EPThow many slots are avaialable?
Mini Mafia IV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
how many slots are avaialable? | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
And I guess back to the usual first day topic. Lynching inactives. Since lynching a scum is very hard in the very first day. Lynching inactives would be a very good start as it would prevent mafia from lurking. I'm going to wait a bit for people to talk since the game has just started. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
On January 20 2011 22:24 Jackal58 wrote: I would argue that lynching the most active players on day 1 is a mistake. Unless of course active player A states "I am scum" which probably isn't going to happen. Duh, of course lynching the most active player day 1 is not the best idea ever (I suggested lynching inactives), but I am saying that we shouldn't be afraid to lynch active players. We shouldn't focus too much on what blues should do. We don't know what blue roles there are and blues will do what they think is best anyways. We should just focus more on scumhunting than whatever blue plans. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
On January 21 2011 01:47 Pandain wrote: Hello everyone its Pandain the Panda, hoping he won't ruin town again for everyone. And as Pandain always learned when young, the best way to get from A to B when theres a brick wall in front of you is to not go around the wall, but keep on running into it until it breaks! In other news, just some general thoughts: 1.Blue's dont claim unless you are about to be lynched. If you find a red, don't claim. Instead prepare an analysis on him and get him lynched without claiming. If you find green, and they're about to be lynched, express support for him, but don't claim unless its near lylo. 2.I agree we should not let inactives survive in this town. But considering we've hardly started, "inactives" is hardly the word to call them. So let's get things moving. ##Vote Nemesis What is this? Clarify this for me, because as I understand right now you just said we should lynch scum, and then say we should lynch inactives. Plus I want to see more contribution. Come on people, pressure is pointless if only one person votes. Let's get things moving. Yes, I did say that we should lynch scum, but day 1, it is very hard to actually lynch scum because we don't have a lot of information available to us. Which is why I suggested that we should lynch inactives for the first day. As it has been said before, inactivity is a big problem which we do not want to see in this game. Lynching inactive first day encourages people to participate more in the discussion and be more active which makes it is easier to find mafia, as the more discussion we have as there is more information available to analyze. ##Vote Shockeyy I haven't seen you post anything useful at all so far other than excuses for being inactive and useless one-liners. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
On January 21 2011 06:50 Pandain wrote: I don't like this post either. Let's take a look at it. First off, lynching inactives itself is a bad strategy. I shall be lenient to him because even I make this mistake, but lynching inactives is a horrible thing to do. When we say "lynch inactives", we mean "lynch lurkers." We want to differentiate the lurkers from the inactives/bored. You are just arguing semantics here. Besides, you can't exactly tell a lurker from an inactive unless they make it obvious. If we say we'll lynch the inactives, the inactives won't respond. IF we say we'll lynch the inactives, the bored won't really respond. Only the mafia will respond if we say lynch the inactives. Which is why you never want to end up LYNCHING an inactive, just pressuring all of them to post. If they don't respond, that does not necessarily mean that they are bored townies. Just take a look at TMM3. Subversion(he was red that game) claimed he was roleblocked, and then disappeared afterwards. There were plenty of FoS on him after that, and he was up for lynch next day, but he still didn't respond. It is pretty much impossible to tell the difference between a lurker and an inactive townie. Furthormore, he just repeated information without actually adding anything to it. Finally he goes for the "easy" kill. There was pretty much nothing else that people were discussing about. I gave my opinion on what we were currently talking about. What else could I have added to the discussion? It is not like anyone else was trying to generate new topic. At least I was trying to further the discussion. I just woke up, I was still half-asleep when I checked this forum. I rather dislike it when town loses because everyone is inactive, and when I saw Shockeyy post "sorry I'm inactive, I promise I'll be active later," I wanted to pressure him to make sure that he actually keeps his promise and doesn't disappear as soon as we forget about him. This is typical mafia to me. I now offer Nemesis as a viable option for a real lynch. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
