EPT/in
Newbie Mini Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
/in | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
| ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
And sorry for the relative quiet, but I am guessing most people were in a similar situation of it's a Saturday evening before Halloween, and were therefore not near their computers. This might be a question for a coach, but what's the normal day 1 protocol in a game like this with no real planning phase? Use a RNG to decide a lynch target to get people talking to get a better idea of who is scummy? No lynch day 1? Or the other mostly random method of SC2 UMS mafia method and lynch based on name? Another method I am neglecting? Regardless, I know getting discussion going is better for town than silence so...yeah. Let's hear some thoughts/ideas people. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
And just to call someone out a bit, I believe Skrammen has actually said the least of anyone so far, with a total contribution of: Good morning gentlemen! | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
On October 31 2011 01:42 risk.nuke wrote: Even if that was what you thought, why were you so quick to tell everyone what you thought toad ment. He wasn't about to get lynched.. If that's what he thought when he wrote it he wouldn't had have any problems telling us that himself, if he's scum he might had given a scumslip. FOS Based on the last line of his post To sum it up: post bitches I am pretty sure that is what he meant. But, you make a good point, I suppose I should mostly let people speak for themselves. Sorry about that, I'll try to give people more time to respond before jumping in. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
On October 31 2011 02:47 IMABUNNEH wrote: 2 people coming to each others' defense early on in the game isn't something I'd have expected either. Interpreting someone else's words to make them seem "nicer" than they were stated... There was no coming to each others' defense, as he has said nothing in my defense. With Bunneh, Chocolate, and Risk all calling him out before my post, I simply wanted to avoid early bandwagoning (sp?) before we had some more contributions from everyone in the game. It was simply that and nothing more. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
Skrammen has now doubled his post count, using his first to say good morning and his second accuses someone for trying to stir up discussion with a vote "so soon", as well as a preemptive excuse for not being active: And just a head's up: Since we have people from both sides of the pond in this game there is bound to be somewhat of a delay in answers and people might be working or sleeping when some discussions takes place. We should be somewhat tolerant of this, but obviously 24 hours of no posting is not good. The only people that benefit from a delayed discussion is obviously the mafia, they'd rather it never happen. Also, while his statement is true, I think it was fairly obvious to most people, and scum always like to have an excuse to fall back on. So FOS on Skrammen for now. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
Keep in mind many (most?) people have not played together, if at all, before. So something fitting their style is hard to determine for those of us who haven't. That being said, I will now go look through that game you were in to try to fix that problem. For anyone else interested in doing so as well: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=264798 It contains 3 of our current players, Toadesstern, Ciryandor, and Zanfada. It is also pretty short, so shouldn't take too long to read through. Careful with just filtering the three players though, context context context! | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
1. Voting is done in this thread. Please keep votes there, and only vote there. Do not PM me your vote. I know Kita mentioned that votes can be done within this thread earlier, but just to avoid any issues, can the OP be updated to clarify that votes should go here, and not in some mysterious "there"? Right now it looks like that should be a link to a voting thread that simply isn't up yet. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
On October 31 2011 07:00 Chocolate wrote: Definitely FOS on Zanfada now. Needlessly aggressive, fos on ciryandor for defending him, even though what you did at first was a smart and good thing to do as it opened discussion. And yeah, having almost no evidence for any of his fos but saying a lot of empty words is kinda :/ [Emphasis mine] I think the bolded part is the source of the confusion. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
On October 31 2011 12:02 Ciryandor wrote: Lots of suspicion (from HoD, risk, xsksc, Chocolate, hyshes) on Toad for prompting productive activity ; which was essentially what I was doing as well. The only person I have called out my suspicion on is Skrammen. Since he hasn't said anything since then, I remain suspicious of him. Some suspicion on Zanfada as well (from hyshes and Chocolate), admittedly minor, for doing lots of "filler talk". Bunneh, Drem, and Skraamen have also mentioned Zanfada as someone to watch. I find it interesting that you miss out on all of those as well as call the suspicion on him minor. However, you seem to be genuinely trying to create discussion, so try to be more accurate with your summaries. Their relevant quotes: + Show Spoiler + Fron Bunneh: Yeah. Maybe they were just trying to get the ball rolling, or maybe they were trying to start people recieving flak early on. I'd go out on a limb and put odds on at least one of them being scum. From Drem: Zanfada also has not posted at all since his initial accusation, so he should also be one to consider for now. From Skraamen: 4 hours into the game and you go on and try to stir some discussion up? He wasnt the only one who had said nothing up to that point, why did you choose him? It seems a little bit... Dodgy to use a vote to pressure someone into talking more so soon I think. All that being said, I would like to hear more from xsksc, Drem, hacklebeast, risk.nuke, and Skrammen. All of these players have been relatively quiet now and I would like to hear what their current scum reads/suspicions are. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
