EPTTeam Melee Mini Mafia II
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
| ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
| ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
1) Straight up, (I'm sure Ace would appreciate this one) our goal is to find mafia and kill them, not debate or vote upon who's the most valuable team to the town. As stated before, this is a small game and we don't exactly have a boatload of days to find scum. Thus we should be using our time strictly to analyze and figure out mafia, not anything else. 2) There's a 50% chance there's no medic (assuming the setup was randomly chosen of course). That's not a high enough percentage for me to care about what a medic might be doing at night. 3) I've never seen a game where there was a medic/DT list created and the actual medic/DT followed it. This is forum mafia and let's not kid ourselves here, everyone thinks they're the best. I don't find it reasonable at all that the medic actually listen to what the town voted for. Add in the fact that each team has 2/3 players on it, which is going to lead to more disagreements about who to protect. 4) Korynne said medic can save themselves. There's hardly any reason the medic shouldn't be saving themselves night 1. *** Now I haven't gotten a response back yet, but if Korynne allows it we should vote to no lynch. Either way, we have 2 shots at lynching a mafia otherwise we lose (I'm assuming that there's no medic saves). If we no lynch, this gives a DT two potential nights to check someone and find a mafia. If we lynch now (and don't hit a mafia), tomorrow there will be 6 teams alive. If we mislynch again the mafia just have to kill someone at night and it's game over. In that scenario DT had only one night's of information to help the town. Yes I realize that there's only a 50% chance there's a DT. But either way we have 2 lynches to get a mafia, and if we no lynch that gives us more time to talk and analyze people. More time is better for the town, the mafia want things to go by as fast as possible. ----------- Main Points: 1) Forget about making a medic list, don't vote for who the medic should protect. Focus on analyzing and finding mafia. 2) Vote for No Lynch if Korynne allows it. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
| ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 20 2010 08:52 Incognito wrote: First of all, this is not true. For example, madnessman (DT) checked Sidesprang day 1, who was on the DT list in Mafia XX. Anyway, the publicity of a medic list is hard for the mafia to ignore, regardless of whether or not medic chooses to follow it. And that's the point. The point of the list is not to result in 100% anythings, and is certainly not to confirm people. The point is merely psychological. Mafia must be preoccupied worrying about things even if town doesn't follow through on it. This has nothing to do with town compliance. Unlike some other recent terribly formed schemes, this one doesn't really rely on town agreeing with it. As for the rest of the post...when did Korynne say medics can protect themselves? I don't remember that being stated anywhere. How do you intend to analyze the mafia without PMs and without people talking about something? Notice how people read my post and decide to respond to only a certain portion of it... I'm still going to revert back to the point of we should be hunting mafia and not worrying about who's going to be on the medic list. If a person/team seems pro-town or more innocent than anyone else, good for them. I'm not going to waste my time thinking about who's more pro-town than who. Everyone here is well versed in mafia, we can all make decisions for ourselves about who's clearly innocent. Not to mention once the numbers start to dwindle we can't afford to make a medic list, especially when we have days of information to analyze people by. But I can understand making a list today, or you doing this to see who votes for whom, as that can be pertinent information in the late game. And still, medics should save themselves anyways. Everyone in this game knows that, so a list doesn't matter to the mafia since they know the medics are saving themselves anyways. I don't think the psychological impacts on the mafia are going to be there because of this fact. I asked Korynne in a PM. It would be helpful for her to say so in the thread and/or update the rules with this fact as well, to avoid confusion in the future. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 20 2010 10:51 bumatlarge wrote: Great south is on our team, god damn behavior game all I read are words, dont bother with inactive checking in a team game but monitor post counts and lynch a somebody everytime. I could really use a translation of this one... | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
