EPTStorm Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 21 2012 07:38 kitaman27 wrote: Is this the standard mafia "opps I got caught in a discrepancy". Time to claim change in playstyle! I hate these meta arguments. People are not automatons that play every single game as a particular alignment in the exact same fashion. Stupid question too, doesn't pressure him even if he is mafia. I've never seen a policy lynch work on TL, not even LAL because town players here lie so often and my perspective is that TL towns are fairly gullible in general. On February 21 2012 07:24 redFF wrote: I disagree, I think a policy lynch day 1 does a number of useful things. I will lay them out. Day 1 is the hardest day to get a scumlynch, as town has the least information available to it. A policy lynch means not possibly mislynching a strong town player. Policy lynches and the reactions to them are very useful. They get lots of juicy reactions. We get rid of a bad. Honestly the chance of a policy lynch hitting scum is about as good as hitting scum from a flimsy day 1 case. We also don't lynch radfield the blue day 1, but thats similar to my only point regarding getting rid of a bad. Day 1 is usually somewhat of a crapshoot in 48/24 games. Policy lynches are good, embrace them. There have been good Day 1 cases on multiple occasions. On Day 1 in the ongoing Arkham City game both VisceraEyes/Sheth got pretty close to the chopping block. "Bad" is a subjective term as well, who decides whether a player is good or bad? The "town"? You might as well pick a random amount of "bad" inactives and just RNG the lynch, what a waste of a Day 1 discussion. Putting votes on inactive townies/policy lynches generates almost no real pressure on a player over whether or not they are scum but only creates arguments over whether or not a policy lynch is justified. Mafia is designed so that the town can still win fairly easily even if they mislynch on the first day. It is not designed to make it impossible to lynch scum on first day or so that people will not try. You get better discussion out of people making, or being forced to make, real cases on people. When mafia have to make bad analysis, they get exposed. You don't have to policy lynch to avoid lynching "blue radfield" or anything like that either. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 21 2012 08:19 redFF wrote: PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE The game has been going on for an hour, my suggestion of a policy lynch does not mean I don't want anyone to scumhunt. It's an excellent way to generate discussion, which it has. VE's post is hypocritical because he's calling me scum for pushing a policy lynch when he himself was pushing a policy lynch up until that post, when it arbitrarily became a scum lynch. Consider him my first moderately scummy read. You're better than this. He never ever said your PL position was bad, but that you are spammy. Please read posts before you start OMGUSing. Considering you have time to spam you should have time to read. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 21 2012 08:29 chaoser wrote: And you need to read better. red is saying VE's vote on him was him pushing for a policy lynch while at the same time he is criticizing him for pushing a policy lynch on tyrran. That is a big problem. Care to respond VE? No, it's not a problem. I disagree with the policy lynch in general but I really don't see how VE is contradicting himself at all. Supporting a policy lynch does not mean you can't be critical of RedFF posting a lot of one liners and talking about it/defending it so vehemently. He isn't accusing of redFF for being scum for supporting a PL anyway, or even for "pushing" it. He never said those words. It's an invented case. I'm voting for red. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 21 2012 08:40 redFF wrote: Nothing I've done is scummy and this is not going to get off the ground so enjoy your lonely wagon ve and drh. Defensively misrepresenting other players arguments seems scummy to me. You're just contributing another negative oneliner devoid of content. If you're not scum, you're really careless. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 21 2012 08:49 redFF wrote: I'm fairly sure carelessness is a towntell if anything, so thanks for saying im acting like town? Yeah that's why I said if you're not scum you're acting really careless. Regardless making terrible arguments, misrepresenting other players, and being antagonistic as a defensive action are not helping you here. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 21 2012 11:17 redFF wrote: explain how any arguments i've made have been terrible. You can't just say this without any backing up. you said i was misrepping and i explained how i wasn't and you didnt respond. is being antagonistic a scumtell? If so then wbg is scum every game! One good example of misrepresenting is by insinuating I'm calling you town/contradicting myself based on something I didn't say at all. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
