| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
If you dont want to play the game, have the respect and quit. I have sat here for over an hour, F5'n her and there for no fucking reason other than wasting my Sunday before having to go back to work tomorrow. ##VOTE: Jampidampi See you at lynch deadline. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
- myself - Mocsta - Sylencia (without a lot of convincing) - TeMiL (though I may vote for him if we come to the conclusion that it's better for town) Which leaves: - Jampi - Zare - Omni I don't want to hunt Omni if I can avoid it, but if he's left alone I might make a case, depending on whether I'm busy with pressuring one of the other two. Lynching Omni does have the benefit of clearing Zare's name if he flips red. Who will you NOT be pursuing? Who is left? | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:24 OmniEulogy wrote: gg Cora. I was role blocked. This is curious. Why would OmniEulogy be roleblocked? A jailkeeper would target someone he believes will be killed. Scum had no motivation to kill Omni, because he was the other suspicious player D1 and thus would be pressured at least N1, if not D2 potentially leading to another misslynch. Many pointed that if StriX flips town (which he did), Omni would be very suspicious. A jailkeeper could also potentially target a scumread in hopes that a) he is scum and b) he carries out the nightkill. Even if he was 100% sure that Omni was scum, that would still only lead to 50/50 chance of blocking the kill. Thus I don't this is likely. A scum roleblocker would target Omni if he thought he had a blue role. A scum roleblocker might target Omni in hopes that he claims and someone suspects this claim. @All Should townies always claim being roleblocked in this setup? Do you think the scum roleblocker would target Omni? Or do think he faked the claim? Or do you have any better reasoning for a jailkeeper to target Omni? | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
All you did was state the obvious jampidampi. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Looking at the possible setups, there are only four: Goon + Roleblocker, Jailkeeper + Cop, five Townies 2 Goons, Cop, six Townies 2 Goons, Jailkeeper, six Townies Goon + Roleblocker, seven Townies In scenario one we have either a player that did not post night actions (TeMiL?), or a person not revealing that they were roleblocked. I'm not sure on whether it is well known if revealing a roleblock is a solid move in this setup (or whether it's a solid move at all). Omni you revealed immediately, do you have this information? I imagine that it is the right play, but I admit I don't have a good understanding of this part of the game. In scenario two Omni is lying, which probably means scum. This scenario is unlikely as it is bloody risky for a scum to do this just to flush out a blue role. In scenario three the jailkeeper might have read Omni as scum, and JKed him, but the more logical play would to be jailing defensively. This scenario is unlikely, as it would mean the JK is playing far less than optimally (there were only really three potential NK targets, where as there were six potential roleblockers. In scenario four the scum thought the best chance of stopping a blue action was by roleblocking Omni. Does anyone know of any slips Omni has made that would make him look blue? I haven't seen any. They may have thought him a likely cop check (though they don't know whether there is a cop). This scenario is unlikely. Interestingly, the town blue roles have more information than the rest of us (if any). A JK can rule out two and four, as well as know there is a 50% base chance of Omni lying if the JK was not the one that roleblocked him (the rest of us only have information granting a 25% base chance). I don't think a JK would jail Omni, as it's the wrong play. Therefore, it is likely that if we have a JK, he knows that Omni is lying. I don't think scum would think Omni is blue. This means that if scum did roleblock him, it was for other reason. I could be wrong on this. If anyone has seen blue slips from Omni, you need to factor this into your analysis of this situation. A cop can rule out scenarios three and four and also has a better base read on Omni's chance of lying. Either we have a bad JK, we have someone hiding the fact they were roleblocked, or Omni is lying. This analysis was on the fly, so if there are holes in it polease point them out. I don't think Jamp's analysis was bad, in fact the information he provided needed to be put down to get everyone less analytic on track. Mocsta you seem pretty grumpy, this is understandable but it won't help your play. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks something is wrong with this. @Mocsta You yourself have plenty of occasiations where you prompt others to do the thinking for you. I'm not certain on this, but atleast everyone of your quoestion session has left me with this feeling. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 16:14 Spaghetticus wrote: Wow there has barely been any discussion at all... Mocsta I am confused as to what is happening in your dialogue with Sylencia, so I'll butt out and let this run it's course. When you want an explanation just holla. I hope the rest of you are reading the thread or sleeping, because this much activity after an NK is sort of unacceptable. We have a lot of information to sift through (more than ever before!), why would everyone be inactive? Alright, can I ask you for the explanation behind that statement? I said it twice before, but I don't understand how you got to the conclusion that if you didn't change your vote from Temil, it would mean your intention was a no lynch. With regards to the roleblocking move, perhaps someone read this post and acted on it? On January 05 2013 14:25 Spaghetticus wrote: We have a 50% chance of there actually being a JK, then that JK has to correctly identify the scum that will carry out the NK without being roleblocked. This was what came to my mind when Omni claimed the roleblock. If we look at it being there being a Jailkeeper who wasn't sure what to do, they would most likely find this piece of advice and use it. What this means is that if it's a Town JK, they are one who suspects OE as scum. If it was a scum RB, it was either to block a blue move, or an attempt to clear his name via roleblock. (Possible for him to be roleblocked by the other mafia member, and then claim it - both actions killing and roleblocking performed by the same person.) I'm not sure if they would risk that kind of move though, because if there is a scum RB, there would've been a 50% chance for there to be a JK+Cop too, so a day 1 move like that would be quite unlikely. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