BM says we need to keep our No lynch incase we get into a 3v1 situation. I can understand that, but that scenario isn't for certain. And actually, barring any medic saves, if we no lynch today that situation is not possible to happen. 5v2 after night's over. Mislynch goes to 4v2. 3v2 after night's over. Lynch a mafia (otherwise game over) brings it to 3v1, then to 2v1 the next day. Other way is if we lynch right tomorrow we're at 5v1. 4v1 after night's over. Mislynch goes to 3v1, then 2v1 once night's over. So there's no need to save it in case we get into a 3v1 scenario. Just use the no lynch now, and we're going to avoid a 3v1 unless there's a medic save along the way. If someone has said that we should lynch today and no lynch tomorrow, the outcome will still be the same in the long run. Only difference is that we no lynch today giving us more time to talk and night actions to help us with our lynch. It doesn't make sense to lynch today and not lynch tomorrow. Vote: No Lynch | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
As far as I've seen nobody's addressed this issue at all. We're all smart players here, I outlined majority of the scenarios in my previous posts. I know that someone is going to respond to this post with "Well I know for 100% that LSB is mafia". Honestly, you don't, it's day 1. So far, the only convincing thing I see against LSB is that a lot of people seem to think he's mafia. Now I know everyone in this game is at the least a decent, regular mafia player, so I have to take that into consideration. But all I see is a bandwagon. I'm fairly certain any argument someone has said about LSB, I could take that argument and apply to YellowInk or Infundibulum or Ace. Great job guys, you found a player in this game who's not actively making plans. So have I, actually, cause nobody's really made any sort of plan (unless you count no lynching a plan), and everyone's just focusing on Team 1 and Team 2. If you really think LSB is mafia, you would vote no lynch, and spend the next ~36 hours convincing the town with solid analysis and not "I'm 100% positive LSB/Pyrry are mafia". | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 19 2010 18:44 Incognito wrote: I'm going to count on Team 3 and 6 for some strong analysis within the next 24 hours. Please do not disappoint. On September 21 2010 17:43 Incognito wrote: At this point we have enough information to lynch. I believe that all the mafia are out there in the open. Foolishness needs to analyze the information we have now instead of rotting away while insisting we need more time to get information before lynch. There is plenty information out there. Anyone claiming otherwise is just too lazy to read the information here. There is no reason to wait. So let's see, I'm running through all my past mafia games, and counting the number of mafia I nailed because they said things like this. I'm at 3 so far. I'm very excited to see you be the fourth. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 22 2010 04:52 Infundibulum wrote: Actually an addendum: YellowInk has a point that it would be stupid to use our no lynch today, when we don't need to, when we could potentially end up in a missed lynch = loss situation later in the game. I think this is the strongest argument against lynching Day 1. Is there something amiss with this logic that i'm not grasping? No, I refuted that argument already. Unless there's a medic save along the way, there's no way we'll end up in a 3v1 or 4v2 scenario if we no lynch today. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 22 2010 05:06 meeple wrote: Pros: - Prevents a somewhat uneducated decision, hoping for some better information tommorow Cons: - We only have one, we waste it now and we're screwed later - We go into Day 2 with just a little less information than we would if we lynched and found out someone's alignment. Give me a scenario where we use No Lynch today and we end up screwed later. Remember no medic saves. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 22 2010 05:56 Bill Murray wrote: the problem is we might not NEED TO EVER USE IT That will be the situation if we No Lynch now. Barring medic saves of course. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 22 2010 05:39 Incognito wrote: I get why people want to no lynch. In a 1 KP game town always wants to lynch when there are an odd number of townies and don't want to lynch when theres an even number. The reason why we probably won't get any information from this lynch is because of the nolynch. Not that hard for anyone to policy no lynch when theres an even number of townies. There's nothing fishy about this lynch. The general apathy in this game is astonishing in its ability to do that. I'd rather there be something fishy about this lynch, but apparently we won't be graced with that information. On the contrary No Lynch gives us plenty of information. Okay I'll agree that lynching someone would give us a bit more information, but that's the only benefit to lynching. Let me relay a few more points on why we should No Lynch: 1) Delaying the game as long as possible only hurts the mafia. The longer the town has to talk the higher chance mafia will get caught and/or reveal themselves. Mafia want the game to be over asap, they don't want to dilly dally around discussion. 