EPT/in
Newbie Mini Mafia V
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
/in | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
On March 01 2012 11:51 trackd00r wrote: Hi everyone, I hope you enjoy the game. This is my second game on this forums. My previous game was Surprisingly Normal Mini Mafia VII. To be very honest, I played pretty bad that game T_T and I hope I can play better in this one. You can take a look and check my meta if you wish. I don't mind. The first lynch is very hard to achieve successfully due to the limited information we have at this moment. The most important thing at this phase of the game is to stay active. Usually, the mafia are able to push out a Townie lynch in Day 1 because inactive or lurkish players don't follow the rhythm of the thread and are prone to make unclear reads and staying out of contributing substantially. Therefore, they are rendered as uncooperative. Plus, they might not have the chance to defend themselves and that pretty much seals their lynch. We obviously don't want this situation to happen, so please be active. Try to post as much good content as you can. This means that you shouldn't post one liners or random fluff to clutter up the thread. Mafia is going to have an easy time hiding if we miss the direction of our goal, which is to lynch scum. This game has 9 townies and 3 scum. As you can see, this might turn out to a short game. If we can't good lynches in the first 2 days, we will be on a huge disadvantage. Don't be afraid to accuse anyone. The key is to push your cases and be consistent. About the lynch policy, I'm totally against a no-lynch, as one is the crucial step to get information. If we don't lynch today, Mafia gets a free kill the following night and we will be on the exactly the same situation as now in day 2. I'll be on the thread for about an hour or so today. It seems that we don't have a wide variation of Time zones, so hopefully all of us can be discussing at the same time. Seems really suspicious, almost like he is trying too hard to prove his innocence without real proof. He also uses "we" as if he already proved himself too be innocent, it sounds very suspicious. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
They have almost 100% chance of getting a townie every single night, we have the advantage of having more people making it viable to take risks, if we do not lynch we will be on almost the same position tomorrow, but one down. They have much more to lose if we nail a scum than if we lose a townie, so I think we should probably lynch someone who is asking for no lynch. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
On March 01 2012 23:13 Mementoss wrote: I am opposed to the general idea of the Random Lynch, it is highly risky, there will be one of us leaving no matter what. So that will put us at 8-3. -->73% Chance we get a townie, now I can see the logic for a Random Lynch, but not in this circumstance. Maybe if it was 50/50. In my opinion, it is probably better to pick someone at random. Three of us are scum. They get to act as a group and they can easily influence us on day 1 since there is not much information. Also, they have 3 votes to easily tip the scales if we were deciding between two players. Then again, how do we go about lynching at random? Is it possible to vote for the admin to do a random lynch? If not, then doing it random isn't an option. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
On March 02 2012 05:46 Mementoss wrote: [ Also, looking at Pablols filter, Stance: Random Lynch, lynch someone who opposes the lynch. --> Labels first post of the game as suspicious. 1 liner, no real logic to why its suspicious. Filler really. --> Sentences like this " Looking at the numbers it seems as if we should play passive until we get more information since there is a high chance of lynching a townie, however, don't forget that we must take risks." that say nothing, and generally contradict themselves. -->"In my opinion, it is probably better to pick someone at random. " - Again contradicting to passive play, also lacks care of his stated high chance of getting a townie. -->Also he is trying to derail discussion of the actual person we should look to be lynching, by trying to bring up an old discussion that has already been over with. The idea of random lynching. The general consensus of those without scummy tendencies have been to try and figure out a good candidate to lynch or lynch no one at all. He is really trying to push a lynch no matter what, risky play. As the townie mafia numbers get closer, the mafia advantage rises significantly. Two bad lynches could be game. Logic should be our weapon, not rolling the dice. Not counting Beorn cause I think it might be cause hes a noob and just forgot about the game starting to be honest. But he is in my mind too. Seriously? It seems like you either trying to take things out of context or just skimming through my posts. -->"In my opinion, it is probably better to pick someone at random. " - Again contradicting to passive play, also lacks care of his stated high chance of getting a townie. I contradict myself? I never wanted passive play, that is stupid, like I said on this post: "They have almost 100% chance of getting a townie every single night, we have the advantage of having more people making it viable to take risks, if we do not lynch we will be on almost the same position