I'm keeping my vote on redFF because he was the only player that so obviously misrepresented/twisted other peoples words and facts to make his cases and scum really have to do that to make any kind of convincing bandwagon at all, unless it's a (wouldn't you know it) policy lynch or piling onto some expendable player like Kenpachi. Some things WBG said jumped out at me as odd, especially his claims that redFF is unreadable. I highly doubt that is the case. I have not played with redFF a lot but there are far more obnoxious and spammy players who are not terribly difficult to pin down. Players who are overly concerned with antagonizing others, talking about how other people are bad, etc. are not helping anybody, they are not moving us closer to lynching scum, this is scum behavior. The lynch ends tomorrow at 1PM PST correct? | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 22 2012 11:44 Jitsu wrote: I wouldn't roll with a BC lynch at the moment. He pretty much said exactly what I was thinking with the "role does not equal alignment." There is no defined set-up information, and it could be plausible that a tracker type would be on the mafia side. No? Dirkzor Cool case, brah. Would it be ok to say that chaoser is a red read to you, then? If not, who then? He made one okay point therefore we shouldn't lynch him? I agree with it too. That doesn't mean anything really. BC is way better than this. He's playing negatively, passively, he's criticizing others for not contributing past the PL discussion but offers nothing to the thread himself. Yeah, RedFF could be faking it and the fact that he hasn't said a role name yet makes me suspect but I feel way stronger about BC with that last post of his now. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:15 wherebugsgo wrote: I haven't personally attacked anyone in this thread. I have called them bad, I have said that their play sucks, and that they are in general useless for town. All of these things are game-relevant and actually pretty important. If you're referring to the fact that I said your agreement with syllo cements my opinion that syllo is wrong, then yes, you deserved that (and no, it is not ad hominem.) It is my opinion that syllo is wrong, and your agreement is bad. That's just indicative of you being bad. Since Dr. H also agrees with syllo, and his posting has been quite shitty, I think he's scum. I think you're just mad because I pointed out that your opinion is worth next to nothing since it's clearly wrong. Why would I be your second strongest read rather than syllo, in this case? Can you logically demonstrate why any case against BC is terrible instead of simply stating that it is and FOSing the people who suspect him? | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:56 wherebugsgo wrote: Because you sheeped and syllogism didn't. prpl would be a scumread too if he was normally any good. But, it's nothing out of the ordinary to expect prplhz to make a bad argument, so despite the fact that he agrees with an opinion I disagree with it isn't alignment indicative for him. I probably could, but I don't have to, since the burden of proof is on you. If you want to convince someone to vote BC you need to come up with a convincing argument first. For now, since your vote reason is poor, no one has a reason to follow you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof I stated my reasons. If you'd like me to do so in more detail, I can do that. I'm not sheeping syllogism, in fact I did not even read his post as I've been busy all day but BC's lack of activity and the few posts I have read jump out to me as scummy and since I'm torn between redFF being awful town or scum, I'm going with BC. You "probably" could? If you are going to say any vote on BC is terribad and call people scum for it have some confidence. When I actually have time to look through filters tomorrow maybe you'll feel I'm more justified but it doesn't seem you're all that concerned about it really. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
He's playing negatively, passively, he's criticizing others for not contributing past the PL discussion but offers nothing to the thread himself. WBG won't give me an ounce of credit, but I did point out a bit more than just "uhhhh he looked scummy uhhh" and this post was meant to justify my vote change before I made a real case. I'd rather avoid scum and the sheeple jumping on me for changing my vote quietly. I've been out and about all night but considering my doubts with redFF I'm not going to keep my vote on him when I feel better about somebody else. Calling that a soft defense is stupid. You have been defending red much harder based on nothing but meta reads early in this game. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. This is, in essence, saying we should be scumhunting instead. Something that BC has not done and justified not doing, when I see no reason that town-BC would act in this manner. This is a typical scum posting behavior, they act like they are contributing or juuuuuust about to do some great things for town and just never do it. Instead of contributing something positive, they just criticize and put down/parrot what other people are doing and this can sometimes give the illusion that they have done something useful. The best way to get town on the right track is not by telling everyone they suck and to shut up, it is to post well/make cases and guide the discussion in the right direction. This was essentially the main point in syllogisms argument if I'm not mistaken. Can you explain why that is wrong and terrible, WBG? On February 22 2012 10:37 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Why did I subject myself to read this fucking nonsense. Do I have to say this? Role does not equal alignment. Redff claiming his role in hopes to confirm his alignment is horseshit. In an unknown setup and him claiming that there may be multi target abilities the chances of mafia having a role to find said abilities is just as within reason as the town. He then states that if he is roleblocked to lynch him, but says its not optimal to lynch claimed blues? Contradiction and sounds like hes just finding any reason to stay alive. This