of Day 1 to analyze enough posts to find something to go one.
|
On January 05 2012 05:52 Tunkeg wrote:
@gonzaw
I belive Blurry is on CET time just as I am, which no is 21:52. So thats KST -8 (KST is displayed up in your right corner)-
So KST is how much in GMT?
..
Wait nevermind, apparently is 1 hour behind me, so it must be KST= -3 GMT
Anyways, that means Blurry wasn't asleep this whole time.
Well, I guess he'll explain why he's inactive once he comes here.
On January 05 2012 05:58 Jitsu wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2012 05:37 gonzaw wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 05:21 Jitsu wrote:On January 05 2012 04:54 gonzaw wrote:EBWOP: On January 05 2012 04:42 Xeris wrote:
I don't favor randomly lynching people in the first night -- unless there is some actual suspicion. Statistically, maybe it's better to random lynch, but I feel like the chances you might randomly kill a cop // medic make it not worth it.
I prefer using the first day to try to get reads on people, then wait until Day 2 to use the information gained in Day 1, based on who ends up dying / etc to make a more reasoned/educated prediction about who might be mafia.
Randomly lynching is a really stupid idea. Nobody mentioned RL yet, why did you? Anyways, just so we get the RNG lynch our of the way, this is what I think of it (feel free to ignore it if you want though, it doesn't really add anything new to the discussion): I think the point of random lynch is, first, to have EVERYBODY ABSOLUTELY AGREE to lynch whoever is chosen. Then, we somehow randomly choose someone (we can make everybody RNG someone, and the one that comes up the most is chosen). Although scum will surely choose themselves, and will surely not choose a fellow scum member for the lynch, so this gives us info too. Then, we decide to lynch the guy. If nobody objects and completely agrees, then we can be sure that player is town (scum would flip their shit if their team member is RLed on Day 1). If somebody objects, then maybe he's scum (and his scumbuddies are objecting), or it's just a townie changing his mind. In any case, you don't lynch anybody, you use it as a ruse to get information and get confirmed townies and stuff. The gist of it is not mentioning this to anyone though. Anyways, I don't know if this can work or not, so maybe in Post-Game (or now if you want) we can discuss it more thoroughly. RNG is a bad idea. This is a game about limited information. No real information is gleaned from RNG a lynch. What happens if you nail a mafia member? Nice! What happens if you nail a townie. You just learn that that individual player was green. Glean information from posts, sort it, filter it, analyze it. Posting and lynching based on evidence is a better theory than randomly trying to pull numbers out of a hat and hopefully snag mafia. I hope by Day 2, people will have enough reads and analysis where a random lynch wouldn't even have to be mentioned. I'd still like to hear from CookieMaker and AnxiousHippo. For one who posted with a lot early activity, and the other who preached it, they surely have dropped off the radar. Yes, that's the point. You ACT like if you were going to make a lynch based on RNG, but in fact you don't. It's used to get info. If the guy chosen by the RNG is scum, I'm sure scum members will freak out. If the guy is townie, I'm sure nobody will freak out (except that guy obviously). After the guy to lynch is decided, and everybody voices their opinions, you just say "lol jk I wont' random lynch him" and just play normally. Of course I think this may be best suited for a Mayor for instance, since I think those choose the lynch on Day 1, or some similar role (it would be kind of impossible to pull this off in a normal setup). RE: Gonzaw/RNG: I understand the idea of it, but in a newbie game, I think you are thinking to hard into it. Also, especially now, I think it would be too hard to effectively play that way, simply because scum now know that if one of them RNG's, that guy is dead weight and will probably be killed regardless. Alternatively, RNG'ing a blue might force a reveal, which might be equally as bad. I like the idea a little. I like backing up lynches with logically posts a lot. We have two days from the beginning of Day 1 to analyze enough posts to find something to go one.
I said this RNG lynch discussion I was making had nothing to do with this game in particular, it was just a general thought on how to "Implement" RNG lynch in other games.
I would only implement that in a game with a Mayor or some role that decides a lynch (so it can be done more smoothly), and only if there is absolutely no leads for a lynch.
Basicly, I would want that as an alternative to no-lynch (if it were the case), since if you want to no-lynch because you have no information, faking a random lynch will give you the information you don't have (and hopefully will make you change your mind and actually have a lynch on Day 1).
|
RE: Gonzaw/RNG:
Ahhhh, I see what you are talking about. Well, let's focus on this game, than, eh?
Gonzaw, give me you're opinion on three people: Myself (Jitsu), Cookie, and Cephiro.
|
On January 05 2012 04:22 Xeris wrote:
I can guarantee you guys that I am not mafia -- I'm a townie.