tomorrow, but one down. They have much more to lose if we nail a scum than if we lose a townie" You quote "In my opinion, it is probably better to pick someone at random. " You left out "Three of us are scum. They get to act as a group and they can easily influence us on day 1 since there is not much information. Also, they have 3 votes to easily tip the scales if we were deciding between two players." ------- --> Sentences like this " Looking at the numbers it seems as if we should play passive until we get more information since there is a high chance of lynching a townie, however, don't forget that we must take risks." that say nothing, and generally contradict themselves. Of course if you take one sentence out of a post it will say nothing. You just looked at the first PART of that sentence, and ignored everything after "however". Or maybe you are taking it out of context purposely? You quote "Looking at the numbers it seems as if we should play passive until we get more information since there is a high chance of lynching a townie, however, don't forget that we must take risks." You left out "They have almost 100% chance of getting a townie every single night, we have the advantage of having more people making it viable to take risks, if we do not lynch we will be on almost the same position tomorrow, but one down. They have much more to lose if we nail a scum than if we lose a townie, so I think we should probably lynch someone who is asking for no lynch." -->Also he is trying to derail discussion of the actual person we should look to be lynching, by trying to bring up an old discussion that has already been over with. The idea of random lynching. What? Maybe I'm seeing this wrong but everyone was talking about random lynching, because it's a huge part of day 1. The one derailing is you, you didn't even read my posts and then you jump to accusing people. This is the reason why we shouldn't go on someone's hunch when choosing who to lynch on day one. You are jumping to conclusions without any real proof. It seems like you should really read more careful because just looking at page 5 we can see the same thing happening. You called out someone, trying to take his words out of context and when he confronted you, you just backed down. Mementoss: "Rereading trackd00r's filter, I see my mistake now. I read it as both concerning towards random lynch. But really, it was just being opposed to a no lynch and opposed to a random lynch. Sorry for the hasty accusations trackd00r. I am still not convinced, but I agree Maverick that you bring up some better suspects." If we were to lynch someone on day one it should probably be this guy, I do not have enough proof to say he is scum but even if he isn't we can agree he is dangerous because he either doesn't take the time to read an entire post or he is scum. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
On March 02 2012 05:46 Mementoss wrote: Here are my top picks for scum right now: OtoshimonoU Pablols Sufficiency (although trackd00r brings up a point about his sloppy post Honestly, the only people who should jump to conclusions like that list are scum, it's only day one and unless you know who not to vote for you wouldn't be calling people out like that. You didn't even give real reasoning to why Sufficiency and OtoshimonoU are on that list "All in all lynching someone with no basis is an absolutely terrible option in this situation. Some circumstances in the game where you cannot risk the scum even getting 1 up, and you have no leads is a good situation to pick someone at random. This is not the case. We currently hold our people advantage and there is no desperation at this point in the game." You said it yourself. But you really seem to be trying really hard to blame someone with no basis so that we organize and lynch then day 1.. As you can read on my other posts I was thinking that random post was the best option because of the lack of information, but now I think I know who I should vote for. You're dangerous to the town even if you're not scum | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
 , I'll be back in 3 hours. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
Yeah, Mementoss is top of my list, I guess I was too direct on accusing him. I only suspect him, day 1 it's impossible to know. I just have a hunch. Regarding my first post, the 2 liner one, I must admit it was pretty bad. It's the first time I play mafia and I am still getting the hang of it. When I posted that I hadn't even finished reading the guide to mafia threads. I don't blame you guys because it does look suspicious. After getting a better understanding of how this works I retract that statement, I do not suspect Trackdoor. I stand on my position towards Mementoss and Maverick, both say I contradict myself. I don't see it... And it was not explained. It's important for people to defend themselves after being accused, it's the natural response and without it false accusations from scum would win them the game easily. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
On March 02 2012 09:09 Mementoss wrote: How many hours before the voting thread closes? I have some things on my mind that I want to post and will post within the next few hours before I go to bed. I'm kind of waiting it out to hear some other peoples opinions/people to respond and speak up. cough* OtoshimonoU cough* Admin said: The game has officially begin. You have approximately 48 hours to determine your first lynch. The current deadline is scheduled for 21:00 EST (-05:00). Good luck! I believe it should be tomorrow night? Is that right? I don't want to miss voting | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