The only thing that we can really do is prevent everyone from heading that way in the first place by pressuring/lynching inactives. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
Note I have always been ferevent about getting town talking, and this game should be no different. While we should pressure inactives to TALK, we should be VOTING lurkers. How exactly do you plan on pressuring inactives talk without voting them? | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
This is a rather a bit of a weird bandwagon. There has been too much speculation on people's actions so far. It's day 1, and people are trying to analyze out of a few posts. Shockeyy is pulling an OMGUS. Barundar is just bandwagoning. Pandain just seems to be flip flopping looking for a target that people are willing to follow him with. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
On January 22 2011 12:42 Hesmyrr wrote: Would you consider voting for GMarshal if someone else votes for him? I'd ask you to switch now but then it becomes 3-3 tie which is the last thing I want. Want to avoid LSB lynch for now since I did not analyze him much, and this bandwagon seems to have come out of nowhere. I am not really sure about voting for Gmarshal. He seems to be trying a bit of forced activity, but at least he is trying, while shockeyy on the other hand has pretty much been useless. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
Right now it is 6-3 5-3 (after tonight) 3-3 (the next day if we mislynch) So next day is pretty much LYLO, unless medic succesfully protects someone. We need to be careful about the next lynch and not be too rash. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
Let's analyze his latest post then: On January 24 2011 05:59 Pandain wrote: Okay sorry for not posting. I wanted to see a couple things beforehand. First off, this is very bad for town. From now on we need to get every lynch right unless there is a medic protection/they hit a vet. In defense of myself, there are a plethora of reasons which show I am not mafia: 1.LSB died-why would, if I'm mafia, I shoot him. It would only bring suspicion upon myself 2.Why would I be frantically changing between two townies. Why not just stick with one? WIFOM WIFOM WIFOM. That is your entire defense. There could be a million reason for mafia to do this. They could be blue-sniping or they could really just want LSB dead. As to why not stick with one townie, again this is pure WIFOM. For example, You could've been trying to find a chance to lynch an active townie. Notice how he kept changing votes after his crappy logic has been pointed out. He was essentially looking for an easy person to bandwagon day 1. That is not really much of a defense. Furthormore, we need to band together and this next vote. Since its 5 v3, if even 1 other person sides with who the mafia want to get lynched, then its going to at least be a tie, which is not good for us. My top suspect is Nemesis. Note how he hasn't been contributing at all this day, when its so important. Yet in previous games when he's town he contributes a lot, making analysis and the such. Along with going for the "easy lynch" in Shockkey, he's hardly contributed to the game. He's a classic "contributing without really contributing". ##Vote Nemesis So your main reason for voting me is having not gone on today until now? Why aren't you taking a look at the people who have posted day 1 but have not really contributed much like your buddy barundar there? I know that having bad logic =/= mafia, but having consistent bad logic for ALL your FoS and votes is really making me suspicious of you. I am going to be thinking a bit before I decide to lynch you as it is LYLO. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
I'm just going to summarize the main things I see here: Day 1 - he starts off with a vote on me for "pressure". On January 21 2011 06:50 Pandain wrote: I don't like this post either. Let's take a look at it. First off, lynching inactives itself is a bad strategy. I shall be lenient to him because even I make this mistake, but lynching inactives is a horrible thing to do. When we say "lynch inactives", we mean "lynch lurkers." We want to differentiate the lurkers from the inactives/bored. If we say we'll lynch the inactives, the inactives won't respond. IF we say we'll lynch the inactives, the bored won't really respond. Only the mafia will respond if we say lynch the inactives. Which is why you never want to end up LYNCHING an inactive, just pressuring all of them to post. Furthormore, he just repeated information without actually adding anything to it. Finally he goes for the "easy" kill. This is typical mafia to me. I now offer Nemesis as a viable option for a real lynch. Ok this is when things get interesting...he now turns his pressure into a real lynch with his main reasoning being that lynching inactives is bad, and goes on to ramble about the definitions of inactives/lurkers. After this, Pandain has pretty much