2) No Lynching now gives you more time to build arguments against who you think is mafia for tomorrow's lynch. Everyone knows that day 1 lynch is kinda a crap shoot. Picking out mafia over 48 hours of talking is an incredibly challenge. Add another 48-72 hours though, and the process becomes easier. You seem to be sure that team 1 is mafia. I'm not convinced though (and neither are other people at this point). We No Lynch now you get more time to build your argument, more time to make them slip up, more time to analyze. It will be much easier to make your case tomorrow than convince us to kill team 1 now. (If it makes you feel any better, I'd totally jump on board to lynching team 7). Overall, yes this point kinda refers back to number 1, more time is better for us. 3) No lynching now avoids any kinda 3v1 scenario, barring any medic saves. I've done the calculations in a previous post, so have others. 4) Seeing who votes and/or doesn't vote for No Lynch might help us in the long run to figuring out who's mafia. Right now there's kinda a bandwagon on team 1. Assuming they are not mafia, the mafia teams are going to jump on board rather than no lynching. The vote list for No Lynching if/when it gets passed is just as important and carries just as much information as a vote list to kill someone. Not to mention anyone who has analyzed vote lists knows that you need at least 2 days (but probably 3) to make any conclusions or suspicions. Not to mention that people who have tried to argue point 3, even though I've proved myself correct, says something about their alignment. People who have continually tried to push for a lynch even though we all know they are smart enough to see my logic says something about their alignment. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 22 2010 07:28 Infundibulum wrote: ok, I see what you're saying. the problem is that this the only way no lynching today is right is if we have the "best case" scenario of no medic (or no medic saves). i hate playing under the assumption that everything is going to go swimmingly - i'd rather plan our plays to accommodate for the worst case scenario. no lynching day 1 doesn't do this. The extra time is lost later if there is a medic save. So I think the choice comes down to: assume best case, get 'extra time' now VS. assume worst case, get 'extra time' later. I think there's pros and cons to each play... on one hand having more time now is good because there are more players. on the other, using the no lynch when it can protect town from a precarious situation can save the game @ BM sorry, i must have missed that post of yours. gotta give credit where credit is due. at this point it looks like no lynch is pretty far in the lead anyway :s No no no no no I'm assuming worst case scenario in everything. No medic and/or no medic saves is worst case for town. If there is indeed a medic save along the way, that puts mafia at a huge disadvantage because medic can claim. Forcing mafia to counterclaim at the least. We'll deal with that if it happens. We no lynch now we will never have a precarious situation later. It's better to be in a precarious situation with a medic. Of course if you are actually mafia, then yes, best case scenario for you is no medic and/or no medic saves. Is that what you meant? | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
| ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
| ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 23 2010 16:24 Incognito wrote: I'm still waiting on content from you. Real content that is. Unless your contribution is that you like to play word games and take shots at people from the shadows while not really caring about actively convincing everyone that I'm mafia. I'm not at all opposed to seeing what you have to say about me being mafia. So by all means, bring on the accusations. Once I present my case against Team 7 we can all decide which seems more plausible. Kapiche? Nah, I already indirectly told you I wanted to kill team 7 as well. Even if I think you're mafia I'd much rather kill team 7 right now. I don't agree at the moment that team 1 is suspicious, but we can agree to disagree at this point at worry about each other later. I'll be posting analysis later, but I think meeple is way out of character than his normal town behavior. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:08 meeple wrote: We only get a single "No Lynch" if I understand correctly... you really think we should waste it on the first day? Good question, but he failed to provide any of his own thoughts about this matter, while most other people had no problem voicing their own opinion. On September 22 2010 04:33 meeple wrote: Well... even though I'm hesitant to use our only no-lynch this early... in a game this small we will need every scrap of information we can get... that bandwagon on team 1 seems interesting too... unvote Team 6 vote: No lynch Hesitant mafia is abound here. Still he brings up a good point about the bandwagon, but doesn't say anything else. On September 22 2010 05:06 meeple wrote: I think the general thoughts are that: Pros: - Prevents a somewhat uneducated decision, hoping for some better information tommorow Cons: - We only have one, we waste it now and we're screwed later - We go into Day 2 with just a little less information than we would if we lynched and found out someone's alignment. I think normally most people would go with the lynching day 1, if not only to get the info... but with such a small game every mislynch is a huge blow. A seemingly fine post, but he's one of the last people to comment on at this time. By the