EDT is Eastern Daylight Time, the timezone for the Eastern USA during daylight savings time. Current EDT is 5:02 PM | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
As mentioned before, his first few posts were rather empty/slightly scummy. He then comes into the thread over 2 hours after a vote is on him, and responds only to my much earlier FOS, ignoring the fact that there is a vote to lynch him. Perhaps an attempt to avoid drawing more attention to it and to himself? Either way his defenses have seemed rather weak, and his contributions to scum hunting have been minimal at best. What are your opinions of Toad and Zanfada, Skraamen? I'd be interested to hear them. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
He seemed slightly scummy and fairly non-contributing since the start. I then mentioned it again as he still had not responded to what I said earlier about him. He then came in with a rather weak defense against only 1 or 2 of the charges leveled at him and disappeared again, after throwing a vote on someone who is not one of the main suspects for seemingly anyone else. As for the focus, focusing is how you get things done. If I post that I am suspicious of 6 people, what have I accomplished? Yes I've perhaps been tunneling him more than I should, but I assure you I've been keeping a watch on others as well. If Skrammen wants any chance of me changing my vote from him to someone else, I need him to answer my earlier request, which I will repeat here: What are your opinions of Toad and Zanfada, Skrammen? | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
So, the people i'm currently very suspicious of are: SKrammen and Zanfada. When i get more time to really look at everyone's posts this might change, but it's just those 2 for now. ##vote Zanfada If you were very suspicious of both of them, why would you leave your vote on Zanfada? At the time of your voting, you had the option to make it 2 votes for Zanfada, or 4 votes for Skrammen. If your goal was to get scum lynched, and you were very suspicious of Skrammen, why place your vote in a way that greatly increases the odds of a no-lynch rather than nearly guaranteeing a lynch on Skrammen? I would also like a bit more from hyshes on why he voted Zanfada, considering his voting post was the following: I don't watn to be modkilled, so i'm going to cast a vote following my feeling here. ##vote Zanfada Do you still think he is scum? Were you around at all after more votes were in? If so, what was your reasoning for leaving your vote on Zanfada, rather than switching it to Toad? Since the failed lynch you seem to be focusing more on Toad, but haven't really made a committal statement yet, do you believe Toad to be scum? | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
His two posts so far: Unnecessarily trying to start a town panic? Baseless accusing people that, under your own admission, have no evidence against? Sounds like very mafia things to do. I'm not going to go so far as to cast my vote yet, but I'm watching you. Besides, I could never have committed the crime. Gmarshal I could take or leave, but killing ponies? I don't have it in me to take out something this lovable. ## vote toadesstern I think his moves have been shady since the beginning. First tries to get the important figures to revel themselves (not explicitly, but if a lurker suddenly started posting significantly after it would give mafia a good clue), then follows it up with a lot of talk about the necessity to kill lurkers. To top it off he fingers chocolate only to rescind his vote after no one else follows suit. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
On November 02 2011 06:24 Drem903 wrote: @Harbinger. I voted for Zanfada because he, at the time, was the person i was most suspicious of. In retrospect i should have looked at SKrammen's posts more, but at the time he [SKrammen] wasn't the most suspicious to me. Now, although SKrammen is still suspicious (he completely ignored toad's analysis a page back, and only responded to defend himself from Zanfa), i am starting to put a lot more thought in the the claim that Toadesstern is a major suspect. (Zanfa i am now unsure of, and hope to see more posts from him before i say anything more on him). Mostly because he seems adamant about convincing us that he is town, and constantly restates that point over and over again. Which seems like something mafia would do if they were desperate to avoid a lynch. I understand he may very well have been the person you were most suspicious of, but in the very post you used to place that vote you said you were very suspicious of Skrammen. My question was if you thought both were likely to be scum at the time, why would you vote in a manner that makes it less likely that either of them would get lynched? It isn't like you made an effort in your post to get people to switch from Skrammen to Zanfada to get him lynched instead, you simply said they were both very suspicious and placed your vote. Let's spell it out a bit: Suppose you think A and B are scummy. You think A is 60% to be scum, B is 80% to be scum. If you vote A, he will almost surely be lynched. If you vote B, there is a small chance A will be lynched, no chance B will be lynched, a large chance nobody will be lynched. How does the second choice ever make sense, unless you think A is likely to be town? | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
