EPTLord of the Rings Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
| ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
| ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
gogogogo | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 17 2011 09:46 prplhz wrote: EBWOP Oh yea Samwyse also had it at some point right? He had it and then he willingly gave it to Frodo 'cause he didn't want to walk around with it or something and then later he indirectly carried it, carrying Frodo who was carrying it. Woopseedaisy. Yes, Sam did carry the ring for a few hours when Frodo was stung by Shelob as they crossed into Mordor; then gave it up once he discovered Frodo to be alive after rescuing him. Quite a faithful colleague he was, doing all that. Do note that its effects are focused only on the person who possesses it, no more, no less. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 17 2011 10:24 Navillus wrote: To clarify though I'm really suspicious of him for dropping a third vote on someone that originally had no justification, then he voted without adding any justification. Yeah, I was going to post on that point that it looked like he was blatantly trying to start a bandwagon with his vote right there. Suspicious, but not yet enough to trigger a vote from me for it. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 17 2011 11:19 Navillus wrote: Wait does anyone think that he was seriously trying to get the ring?? I thought it was quite clear that his original post was a joke, not just the content he makes it look joking, it really is a null tell and doesn't matter if he contradicts it, cause you know, it was a joke... Just a talking point, what if he's Smeagol/Gollum? His behavior seems normal if that was his role; as he would want the ring, try to fish for it, and throttle anyone who got in his way of looking for it. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
Are you trying to derail the analysis and information here? What do you think of JeeJee? | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 17 2011 15:03 TranceStorm wrote: First, if the players in question cannot pass the ring, then the plan does not go into effect. A player only announces that they had the ring in the previous turn. If they can't pass it on, they stay silent and we are none the wiser. Second, given Radfield's argument that evil players probably don't have the mechanic to pass the ring (otherwise they would pass it amongst themselves), if we can get two successive passes, that would confirm at least one player. The danger of course is passing to a mafia player, but that probability initially is small. At any rate, I think it is pretty likely that the ring will worm into non-town hands (whether 3rd party or mafia) given that non-town players will constantly search and probe every turn. There's no way to comprehensively prevent them from getting the ring, therefore, why not get some benefit to it. Finally, another point that can be made is that the player who passes on the ring and reveals themselves can also reveal what the ring does. Given that every player already covets it, it would be nice to at least have that information. Why would they have to expose themselves? Given the fact that the Ring more likely than not provides some sort of power according to one's stature/role; any scum that have an interest in it would take the first opportunity to kill the bearer so they could claim it for their own in order to enhance their powers; and one could easily take it by force if someone claims it after getting passed on and not state that they passed it on as well. Your insistence in putting the ring-bearer as of now into the open with this strategy is something that merits scrutiny, it distracts the Forces of Good getting at less active players by attracting attention to you if you are town, but I have a vibe you have scummy tendencies. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 17 2011 15:19 DoctorHelvetica wrote: TranceStorm has a bad plan. Big deal, hopefully he can be made to see the problem with it. The main problem is that this game is not about confirming townies using mechanics we don't understand the goal is to find and catch scum. Wherebugsgo I don't know your metagame but here's what I see. 1. begging for the ring in every post 2. vague allusions to why you want it 3. voting for TranceStorm and FOSing him with no reasons. You're playing absolutely detrimental to town. This is not pro-town play, it is not how we catch scum. It's how shit gets stirred and people always let bad scum like this slide (coag in countless games) because they figure "oh no way scum would act so brashly or bad". ##Vote wherebugsgo At the very least, if you aren't scum, you are a stellar example of how town players should never act Are you saying that his activity is a good reason why he should be a policy lynch, for being detrimental to village planning and strategy? I sort of agree, but TranceStorm's strategy only means that it exposes townies, because it's easy enough for a scum who cannot wield the ring's power to its full extent to be deprived of it by or pass it to a bigger scum who can actually make use of it if the initial ring-bearer throws it to them, which would blow the whole tactic out of the water. Also, it could have negative repercussions by allowing a nominally cleared scum player to actually take out townies from within. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
| ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 18 2011 00:20 Radfield wrote: We're missing plenty of players right now, why are you so focused on Jeejee? Just wondering, as I've seen in recent games he's been in he's quite active when he's present. The same could be said of some other players as well. On September 18 2011 00:36 Radfield wrote: You're missing the point of Day 1 Jackal. You can't find scum with no posts in the thread, which is why we need something to talk about. Of course it's useless speculation. But guess what, if someone has to take paragraphs to discuss the ring and alignments, and then clams up when we actually have votes to discuss, that makes the discussion worthwhile. There's no need for the aggression. And this is why I asked for JeeJee. Same thing can be said of Erandorr, Palmar, Archon_Toilet. Inactives cripple the town, especially if they get some sort of blue role that can help make things happen. As for active lurking, we see people like Pyo, iGrok, GGQ and Vain. We have lots of targets, but we are grasping at a few people who are talking set up when the guys pressuring them provoked the set-up discussion. Also WBG should be ignored IMHO, we can take him out later. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
| ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 18 2011 11:45 kitaman27 wrote: There are far too many people that are getting away with posting the minimum or nothing at all. Palmar decides he isn't going to read the thread the first two days JeeJee goes and randomly votes for himself Erandorr has 9 pre-game posts and one real post Archon_Toilet has two posts about flavor Pyo has nothing of interest If we don't call people out for doing nothing, scum are going to take advantage and lurk the game away. Can we go and try to provoke some responses out of the last 3? The first two are relative veterans and thus other players can use what they already know of them to coax something of their position in this game. I want to throw the Kitchen Sink at the Archon_Toilet, just because it sounds appropriate for me. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
I'm voting Archon_Toilet since he was the person who had the most BS when people called him out on inactivity. Jackal also comes a close second to my eyes, and I wouldn't regret switching to him one bit. #Vote Archon_Toilet | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 19 2011 01:02 Navillus wrote: Oh my wow... Please filter Ciryandor's posts, it's a big collection of "well I think X but maybe not X and Y is also possible but maybe we shouldn't because bad stuff could happen" He's super indecisive about his thoughts, then instead of giving a real opinion he decides to vote for inactives over any of the people who actually have cases made against them, this is very scummy this late because he's voting for someone with almost no chance of getting lynched AND with very little reasoning to back it up because he's inactive, this allows scum to get away with meaningless votes that don't tell us anything about them, or if we do manage to lynch an inactive it won't be a scum one because they'll shift the vote to a town inactive since, you know, we can't tell the difference. They're inactives. Now as I mentioned, it's late in the day so I don't think I can get him lynched so I'll leave it at FOS Ciryandor but on a very related note ##Vote pphlz Ciryandor has done nice little soft defends of him at least twice now, the first time saying that pphlz is a "good guy" the second he tries to use his inactive lynch idea to divert attention specifically from pphlz, so I say we lynch pphlz, then if he flips red we've got another definite red in Ciryandor. And if he flips town? It wouldn't be wyse to lynch people who have put in some contribution, however inane it may sound. I'd rather throw some poor guy who's offering sauce for a reason into the bloody Brandywine than a half senile old man. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
Getting people off their asses and fishing for reactions should be our Day 1 goal, NOT giving some schmuck who barely scrapes by the anti-lurker guidelines a free pass to winning the game as a deadweight scum or hanging by the coat-tails townie, while the people who are yakking it up and that we have more of a profile of on their desirability for town get targeted just because they're non-committal or obnoxiously loud. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
##Unvote ##Vote Jackal | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 19 2011 02:07 Navillus wrote: Sorry for the triple post but just saw this too. First I'm an elf not a dwarf. Second this is just confirming my suspicions more and more, I FOS him and he jumps on me with a really REALLy angry OMGUS. And third, please stay civil, if you are town (something I'm doubting more and more by the second) then you really shouldn't be essentially trying to start a fight, making things personal only helps scum. Your tunneling makes you look more like an elf with a hard-on for dwarven quarrying every moment you do so; pressuring a person who has at least put in a modest effort to play the game and not try to hide is not productive to what town needs, and that is information on everyone else. So what happens when we get three, maybe four people lynched for being either misinformed or non-committal in their choice of vote, even though they've provided some information regarding other people and themselves? We are left with people we have less to work with, because they haven't been pushed around, and they only have besides their own scant words some non-specific sleuthing from players who we already know the alignment of yet cannot go back on to squeeze them both for more. In short, I want us to vote away from our current front runners to someone else who isn't active entirely. We have the information we need regarding WBG and prp from people's reactions and views to them, woe be to the scum that kills either and proves certain people's conclusions right or wrong; let us get to someone who we'll have a hard time reading because they've been hiding like a thief. | ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
| ||
|
Ciryandor
United States3735 Posts
On September 19 2011 02:27 jcarlsoniv wrote: Cir, lynching people who are less active gives you less information. People who have been active have given us something to work with. We can then take what we learn after the lynch and apply it to their posts and make connections. If there aren't posts to observe, there aren't patterns to observe, and connections can't be made. You are basically saying "I don't want people to focus on WBG or prpl, and I want to complete turn the votes around with very little left in the day". On top of it, you're getting very personal. What's wrong? Did we offend you and your scum buddies? Conversely, if none of their posts and their connections point to lurkers, what happens to these lurkers? We are left completely in the dark to their choices and motives then. What can be achieved by winnowing out the chaff is that lynching one active guy in a later day yields much much more information regarding them than lynching them on Day 1 would have been. Simply put, more activity equals more material to work with, and the easier to unravel the patterns and connections that everyone would have with one another without us losing more townies than absolutely necessary to the lynch or night shots. Just think about it, a scum-team with a mix of active and inactive players can exploit silent townies who have no idea where to go or target by sacrificing them late in the game as potential scum while they can focus on killing off power roles. Forcing all of them to be active deprives them of one level of camouflage and forces them to either expose their gameplan or cover their tracks. Both yield information on who we have to end up killing. And don't tell me I'm being personal, Navi started it by poking at my non-committal Day 1 play-style because he thought it was too indecisive. | ||
| ||