Anyone who has played mafia with me knows how terrible I am at being a mafia. I am a really good townie though, so you should definitely keep me in the game!
I don't vote in this thread right?? When are the votes due (i.e. what actual time)?
Voting is done in this thread, You can find the deadline in the relevant daypost, but for right now the deadline is Friday, Jan 06 1:00am GMT (GMT+00:00)
|
On January 05 2012 06:25 Jitsu wrote:
RE: Gonzaw/RNG:
Ahhhh, I see what you are talking about. Well, let's focus on this game, than, eh?
Gonzaw, give me you're opinion on three people: Myself (Jitsu), Cookie, and Cephiro.
Hmm, for one, I agree with most of your posts.
I agree with your points about having a lynch on Day 1.
I agree with you that Cookie is acting strange. The only things he posted where the 50/50 chance of there being a DT thing, and him advocating no-lynch.
Plus what I already stated about him, that he said he just wanted to vote the player with less votes, effectively ridding him of any responsability for the lynch.
However, you only discussed those things and this whole RNG thing, and I'm not that content with that.
You also pressured AnxiousHippo, and then you never came back to that.
At the very least, you could have pressured vote him, so you know he will have to respond to you some time in the future.
I'd like your response to why you didn't continue to pressure AnxiousHippo.
Also I'd like you to contribute more regarding other players, like Liquidseth (sp?), Gretorp, Catshats, etc.
Speaking of which, it might be a good time to actually pressure AnxiousHippo too.
Regarding Cephiro:
I think he's one of the 2 players contributing more here, with the other one being Probulous (although he's been fairly inactive for some hours, I'll just assume it's the time zone thing).
I like his enthusiasm and activity, that seems fairly pro-town, but I don't like that he's "trusting" a lot of people and having too many "town reads" for the moment, and basicly no scum reads.
I'm waiting for his response to my post too.
|
EBWOP:
Also, it's 'your opinion' not'you're opinion' >
.
..lol jk
|
On January 05 2012 06:40 gonzaw wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 06:25 Jitsu wrote:
RE: Gonzaw/RNG:
Ahhhh, I see what you are talking about. Well, let's focus on this game, than, eh?
Gonzaw, give me you're opinion on three people: Myself (Jitsu), Cookie, and Cephiro. Hmm, for one, I agree with most of your posts. I agree with your points about having a lynch on Day 1. I agree with you that Cookie is acting strange. The only things he posted where the 50/50 chance of there being a DT thing, and him advocating no-lynch. Plus what I already stated about him, that he said he just wanted to vote the player with less votes, effectively ridding him of any responsability for the lynch. However, you only discussed those things and this whole RNG thing, and I'm not that content with that.
You also pressured AnxiousHippo, and then you never came back to that.
At the very least, you could have pressured vote him, so you know he will have to respond to you some time in the future.
I'd like your response to why you didn't continue to pressure AnxiousHippo.
Also I'd like you to contribute more regarding other players, like Liquidseth (sp?), Gretorp, Catshats, etc.
Speaking of which, it might be a good time to actually pressure AnxiousHippo too.Regarding Cephiro: I think he's one of the 2 players contributing more here, with the other one being Probulous (although he's been fairly inactive for some hours, I'll just assume it's the time zone thing). I like his enthusiasm and activity, that seems fairly pro-town, but I don't like that he's "trusting" a lot of people and having too many "town reads" for the moment, and basicly no scum reads. I'm waiting for his response to my post too.
RE: Hippo Pressure
I was giving him the benefit of the doubt when it came to time zones, seeing as how it's just becoming 7AM where he lives in Australia. If it's painfully obvious that he's blatantly ignoring my posts, than the heat comes on. I pressed him twice, third time is the charm. A lot of people pretend to be aggressive when they just make bullshit posts. I don't believe i'm one of them.
RE: Cookie
I see. I agree mostly with the thoughts on Cookie. Strange indeed.
@Cephiro, what are your thoughts on CookieMaker?
|
On January 05 2012 06:54 Jitsu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 06:40 gonzaw wrote:On January 05 2012 06:25 Jitsu wrote:
RE: Gonzaw/RNG:
Ahhhh, I see what you are talking about. Well, let's focus on this game, than, eh?
Gonzaw, give me you're opinion on three people: Myself (Jitsu), Cookie, and Cephiro. Hmm, for one, I agree with most of your posts. I agree with your points about having a lynch on Day 1. I agree with you that Cookie is acting strange. The only things he posted where the 50/50 chance of there being a DT thing, and him advocating no-lynch. Plus what I already stated about him, that he said he just wanted to vote the player with less votes, effectively ridding him of any responsability for the lynch. However, you only discussed those things and this whole RNG thing, and I'm not that content with that.