time he's made this post, I've already detailed out why we should no lynch while countering every other argument. All he's done is restated arguments made by everyone else. Also notice his last sentence, he says "most people would go with the lynching day 1" yet he himself has already voted to No Lynch. Indeed this is quite suspicious. On September 22 2010 05:32 meeple wrote: Hold on... so we only get 2 lynches if we have a no lynch and no save scenario... balls to the walls... wait... Assuming we use our no lynch now and assuming that we have no medic saves... Today:_______________6 v 2 Tommorow____________5 v 2 Day 3:_______3 v 2______or_______4 v 1 Day 4:__town lose or 2 v 1____2 v 1 or town win Day 5: town win or town lose in both cases What am I missing... this gives a 50% chance of town win, based on total randomness and no saves. Now I suspect that he doesn't actually read the thread, since I already did this math in an earlier post. On September 22 2010 05:34 meeple wrote: Well... technically can't we use a No lynch in a 3 v 1 scenario to prolong the game into a 2 v 1 with a higher chance of catching the last guy... Which is great except I explained why that's a meaningless argument many many times. I'm also very skeptical of his constant use of ellipses (...), as that further shows how hesitant he is. His use of these show that he's trying not to draw attention to himself by making himself seem less threatening. It seems like he's trying not to take sides on the issue at hand, and instead just bringing up what other people think. Just like a bad politician, he doesn't want to take a firm stance on an issue so he can't be held accountable later on. This is what mafia try to do, they don't want to take sides so as not to create possible enemies in the future. On September 22 2010 05:51 meeple wrote: Eh you're right, me and YI aren't really coordinating that much... probably should be. I never agreed with a Team 1 vote... About the wasting our no lynch... I was just summarizing the reservations I picked up... could've been misinterpreted though. I thought that saving our No lynch could possibly avoid a situation where we are forced to lynch but don't have a good target and as a result we lose. In any case, I don't mind using it now, since we don't really have alot of evidence or solid leads. This is just more of the same meeple as before. Notice how Incognito indirectly called him out and meeple gets defensive in a typical mafia style. Meeple explains his actions but doesn't want to make it appear like he's against Incognito and doesn't want to make an enemy. As before we see him being hesitant, especially in his last sentence. Remember in his earlier post he said most people would probably want to lynch day 1 in order to get the information out of it, yet here he says he doesn't want to lynch since we don't have much evidence or solid leads. Sure, everyone changes their mind about things as the game progresses, but this is just wishy-washy behavior. On September 23 2010 10:59 meeple wrote: odd choice for mafia... people seem to have a grudge against them Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town. Of course he has yet to say anything about them. Incognito pointed out this fact, and meeple delivered. On September 24 2010 03:57 meeple wrote: + Show Spoiler + Alright, the analysis... yeah its delayed and I roasted for not posting it earlier... BM: + Show Spoiler + On September 20 2010 19:39 Bill Murray wrote: @pyrr excuse me? are you admitting he is your scumbuddy? @everyone else If pyrrhuloxia is mafia, southrawrea could be as well. It might be null, but I feel like that could be a slip. I am liking pro-town discussion of Incognito and Foolishness, and are not really suspicious of teams 8 and 3 as a result. Incognito is capable of spotlighting as scum, so I'm not saying he is cleared, but I have played with him where he is scum, and this does not feel quite the same. Due to meta, and his amazingly pro-town play, I would definitely not be ok with his lynch at this juncture. I am not fully convinced Pyrrhuloxia's team is a mafia slot, though, and am going to reserve my vote for the moment as such a small setup can be volatile. I would be happier with a lynch on team 2, as I found SouthRawrEas post to be all fluff and no content. @mod votecount please ##vote: team 2 Expresses doubt about South's greenness due to fluff posting... says that he enjoys Incog and Foolishness's analysis, but adds a caveat about Incog's ability to spotlight as red. + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 05:59 Bill Murray wrote: LSB's admission is only icing on the cake @LSB: how would you be so CERTAIN they're scum? You have a scumlist, buddy? This makes me confident in my earlier read he is appealing to pyrr's authority. Scummy, scummy, scummy. @meeple: I find it funny you ask me to justify my vote when I voted SR on fluff, then make a secondary reason as for voting being fluff yourself. I also dislike you speculating that I was 100% pyrr/SR are the scumteam.... if that was the case, I would have been putting a second vote on Pyrr's team. I didn't. I'm voting SR because I am unsure if Pyrr actually made a slip. The way SR is acting now, though, in the above post, makes me