On January 06 2013 22:32 Sylencia wrote: Also, it's very unlikely that he is lying, because if no one else claims a Roleblock here, the 3rd setup is the most likely one - which means he could easily cop a check (excuse the pun) the next night. By the third setup do you mean the one with only a jailkeeper? And I'm not sure if I understand the meaning behind your 2nd sentence, do you mean a cop is likely to check on him? But there is no cop in the 3rd setup... | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Okay so it doesn't seem like Mocsta was making the play I thought. I'll reveal. If you have your vote on someone and that person has no chance of being lynched, your vote is not actually doing anything. Functionally, it is the same as voting for a no-lynch, as everyone else will go an lynch someone without your input. When you stayed on jamp, there was no way he was getting lynched, and so not changing you denied us your input on who got lynched. This means we cannot blame you for a mislynch, it's complete disassociation from the actual lynch. Now that I think on it, that means if you flip scum you were probably happy with an Omni or StriX lynch, which would increase the town read on Omni. It does not mean that you are actually wanting a no-lynch. A no-lynch will hardly ever get off the ground in a newbie game. When I described your vote as the equivalent of a no-lynch, I probably should have said it was the equivalent of a no-vote. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Can you please quote the cop sentence in question? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 22:48 jampidampi wrote: By the third setup do you mean the one with only a jailkeeper? And I'm not sure if I understand the meaning behind your 2nd sentence, do you mean a cop is likely to check on him? But there is no cop in the 3rd setup... Sorry, second setup with the Cop only. | ||
|
jampidampi
Finland386 Posts
So what you are saying that in the event he is lying, a cop will check on him? If that is so then I understand. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 22:48 Spaghetticus wrote: Ew did I actually write that? I probably thought at that point that a JK was only the town version of a roleblocker. That would explain a lot though. Okay so it doesn't seem like Mocsta was making the play I thought. I'll reveal. If you have your vote on someone and that person has no chance of being lynched, your vote is not actually doing anything. Functionally, it is the same as voting for a no-lynch, as everyone else will go an lynch someone without your input. When you stayed on jamp, there was no way he was getting lynched, and so not changing you denied us your input on who got lynched. This means we cannot blame you for a mislynch, it's complete disassociation from the actual lynch. Now that I think on it, that means if you flip scum you were probably happy with an Omni or StriX lynch, which would increase the town read on Omni. It does not mean that you are actually wanting a no-lynch. A no-lynch will hardly ever get off the ground in a newbie game. When I described your vote as the equivalent of a no-lynch, I probably should have said it was the equivalent of a no-vote. Right, but then as I've said previously how am I supposed to honestly reply to a question such as "What was the reasoning behind voting Strix?" without sounding like I've just jumped onto the wagon without him having a scum image in mind? That was why I didn't change my vote in the previous day, and I think if I did it would've caused more problems during today because there would be a high chance that I would be killed off for changing my vote on someone I didn't have any reasoning behind. @Spag Was my train of thought wrong, and should I have switched my vote despite my internal thoughts on the situation? If I had done it, would you have reacted the way I thought everyone would regarding a random switch in vote? If you disagree with my thoughts, I want to hear what you would have done/suggest. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On January 06 2013 22:53 jampidampi wrote: So what you are saying that in the event he is lying, a cop will check on him? If that is so then I understand. Yes because without the Roleblocker on the scum team (only 1 RB got claimed), the Cop and JK do not co-exist. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
And yes, if your voteswitch looked like a pure bandwagon you would have been grilled, but by speaking the truth (that your vote was otherwise redundant, and that you exercised as much control over the lynch as possible under the circumstances) town would be in a better position to assess you, and I at least would have found your response adequate. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Are we laying this to rest? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
The time given to read and make a rational decision based on that post was very small. I had just woken up and when I saw that post, and I only got to skim read it because I was going through it so slowly. Since the finer points of the argument weren't read properly, I was not going to vote for him. If others want to make a comment about this, I'll be happy to answer, but if not, I think there are other things we can concentrate on. @Mocsta: You were annoyed that most of us were not on during the evening of tonight, and you placed a vote on Jampi. Was there a reason behind it, and is there a reason you did not choose to pursue OE with a vote on him instead? My guess is that the roleblock claim had something to do with it, but since there's a lack of discussion going on, I want to know where this vote is coming from. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
WardiTV European League
ShoWTimE vs sebesdes
Percival vs NightPhoenix
Shameless vs Nicoract
Krystianer vs Scarlett
ByuN vs uThermal
Harstem vs HeRoMaRinE
PiGosaur Monday
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Epic.LAN
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