derailed the whole thread into a discussion of what is inactive/lurkers and whether it is a good idea to lynch inactives. Town wasted half of day 1 talking about the definition inactives/lurkers because of Pandain, instead of discussing who to lynch. Once it was clear that no one agrees with him, he pushes for another target: hesmyrr. After his crappy accusation was addresssed, he uses this to justify derailing the whole thread: And me thinks I've gotten town active. By accusing two people, I started discussion, got people talking, and so forth. Then, he goes out to accuse BC for pretty much the same reason as hesmyrr. After he was told how stupid his reason for voting is, he moves on to shockeyy. After this he accuses LSB in the last hour before day ends. After barundar bandwagoned with him and once again being told how stupid his reason for lynching is, he changes his vote back to shockeyy. Notice a pattern here? He basically goes from target to target and after being pointed out how bad his reasoning for lynching is, he changes it until his vote lands back on shockeyy, a person that most people suspected at the time. He is basically trying to find an easy target to lynch that town will agree with. I would also take a look at the people he didn't FoS during the first day: gmarshal, chaoser, ggq, barundar(who also bandwagoned with him in his last minute vote switch to LSB). Now as for his later post, I have pretty much covered it in my previous post. In Summary: - he derails the thread with his whole inactive/lurker thing - he tries to look for an easy lynch target day 1 and changes votes after being told off for his bad logic - he uses WIFOM to justify his actions not being scummy - he constantly has bad reasoning for his votes. Townies sometimes have bad reasons for voting, but when it happens ALL the time, I can't think of it as as anything but scummy combined with all the other reasons, and I think we have a pretty good lynch target. ##Vote Pandain | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
What's up with the inactivity? I am not going to be able to get back on until around 8pm tomorrow, so hopefully people pick up the discussion by then. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
On January 24 2011 13:31 chaoser wrote: And you're not in the clear Nemesis, I just want to clear up this whole Pandain thing first and then I'm going to look at all your posts and analyze them. Not clear of what? I didn't know you had something against me. Feel free to analyze away. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
 First of all, you still haven't addressed my post. I also have to add that you are playing like the way you were playing Insane Mafia when you were hyper aggressive and basically mostly used WIFOM as your argument to FoS DoctorH. A lot of your arguments Day 1 was pretty much WIFOM. "He's not contributing so he must be scum" was your main argument for all your FOS. Just to address your reasons for voting me: On January 24 2011 11:31 Pandain wrote: Why I believe Nemesis is mafia. Summary: Nemesis to me is scum. From "contributing without really contributing", weak contribution compared to his previous game(such as lack of analysis) to his general posts this game, Nemesis has been playing scummy. Note how when he was town he would contribute alot, and I even waited a day for Nemesis to perhaps post something, but its very likely in my eyes that he's scum, and just wanted the day to go by. I'm unsure about nearly everyone, but Nemesis in my eyes is our best bet. An analysis of his posts this game + Show Spoiler + On January 20 2011 22:08 Nemesis wrote: @Jackal I wouldn't say that lynching actives is a big mistake. I wasn't paying attention to what happened in XXXVI, but we should lynch scum, and mafia is not always inactive. And I guess back to the usual first day topic. Lynching inactives. Since lynching a scum is very hard in the very first day. Lynching inactives would be a very good start as it would prevent mafia from lurking. I'm going to wait a bit for people to talk since the game has just started. I don't like this post. I'm going to be a little lenient since it's a somewhat confusing concept, but again, we don't want to lynch inactives. We want to lynch lurkers. Every person we lynch who's "inactive." is not going to be mafia. On January 20 2011 22:30 Nemesis wrote: Duh, of course lynching the most active player day 1 is not the best idea ever (I suggested lynching inactives), but I am saying that we shouldn't be afraid to lynch active players. We shouldn't focus too much on what blues should do. We don't know what blue roles there are and blues will do what they think is best anyways. We should just focus more on scumhunting than whatever blue plans. Okay, focus on scum hunting. However, Nemesis hasn't scum hunted or helped with blues. On January 21 2011 06:11 Nemesis wrote: Yes, I did say that we should lynch scum, but day 1, it is very hard to actually lynch scum because we don't have a lot of information available to us. Which is why I suggested that we should lynch inactives for the first day. As it has been said before, inactivity is a big problem which we do not want to see in this game. Lynching inactive first day encourages people to participate more in the discussion and be more active which makes it is easier to find mafia, as the more discussion we have as there is more information available to analyze. ##Vote Shockeyy I haven't seen you post anything useful at all so far other than excuses for being inactive and useless one-liners. Explains himself, but the main problem about this post is his vote. Votes with a one line answer, going for the easy lynch. On January 21 2011 10:53 Nemesis wrote: Okay, note what he's saying. 