believe that my initial reaction to who I'm voting is actually wrong. I needed to stack on pyrr because his team is way more important as I'm feeling both SR's team #2 with bumatlarge and divinek are scum with Pyrrhuloxia's team #1. My reasoning and justification are how SR is acting towards pyrrhuloxia. I will also give justification in relation to why we should lynch vs a no lynch day 1. I am not saying "let's not ever no lynch", but that we could use it day 2 if we don't lynch scum day 1. day 1 lynching scum: 6 v 1 night kill day 2 5v1 <- possible win here mislynch + night kill day 3 3v1 (mylo) <- obvious no lynch unless 100% certainty night kill day 4 2v1 (LYLO) if we DON'T mislynch now, and no lynch later, we can save it for a MyLo potentially. That's why we need to take a chance on lynching scum today. this is assuming we fuck up later, but we rocked on day 1. I'm not even really worried about this is Pyrrhuloxia's team #1 flip scum, which I expect them to do based upon SouthRawrEa being a newer player who is a dead giveaway. Though I am more sure of SR based upon his posting, AtA, and my not liking bumatlarge's posting earlier, I feel like they implicate team #1 through SR, and there being a vote on a slot that I find scum is enough for me to want to wagon said slot. ##unvote: pyrrhuloxia/LSB ##vote: SR, bumatlarge, and divinek States that SR is a new player and a scum giveaway and they implicate team 1. + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 17:06 Bill Murray wrote: + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 08:56 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Alright, I am going to be addressing both BM and BB with this, since this seems to be using faulty logic. BM you are arguing that we achieve the same result by no lynching day one or two, this is wrong because on Day 2 we have more information to work with PLUS we have higher percent of just randomly offing a mafia simply because there is one less team in the game. Completely faulty logic. As the game progresses our information increases so saying day 1 = day 2 no lynching is completely wrong, even if it is mathematically the same in regards to WHEN the day ends. Also BM you assume that we are rocking out day 1 and fucking up rest of the time? That's such an unlikely scenario considering as the game progresses information increases. BB inactivity is an easy mafia ploy to pull off day one claiming little to no reason or content to post, so its a given that they SHOULD be posting and if it continues it is very scummy and antitown, in the current set up I am willing to let it slide and not lynch of inactivity Day 1, but come down on it hard Day 2. I would disagree with the we-should-lynch mentality, simply because no-lynching day 1 actually gives us an extra day. Obviously if we're 100% sure we have a scum we should lynch, but failing that we should no lynch, because then we have an extra day of analysis and a nightkill target. Get the cop (if he exists) to rolecheck team 1 or 2 tonight, and if he finds a scum, have him claim and get the medic (if HE also exists) to protect him. This obviously assumes blue roles exist, but since we have a 3/4 chance that they do, I think it's pretty safe to assume there's at least 1 blue in the game (if we get lucky, we get two!) I do agree with the fact that we need to get good discussion going, and that we need to get LSB to 'splain himself further about his accusation. This entirely reeks of shit to be blunt. It starts with kind of what I was saying but dissolves into the most retarded plan I have ever read. The whole DT CAN CHECK SOMEONE THEN SAY WHAT HE CHECKED AND THEN MEDIC PROTECTS HIM = GG is retarded. You are basing SO MUCH off of the chance its a 1/4 scenario where we lucked out and got both a medic and a DT. When deciding what to do we have to see what would benefit us the MOST in every possible scenario, which I believe is clearly day 1 no lynching (in our current predicament) Obviously if we have a strong suspect we should ALWAYS go for it, but quite simply the reasoning that you are justifying no lynch is nonsensical. Now, to get some discussion going: What do you guys think of the possibility of having cop (if cop exists) claim day 2? Obviously he shouldnt claim now, because if he exists there's only a 1/3 chance that medic also exists and can protect his ass tonight. However, I'm assuming that since cop is more than 1 person, and this game is mostly talented players, the rolecheck tonight should turn up something good. I think it would absolutely be worth it to trade cop for 1 of the mafia. Obvious flaw with this: If there's no cop, and mafia fakeclaims, who's gonna counterclaim? Still, I'd love to hear other peoples' opinion. DT should only claim if he feels a good enough reason to. Personally I think as soon as the DT confirms someone as red he should claim. Trading mafia for DT in a small game like this seems beneficial. The only reason NOT to do that is if that individual is getting lynched anyway for whatever reason, but if the vote is close I would still claim as a DT and make sure a mafia got killed. Besides that claiming for the sake of claiming is stupid. I disagree. If team 2 are mafia, and I get team 2 lynched, it is 100% likely on