level of play is so insanely bad that it makes me sad. He knows all this and yet still does the play to create a total shit fest of a thread and does not in anyway create a pro town environment. As for syllo. Get off my nuts. 5 hours is never enough information to actually commit to a read especially given my horrible ability to differentiate between bad play and bad scum. Find other straw men to go burn. ##vote redff My understanding is that redFF is saying he shouldn't be lynched right away except under the exceptional circumstances he mentioned. It's not a contradiction, it's an exception. If I'm wrong about that point it out but I'll go over red's filter again and check myself. Get off my nuts. 5 hours is never enough information to actually commit to a read especially given my horrible ability to differentiate between bad play and bad scum. Find other straw men to go burn. I'm certainly not asking you to go nail the scum in 5 hours, you're being asked to contribute beyond being negative about what's going on already. You can tell us all how bad we are as long as you want, you've been on TL long enough to know that won't do anything except fan the flames. Inject a little bit of good into it. Nice job justifying your lack of effort, negging yourself a little bit. I think BC is scum and I'm voting for him. Considering it's still Day 1 it's not a homerun 100% nailed done deal fucking case, but I'm going to put my vote where I feel it needs to be. I don't care that BC is a vet or any other nonsense meta arguments for lynching/not lynching any player in this game. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
@Dirkzor This is very troubling: I find it highly unlikely that RedFF is scum. followed by At the same time we can't just keep RedFF around because he claimed a blue role. If you find it highly unlikely a player is scum, you shouldn't talk about lynching them or encouraging DT's and Vig's to possibly hit him. Your case on BH is fair though. I'm in the process of second guessing myself a lot because of how uncomfortable I feel about VisceraEyes right now. I don't understand VE's meta at all but I don't need to at the moment. I let him slip by Day 1 on Arkham City and I always make the same mistakes that lets this kind of thing happen, I lack confidence. Hopefully BC responds adequately to the pressure, but for the moment I'm pretty uncertain. Considering the time I think it's highly unlikely that anyone besides redFF will be lynched. If he is indeed the tracker, it doesn't give us really much to work with considering the ease and size of the bandwagon. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 23 2012 02:22 Jitsu wrote: The fact that I had the same idea is less about me agreeing with it and more about having the same train of thought. Did you read L? Everyone was making the same case about him in L, saying how he was causing more chaos then good, especially with revealing his role. Not comfortable with lynching him at this point. I could get down with a Dirkzor lynch. - non-committal early on, staying out of the spotlight for the most part. - says that chaoser is curious because he is "flippy floppy" - This post makes just about zero sense to me. It's more of the same, with a bit of confusion as well. If I wanted to post something to make it look like a contribution, this would be it. - says he can't wrap his head around this game, then two posts later, claims chaoser as his primary scumread, and adds a [weak] case about how chaoser is scum. - doesn't even vote for chaoser, even though it's his target. Something is up. ##vote Dirkzor No, I'm completely unfamiliar with BC's meta other than a game I played with him as scum too long ago to remember. That game was a perfect victory for us too. Dirkzor has made some alarming posts but also some solid points against other players, I want to hear how he responds to criticism before I consider lynching him because I may just be misunderstanding or misreading him. On February 23 2012 02:26 Blazinghand wrote: I still don't see what the problem is with lynching redFF at this point. He's never gonna get shot by the mafia if he's town just to make us sad, will get RBed or *And I think this is the case* he's just mafia and punched out this tracker claim since he's out of breathing room and will claim RB. So you sheep all game and then say it's okay to lynch town just because "mafia won't shoot him" night 1? How do you know what the mafia will do? WIFOM galore and lynching town is not okay. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 23 2012 02:43 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: K, I know you are smarter than this or at the very least functionally literate, so I'm going to give you around 20 minutes to read the last 3 pages of the thread and realize why this isn't some dumb wifom shit, its an obvious end result of RedFF's dipshit scummy claim. It is WIFOM. I agree scum would probably not shoot redFF if he is town AND survives Day 1 considering he's distracting and an easy lynch target, but I don't agree that it's alright to lynch town. redFF's claim is stupid and I'm not sold on it considering he didn't even say a name with it and just dipped out immediately. They should roleblock him but I just don't like making arguments or lynches based on predicting what the mafia will do. I can think of countless times I've been scum and we've concocted to do the opposite of what town would expect, even make bad shots just to confuse people. Mafia is not a game played by machines that make the most efficient decisions and even if what he said is likely correct, it is not helpful. | ||
| ||