You also pressured AnxiousHippo, and then you never came back to that.
At the very least, you could have pressured vote him, so you know he will have to respond to you some time in the future.
I'd like your response to why you didn't continue to pressure AnxiousHippo.
Also I'd like you to contribute more regarding other players, like Liquidseth (sp?), Gretorp, Catshats, etc.
Speaking of which, it might be a good time to actually pressure AnxiousHippo too.Regarding Cephiro: I think he's one of the 2 players contributing more here, with the other one being Probulous (although he's been fairly inactive for some hours, I'll just assume it's the time zone thing). I like his enthusiasm and activity, that seems fairly pro-town, but I don't like that he's "trusting" a lot of people and having too many "town reads" for the moment, and basicly no scum reads. I'm waiting for his response to my post too. RE: Hippo Pressure I was giving him the benefit of the doubt when it came to time zones, seeing as how it's just becoming 7AM where he lives in Australia. If it's painfully obvious that he's blatantly ignoring my posts, than the heat comes on. I pressed him twice, third time is the charm. A lot of people pretend to be aggressive when they just make bullshit posts. I don't believe i'm one of them. RE: Cookie I see. I agree mostly with the thoughts on Cookie. Strange indeed. @Cephiro, what are your thoughts on CookieMaker?
Ehmm Jitsu, when I said I wanted your thoughts on Liquid/Gretorp/Cats/etc I meant it lol.
But really, what are your thoughts on these players?
|
Hello again everyone! Got caught up watching a good movie, but going to catch up on mafia now:
On January 05 2012 04:26 gonzaw wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2012 03:41 Cephiro wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 03:05 Jitsu wrote:
There are reasons for this. And there hasn't been a major reason to post a lot yet. I think I've spoken a fair amount in the posts I have written. Quality of quantity.
I see what you mean. But regardless of what your reasons are, you need to be available enough so that we can get a read on you. Not being able to get any kind of read on you doesn't help your case at all. But I'll trust you... for now. You know, the problem I have with you for now is that you "trust" a lot of people and think a lot of people are town. Although finding out who's town is benefitial (since then it becomes a process of elimination to find scum), you should specially try to find scum directly.
I see your point. I consider that you need to be able to trust some people to some extent in this game, and I am trying to find players which I can be fairly sure of to be townies. That does not mean I will analyze them any less though, I'm not taking anyone for granted neither am I setting anything in stone. I think that the first 24-hours of D1 in this game are quite hard to start pointing scum fingers at someone, but I assure you that whenever my scum sensor alerts, I'll let you all know. So I do get your point about finding scum directly, but I don't want to negate trying to find out whom are town. In my opinion, both is better than just the other.
About Gretorp, I am certainly not liking his play so far. He has only posted twice, which of one was appareantly a joke, and the other being an explanation of the first message. The fact that he has posted but still hasn't said anything with content feels suspicious to me. What do you others think?
Random Lynching is a retarded idea in my opinion, (since someone brought it up, I'll have my say in this as well.) because we still have more than a whole day on us to make reads, and since we don't have a mayor in this game, we can't use it in the way you were theorycrafting either. I still stand by what I said at start, I want us to be able to get enough reads on people to lynch a scum on day 1.
Jitsu's post pretty much sums up my opinion.
On January 04 2012 05:21 Jitsu wrote:
Glean information from posts, sort it, filter it, analyze it. Posting and lynching based on evidence is a better theory than randomly trying to pull numbers out of a hat and hopefully snag mafia. I hope by Day 2, people will have enough reads and analysis where a random lynch wouldn't even have to be mentioned.
I don't approve Xeris's play at all so far, all he has is two posts talking about the different ways of lynching, he hasn't provided any opinions about anyone, nor asked anyone else about their reads. Not very pro-town in my opinion.
If he isn't going to step up soon, I am probably going to pressure vote for either him or Gretorp.
My timezone is GMT +2, so it's around 15 minutes past midnight at the time of this post. I will probably stay up for at least 2 more hours.
@Jitsu: I'm actually starting to be really suspicious of him at the moment. He had a very active start, even though his content was somewhat fluffy. I've changed my opinion about him since my earlier post, partly due to many people providing good reasoning about his play so far. I am actually wondering a bit as he hasn't said anything since yesterday's start, so I'm interested to hear if he has some actual opinions or reads to give when he comes back.
|
EBWOP: And more regarding Cookie, his whole point of no-lynching seems to rely on the chance that there is a DT in this game, which we have no idea of if that's sure or not. 50% chance, and I think we didn't come to play Forum Mafia to flip a coin to see if we'll lynch or not.
|
@Gonzaw, in continuation. I needed to read filters.