both days they will flip mafia. I don't look at it "randomly", I look at who is fucking mafia and who isn't fucking mafia. That being said, over the past couple of pages, I have been really happy with SR and Divinek. I was happy with bumatlarge until he started using really odd language. bumatlarge, explain the ending of your most recent post, as seen here: ...What? Basically, I am fine with no lynch at this point. I was pretty sure I had caught scum, but I am admittedly not so sure now. vote: no lynch Expresses doubts about his previous convictions and changes his vote to no lynch + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 19:28 Bill Murray wrote: Foolishness trendily lurks until D2 too bad if he doesnt die N1 he is likely mafia, as he likes to lurk D1 as mafia just like he does as townie or blue so that is very, very, very null from him. I cannot emphasize this more. The funny thing is, though, mafia could choose to not hit him and use it as an argument. "Foolishness didn't die, he is mafia, get him" on day 2. That's the problem with his high level of play if it goes unchecked, it makes all arguments pretty WIFOMy which is why I like to pressure people who lurk I like to do that more on day 2, or forward, though. I like a lynch on D1 vs a No Lynch, so I am tempted to wagon. If I wagon, would you guys take it the wrong way? I like wagons as town these days, but I don't like mislynches, and I haven't seen anything glaring at me saying "this player is scummy as fuck" like I had originally thought I had. It's funny everyone is dead set on a team I initially thought was scum. The minute I back off, people start believing. The world works in mysterious ways. I am going to vote simply to consolidate my vote with my partner's, and Vote: Team 1 Tomorrow we can pressure people based around their posts, and our general suspicions on teams 7 and 2 if they flip red. If they flip townie, then I'll have to look at a couple certain teams, too, so I'm actually happier with this lynch than teams 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and possibly even 2. Votes Team 1 to with Ace, and still expresses concerns about teams 2 and now 7 Ace: + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 17:40 Ace wrote: Ah damn I was somewhat supporting your post until you said We need this lynch for information. What information are we getting from a lynch besides his alignment flip? LSB is still the scummiest person so far in my book though. + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 18:40 Ace wrote: actually I dont think your case by itself is really that strong, it just seems convenient. LSB's accusation of Team 2 and his weak explanation, which didn't even seem to answer my concern is still my prime motive for leaning towards them. I'll rethink this again later for sure but for now ## vote Team 1 States suspicions about LSB and votes for him + Show Spoiler + On September 22 2010 03:03 Ace wrote: this is such a terrible lynch. Just way too many easy voters. Bill Murray unvote them, this lynch just doesn't seem legit at all. ##unvote Team 1 Gets anxious about the easy votes and unvotes Team 1 + Show Spoiler + On September 22 2010 09:33 Ace wrote: No it isn't. This post is blatantly misleading. No lynching is for when you can't conclude someone is scummy enough to lynch. Like I've said, the town does not have to lynch every day. So most of the time it's in your best bet to No lynch unless you are in a situation where there is clearly going to be a benefit. Being in the end game does not matter for a No lynch, all it means is that you're decision has a more immediate consequence but it's also easier. Towards the end of the game it is actually much rarer to have a No lynch. Remember what I said? It's in your best bet to avoid a lynch when you aren't sure someone is scum or there is no clear benefit. At the end of the game you have so much information between votes, player interaction, the knowledge of what roles have been revealed and your own ties to players that it's really not often you'll be No lynching then. In a typical game a single medic save gaining you a day is false. Saving a player and them possibly being confirmed innocent is a pretty big deal don't you think? It may not directly add more days to your win condition but adding more players to the likely pro-town pool, that TWO players know about is pretty heartbreaking for scum once it's revealed. Using a No Lynch now would actually be the best bet...if this were 10 hours ago and this was a normal setup with infinite No Lynches. Clearly though, LSB has been posting god knows what and well I'm a little intrigued by this post of yours. I thought you were a good player so how could you actually believe this nonsense you just posted? The only thing worrying me is that Incognito seems to have pegged both your teams also which shows his scumdar is operating on great batteries like mine, or he's just good at picking off easy townies. So I'm going to ask you this one time: Let's assume you were a detective. What team would you investigate tonight and why? Accuses Yellowink (Team 7) Now lets see... Amongst the people that are included in the "easy votes" on Team 1 are: bumatlarge Divinek Infundibulum YellowInk SouthRawrea Incognito Also the people that accused BM/Ace YellowInk - albeit halfheartedly + Show Spoiler + On September 19 2010 14:22 YellowInk wrote: I think we should hang Ace and Bill Murray. LSB + Show Spoiler + On September 22 2010 08:20 LSB wrote: As for the things I'm supporting 1) No lynch. 