Townie priority list. 1. Establish your innocence. 2. Support the right townies. 3. Vote properly. 4. Shut down any attempts to lynch other obvious townies. 5. Shut down attempts to spread doubt or chaos in the thread. I find it a bit odd that your list doesn't include finding scum. My list would be: 1: Figure out who is scum 2: Once you have determined someone is scum (or at least likely to be scum), make a case against them and convince other people that the person is, in fact, scum. The rest should take care of itself. I would also like to take a moment to share two potentially relevant quotes from Ver's guide: + Show Spoiler + "The worst way to play day 1 is with apathy and disinterest and lynch the most outspoken/controversial player, who is never going to be mafia." "The most important thing to do with the day 1 lynch is look at the votes and trends. Was there a big swing for one candidate over another? How late was it in the cycle? How many people received 1-2 votes? In this case, the most interesting vote count list is the one posted with 4 hours to go. At this point, love1another has 6 votes, Bill Murray has 5, and Roffles has 4. There are 9 players with 1-2 votes and 4 players have not voted yet. This list tells you that there probably isn't a mafia in the top 2 vote getters. The votes are close enough that the mafia doesn't really have to risk itself too much to do a voteswing, but the mafia also don't want to do a voteswing at the last minute because last minute voteswingers generally get put under heavy pressure after an innocent lynch. The mafia would have been pushing a different candidate harder over the course of the day if there was a mafia at risk. Instead, expect to see the mafia pretty spread out among the votegetters and don't expect many of them to switch at the end. And sure enough, only Misder is voting for any of the top 3 vote getters. Infundibulum hasn't voted yet and the other 4 mafia members are in lists of 1-2 votes. Sure enough, looking at the final votes, only 1 mafia changed their vote and Infundibulum came in and voted. There isn't a single mafia on the love1another lynch list. At this point, Bill Murray should be viewed as almost certainly not mafia." | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
Well then, let's see what this means. Risk.nuke was the main proponent of the lynch toad campaign. Other than that he has called one of Ciry's posts suspicious, and he called a FOS on me awhile back. So, who benefits from risk's death? 1) Toad, it removes the most ardent supporter of his lynching. 2) Skrammen, risk defended Skrammen, him flipping town upon death gives more weight to risk's defense of Skrammen. It also discredits Toad, as Toad had risk highest on his scum list. Him being wrong about that lowers the worth of his word when he accuses others of being scum. 3) Bunneh, also defended Skrammen, and is therefore indirectly helped by risk's death, although only slightly. 4) Ciry, but only if Ciry was worried about risk becoming increasingly suspect of him. 5) Myself, but, again, only if I still thought risk was suspicious of me. 6) Lurkers, if neither Skrammen nor Toad is scum, killing somebody who has spent almost all his time talking about these two makes for an amazing kill. It practically guarantees we will continue to focus on them, giving mafia another day where they don't get lynched. I think it is clear that 1, 2, or 6 are the best candidates. 3, 4, and 5 mostly serve as potentially added bonuses, but certainly seem unlikely as main reasons. Also keep in mind, it is likely that the decision was made by scum before risk's long post before the bottom of page 17, and possibly before toad's as well. Very few people were around after those posts and prior to the night ending, and presumably scum would not leave the decision on who to shoot to a single member of their team. So here's my opinion on the matter, Toad tends to talk too much and to talk too freely for me to think he is scum. Skrammen tends to have rather empty posts, he has done no real analysis so far, and has engaged in a decent amount of OMGUS, as collected in the spoiler. + Show Spoiler + Note: These are all directed at different people Not once did you FoS on me, yet you preffered to vote me instead of zanfa. You also FoS'd Ciry but claim you didnt. You seem to be a bit everywhere, throwing suspicions left and right. To me, it appears like you are trying to be a bit of an instigator while saying very little of substance. You've posted nearly as little as I have done, and you say you vote me because of lack of activity? ##Vote Chocolate And now you have decided to vote me. Did you already make up your mind before I did my post? As far as I can tell, the only thing you seem to base your suspicion on is the fact that I made a point about timezones. I think you are over-analyzing things way too hard, stop looking for something who is not there. Just stating the obvious. Why say I might red if I am scum? Well, if I was, would I tell you? Are you desperatly trying to find a reason to get me lynched, again? What about you. So far, the only thing you have done is come in, instigate somthing on someone else, defend yourself when you got under pressure only to disappear again. And here you are again. However, I, unfortunately, lack the conviction of our departed risk.nuke. I cannot say with 100% certainty that Skrammen is scum nor that Toad is Town. But here's what I think can help solve the problem, Toad and Skrammen, if you value your lives, please make a post of the following: 1) At least 2, preferably 3 people you think are scum 2) Explanations and some analysis of why you think they are scum 3) At least 2, preferably more, people you think are town, excluding yourself 4) Explanations of why you think they are town 5) What you think the goal of the risk.nuke shooting was If we have this information from both of them, I think we will have a much clearer picture of things. This post is getting long, but I feel the need to restate something from an earlier post of mine, thus far hacklebeast has gotten away with contributing a total of jack shit and that needs to change in a hurry. | ||
|
HarbingerOfDoom
United States508 Posts
Your target will be informed that they have been role-blocked (even if they didn't have a night action). You do not have to use your action every night. So, if somebody was role-blocked, it would be nice to know, as the setup does not explicitly state whether or not they have one. Additionally, who, if anyone, was role-blocked would provide further information. | ||
| ||