RE: Sheth
After I red his filter, I have a town feel from him. He's still null, but leaning town. He's putting a little but of pressure on Cats, but he totally lets Cephiro off the hook after he posts his general town reads. Not sure if he's using the fact that Cephiro posted this morning as a cop-out to not having to post a real read, or if his post was actually against Cephiro.
He has his initial post, which I thought was good. Few posts of filler and helping out newbs, and than this golden, awesome post about how he's going to make a post in the morning about something that is bothering him!!! Hype Hype Hype...Hype...hy..pe...Let down.
I don't like that.
If you are going to post that you are going to make a post later, save your post count and do it than, or do it later. No announcements to announcements.
RE: Gretorp
Too little information to really make a read as of right now, but I'm getting a null-green feeling if anything.
RE: Catsnhats
+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2012 01:52 CatsnHats wrote:Show nested quote +
@ CatsnHats, slightly better. What do you think about Tunkeg's aggressive playstyle?
As for Tunkeg's aggression, right now I'm leaning towards overaggressive townie prodding for reads as opposed to a mafia running smokescreen for himself by accusing others. That being said, 3 accusations on 3 different targets in 3 subsequent posts is a little too much. If he keeps it up at that pace I'll be much more suspicious.
3 accusations on 3 targets in 3 posts might be too much, but it's a shit-ton better than 0 accusations on 0 targets in a small amount of posts. Out of the three players, you are giving me the hardest scum read out of all. The filler in his post is basically him going through the motions and agreeing/disagreeing with what people have said already.
As of right now, I think you need to post something with substance. You said that you are waiting for the last few lurkers to post. The last few lurkers have posted. Where are you're reads at?
|
cephiro, why are you trying to create outlandish narratives to make a decisive choice? You aren't' leaving much range for people to be townie. so interesting! :-)
|
On January 05 2012 07:36 Gretorp wrote:
cephiro, why are you trying to create outlandish narratives to make a decisive choice? You aren't' leaving much range for people to be townie. so interesting! :-)
I am not entirely sure what you mean by trying to create outlandish narratives to make a decisive choice? If I understood that sentence right (I even checked an online wordbook just to be sure >.>), I still don't understand your point. So since you're accusing me of something, could you please be more exact about what you mean so that I can give you a proper response?
I'm not either entirely sure on what you mean by me not leaving much range for people to be townies, but in my opinion less range is better than more range? I mean, we aren't here to try and let everyone off the hook for pretending to be townies. Anyone could be anything.
And I still feel like you're not helping the case at all. Three one-two liner posts, not saying almost anything. If you are a townie you need to post more content or you aren't really helping us, the town. Instead we have to waste time on wondering if you're just a less active townie or maybe a sneaky scum. Do something useful and tell me what you think about Gonzaw?
|
On January 04 2012 18:07 CookieMaker wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 14:22 Probulous wrote:
With that I am leaving till tomorrow. See you guys at about 08:00 KST tomorrow. Jab and dodge eh? I like your style. I'd actually also like his opinion. At the moment I am very content with the way the town is developing. There is clearly a trust developing among several players who employ similar town-favored tactics.Also, I enjoy watching Sheth stir the pot, but he's kinda leaving the lid off without giving it a chance to boil. I'm interested to see what our current inactives have to say; I think even the majority of the Nords have already piped up. And now I sleep in the hopes that during the night little elves will come and whisper in the ears of our inactives, and whence they rise an impulse stronger than coffee shall empower their mouse cursors to look at their TeamLiquid PM's and realize that they should be posting in this thread about their regret at not having posted sooner. Tunkeg I'm giving you some leeway because of the timezone comment but I swear to Odin....  Thought of some cute food for thought: Surely rotten eggs will indeed be the those whom first crack in the steamer This is one of the worst posts so far. Cookiemaker points out that Probulous leaves right after making accusations, and later says that he's about to go to sleep too. He also talks vaguely about how people are trusting eachother but so far it's only been cephiro and catsnhats, there's barely any trust from everyone else.
He then uses a fancy metaphor which always annoys me, like they're trying to sound better.
Then he posts some more useless metaphorical stuff saying he wants people to be a bit more active. and then a poem.
cookiemaker clarify what players seem to be trusting eachother
sheth tell us what posts are bothering you
Also, where did blurry go?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