2) Bum's medic plan The thing is, if I was mafia, I would be supporting an erronous plan, trying to get the town to take part of a plan that is easily exploitable. A great way to do that is to support your plan! Your plan has problems. Strangely you haven't address these problems. Right now you are saying, "LSB seems skummy, so therefore I don't need to worry about the holes in my plan". That isn't logic, that's misdirection. I'll repeat myself: We should use the DT and the Medic in the places where they will be most effective. The Medic should focus on making sure that someone doesn't die. And the DT should be used to try to investigate targets. I don't like the list idea, since it tells the mafia what to stay out of. Again, please address this problem. Tell me why I am wrong, don't just make a long post on why I'm supposed mafia to distract others from seeing that your plan has a problem. I don't have this list of possible plans in my pocket and try to use them. If I think of something, I'll use it sure. I moved on of course, chiefly no lynch once we figured out that it could be used. What I am saying is that your accusations twist my words. You admit that you can't read my posts at face value because if you do, you'll find that I'm a townie. You now are relying on the fact that I haven't taken any positions? What positions are you accusing me of not taking on? Planning: You claim that I haven't made a plan. Therefore I am Mafia. Thats just silly. I'm not going to make a plan unless I think of one. Ace/BM is scumYou said that I didn't give enough input into the Ace/BM lynch. Well, I don't feel like I should. Because I think there're town Rastaban/Foolishness is scum: You said that I didn't give enough input into the Rastaban/Foolishness lynch. Well, I don't feel like I should. So you expect me to 1) Pull out plans or die, or 2) Accuse random people. <sarcasm>Sounds townie to me </sarcasm> I would have liked more time to see what Bum would do, and how SR would play this game. But like you said, people wanted me to post. So I did, and I said that I didn't really think that they were mafia since new posts didn't fit with my general theory. Conclusions: I think we should examine some of the players that bandwagoned on Team 1... especially Team 2 since we know BM had some serious concerns about them. Yeah okay, LSB, I know he delivered, but what analysis did he really do? He compiled their posts (at least the important ones) and gives a one line summary of a few of them. That's not analysis, that's contributing without contributing. I give him credit in that he wants to look at the bandwagon against team 1, as that's pertinent information to the game. However he mentioned this point in an earlier post of his (see above), and didn't do anything then. All he did this time was look at who voted for him, and which players voted and/or were suspicious of BM/Ace (which doesn't mean anything). I also realized that his list of those against team one was comprised of the entire team 2. I don't find this strange at all, given that early day before No Lynch had been thoroughly discussed, team 1 and team 2 had all the heat on them. It would only make sense that team 2 would vote for them as they don't want to get killed themselves. On September 24 2010 04:05 meeple wrote: Also Vote: Team 6 Okay look: this post came immediately after meeple's previous 'analysis' post. Meeple made no mention (as I can see) about team 6 or anyone on it. He says that we should be focusing on team 2, because BM had issues with team 2. That's a good point indeed, yet instead he tosses his vote on team 6 without any analysis or reason. YellowInk immediately follows in this manner. A note to meeple and YellowInk: I think that team 6 is pretty suspicious as they've hardly done/said anything all game. I could easily be convinced that they are mafia. But none of you have done any analysis on them (in fact, nobody has), and instead you blindly throw your votes on them. Vote: team 7 If you ask me, everyone on team 2 seems like a bored townie. I haven't thoroughly analyzed them though. ******** Summary: 1) Vote for team 7, meeple and YellowInk, because: 2) meeple has yet to contribute any of his own thoughts, he's only been restating already said arguments 3) meeple has been taking a very hesitant stand so far, as if he's trying to draw attention away from himself and not create enemies. This is mafia behavior. 4) These arguments coupled with Incognito's post about team 7 (YellowInk in particular) show that this team is outside the bounds of "bored townies". They are hiding something. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
| ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 24 2010 08:35 BrownBear wrote: This is extremely dangerous, simply because if we fail we essentially enter into LYLO. Yes I know, but they have ample time to defend themselves and/or to tell us why team 6 is mafia (or anyone else for that matter). | ||
| ||