Thank you for putting that list together, I like the idea of everyone posting their top suspects and the reasoning behind it. As of now this are my most suspected players Sufficiency: I would really like for this guy to respond to some of the accusations, as it is now he seems to be dodging the questions. Maybe he is just busy with real life, but if he doesn't post again he is definitely worth looking at. Mementoss: I have already explained in detail why I think his accusation towards me was illegitimate since he only responded to parts of my posts and left out crucial information. That is the reason why I think he could be scum, we should never misquote people or leave out important information when calling someone out. Maverick: I suspect you less than the other two, but I must say that the following post made me feel as if you have some sort of connection with Mementoss: "@Mementoss- Good reads. I also want to hear more from sufficiency!!! I know you guys are looking at OtoshimonoU and Pablols, but I didn't get a good a read off them intially... however based on that last post, I will agree that these are my main 3 suspects. Also I specifically asked a couple questions to some people, and I'm curious to see if they're sidestepped or if they confront the question.. " You have the same suspects, and Mementoss later on responds to you in a friendly manner: "... Also this is the second time you mentioned yourself being "bloodthirsty" lol.." | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
I agree with you on this, everyone needs to be more active. More interactions among more people will result on more information to analyze and then maybe we can make day 1 lynch an educated group decision we won't regret instead of just 3 or 4 players doing everything. Although I suspect Maverick and Momentoss I like the fact that they post often, it's great and we shouldn't discourage it. ----- If it seems like they are taking control of the thread then post, and challenge them when you don't agree. We are all equal at this point and everyone's opinion is worth hearing. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
On March 02 2012 11:54 gunman103 wrote: Sorry I haven't been able to post much. #1 Tiystus- He was fine with randomly killing someone early on but then changes his mind later. Seems like one of his scum friends told him what to say. He also never seems to make a decision on anything. #2 Pablols- I think that he overreacted to Mementoss and accuses him with no real reason other than that he was accused by Mementoss. Also, he accuses trackdoor pretty early on in the game with no real evidence against him other than "he is trying too hard to prove his innocence without real proof" a weak argument imo. Mementoss would probably be third simply because he left out a lot of Pablol's statement and left out crucial information. Seems like a scummy thing to do imo. You should never intentionally misquote someone, even though it probably was an accident, you never know. Just to clarify I accused mementoss because of the misquote issue, that's it. Other people have called me out but I have had no reason to suspect them and I didn't accuse them. For example, your post, there is no reason to suspect anything. But like I said, misquoting is dangerous play and shouldn't be taking lightly. Even if he isn't part of the mafia, in my opinion, he could be dangerous to the town. Regarding the trackdoor accusation I already took that back, "Regarding my first post, the 2 liner one, I must admit it was pretty bad. It's the first time I play mafia and I am still getting the hang of it. When I posted that I hadn't even finished reading the guide to mafia threads. I don't blame you guys because it does look suspicious. After getting a better understanding of how this works I retract that statement, I do not suspect Trackdoor." | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
I had to study last minute for 2 exams... I'm glad it's over, I'll read the thread and post actively from now on  .I'm confused though, what made Oto more suspicious than someone like Sufficiency? All he did was post one liner posts with no content. Just an idea, but what if the mafia were waiting for someone to vote for a townie and then went ahead and used their votes on him? I think there are at least 2 mafia among the ones who voted for oto on day 1, because honestly there wasn't enough info in my opinion to be sure he was scum. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
Even though I don't really suspect Oto, I think that since Mementoss got killed targeting him is a good option. And @blubbdavid Wow amazing post. can't wait to hear more reads from you. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
On March 04 2012 14:13 Sufficiency wrote: To Pablols: Can you tell me who you would have voted for if you had the chance to vote? I would've voted for either you or mementoss | ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
| ||
|
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
I'll make sure to read through everything and vote today though, I hate midterms. | ||
| ||