1."I'm just pressuring Shockkey". Yet Nemesis never ends up unvoting him, despite Shockkey becoming considerably more active. 2."Hey, no one else is adding new content." Well for one, that doesn't give you an excuse at all and second, you've done some pretty decent analysis in previous games. Furthormore, other people had actually been actively talking about stuff. On January 21 2011 11:17 Nemesis wrote: Pandain all you did is define inactive/lurker. You still haven't answered how we can differentiate between them.You are just repeating the same points over and over again without really answering that question. The only thing that we can really do is prevent everyone from heading that way in the first place by pressuring/lynching inactives. Keeps saying "Lynch inactives!" Again, we want to lynch lurkers. But that's really moot, and it's more the philosophy of how to play mafia rather than mafia itself. Notice how rather than actually contributing at all Nemesis has just defended himself and argued over the definitions. You were the one who was arguing over the definition, you basically derailed the thread with your whole lurkers/inactive thing. On January 22 2011 12:52 Nemesis wrote: I am not really sure about voting for Gmarshal. He seems to be trying a bit of forced activity, but at least he is trying, while shockeyy on the other hand has pretty much been useless. Note how Shockkey has by this point actually been contributing somewhat. At least more than Nemesis. He's changed from "just make sure he doesn't dissapear" to "lynch him, he's useless." And what exactly has shockey contributed? All that shockeyy contributed is pull an OMGUS on LSB and then disappeared again. At this point, I refuse to believe that you are just a bad townie, since you are now making stuff up. Also who would you rather have my lynch at that point of the game? The only other people that was up for lynch was Gmarshal and LSB, both of which I didn't think was scummy. On January 23 2011 03:58 Nemesis wrote: Hmmm, town is in a bit of a bad position right now with BC getting modkilled. Right now it is 6-3 5-3 (after tonight) 3-3 (the next day if we mislynch) So next day is pretty much LYLO, unless medic succesfully protects someone. We need to be careful about the next lynch and not be too rash. States the obvious. His posts, as town, in TMM2 Note how he failed to mention that flamewheel/orgolove turned up townie even though I had a "good" reason to vote him. What I realized that game is that it is pointless to analyze base on a few post on day 1, which is why I went for who I think would be a useless person to town later in the game(inactives). Also, it would also have the benefit of encouraging activity. You want analysis? I've been doing analysis since I've come online this day phase. You are just drawing at straws for me not having been online during the first 15 hours or so of day phase. In summary, Pandain is making a lot of shit up and is mafia. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
| ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
| ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
jackal, I just took a quick skim over his posts right now. And hmm, he seems to be posting a lot but most of his post seems to be either stating the obvious or useless one liners. He put some FoS on bc, hesmyrr, and ggq for not contributing but doesn't vote for them. He then proceeds to vote for you but doesn't really say why beyond I'm suspicious of him, and then disappears. He seems to be lurking quite a bit too. He's been going under the radar for a while now with his "contributing without really contributing" play style. Hmm, I think he is scummy, but my main bet is still on you Pandain. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
The first post that you mentioned was I admit that he was at least trying. But really he only responds when he is called out. It was the same thing with the other 2 post that you mentioned. His second post was an OMGUS for him having "2 jobs and school", and his last post is counting the number of post to "prove" he's not lurking/inactive which is pretty useless as it doesn't take into account the content of the posts. | ||
|
Nemesis
Canada2568 Posts
We can't win this game without people actually voting :/ | ||
| ||
