EPTTL Mafia 'Area' LIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
However, I'm not ok with just a mass claim on N1 like Gonzaw has suggested, as that could lead to scum just shooting the vigs before they can shoot, taking away a valuable asset to the town. What I would suggest is that on N1, vigs claim AND fire, shooting into any lurkers we have. If mafia want to fake-claim, then what this policy would force them to do is use a night kill on a lurker instead of an active town, which would actually help the town weed out lurkers, and make it harder on scum to hide, and save an active town member. Therefore it's less likely that a fake-claim will occur (WIFOM I know, but I still think it's logical) It will also get all the vig shots out of the way so scum can't claim vig later on. The problem with this is that in a way it's a waste of the town's resources by aiming at lurkers and not directly at scum. I still think that minimizing the confusion caused if vigs flip is at least potentially worth something, though. The other problem is that we may not HAVE any lurkers, in which case we'd need to try something else. What that would be I'm not sure, but this plan WILL NOT work without obvious lurkers to shoot, since one of it's major advantages is making it less likely that scum will claim. Any thoughts/comments? Think this is a good idea? Tell me why. Same for if you think it's a terrible plan. I'll be going to bed in a minute, I'll be back tomorrow. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 21 2012 16:13 gonzaw wrote: To Janaan: I like it that you are trying to bring new ideas to the table (so I guess this is not a "very bad 1st post" from yours  )Okay, answer me these questions then: 1)What happens if we lynch a GF (someone flips GF) on D1 then? (in your plan vigs claim in N1) 2)If all vigs shoot "lurkers" on N1, what happens if there are 3 vigs and the 3 lurkers are town? What happens if there is a KP unaccounted for? What happens if town wanted someone else dead, and some people actually thought a targeted lurker was town or had better candidates in mind? 3)Why would you want to protect vigs? They are Millers who flip GF upon death and can't actually shoot GFs. Why would you NOT want scum to shoot them on N1? How are they a "valuable asset" in this case? 4)Who decides who shoots who? Remember this from the OP: 2 or more vigs can shoot the same guy, which leads me to the next point: 5)What happens if a scum claims vig "after" someone else claimed vig and he claims he targeted a "lurker" that another vig targeted? Would you believe they are 2 vigs that were lucky enough to target the same player, or that one is a vig and the other one a scum that just chose to "hide" behind the other vig so he didn't have to waste the Goon's KP? Final question: What do you think about VE, his "case" and my case against him? And what about other players that have been the focus of attention lately? I'll only briefly answer these questions in the spoiler, because I think at this point, we're past the vig discussion. No plan will work unless everyone agrees to it, and the discussion so far leads me to believe that it isn't going to happen. At this point, any vigs we have will do what they want to, and we'll have to use our best judgement when things start happening. + Show Spoiler + 1. I don't know, actually. I suppose it could be better for vigs to claim on day 1 if this plan was followed, that's a possible revision that could have been made. The only issue with that, though, is that even if someone claimed vig, if they were looking scummy enough to be lynched before, I don't know that a claim would be enough to stop the lynch, since it could have just been a scum trying to not get lynched by claiming. I'm honestly not sure which would be a better option. 2. I was assuming that the vigs would claim their targets, not just their roles. So as town, we'd know ahead of time if a vig thought there was a "better target" and we could either try to suggest someone else if we disagreed or let it go if we agree. As far as the other part of your question, what if the lurkers are all town, that would be bad I agree. But I'd rather the vigs be completely open about what they're doing, make it harder for fake-claims, and be down a couple lurking townies than have mass confusion because of a vig/GF flip. I'm weighing the cost/benefits, and this is the best option I could come up with, even though I don't like it. I could be overestimating the confusion that could occur I guess, but we'll have to wait and see about that. 3. The "valuable asset" that I was specifically speaking about was their vig shot. In your plan, it seemed like you were suggesting a mass claim on day 1, then the vigs just sit around waiting for a good shot to take. The problem I had was that scum could pick them off before anything constructive could get done with the shot. This way, at least we can have vigs make it harder for scum to hide through lurking and scum don't have a chance to do anything about it. 4. Again, I was assuming that vigs would claim targets. Having two target the same lurker wouldn't happen, because the second vig would see that there was already someone claiming that target. 5. Same answer, really. The only excuse for a claimed target not dying *should* be that the target was a GF. That's the only option in my mind. I'll need to re-read the 2 cases again to be sure, but if I remember right, I don't really agree with the conclusions on either of them. At this point, I don't think I'm willing to go with a VE or Gonzaw D1 lynch. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 22 2012 03:46 MidnightGladius wrote: Janaan, if you're going to acknowledge that the vig plans are no longer a useful topic, then save all that for the post-game. What do you think of Marv? At this point, what I don't like most about Marv's posts is that he obviously saw Gonzaw's big post about vigs, decided to comment on it's shear size, but then apparently decided not to take 15 minutes to actually read it and make comments on what Gonzaw was actually saying. Even though he earlier said that the early game was the perfect time to discuss stuff like that. His posts have added nothing to the thread, if he didn't post at all we wouldn't be any worse for it. I'd still like to hear what Marv has to say for himself, if anything, but at this point, I'd say he's a good candidate for lynch. @Risen, cool off, man. you're being very defensive right now, and your case seems to be little more than OMGUS to me. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
He seems to spend quite a lot of his time clarifying other people's stances, he asks VE a question about his analysis of Gonzaw's plan, but there's very little content there. He doesn't take any hard stances himself, just asks for others to take stances. It just feels to me like he's taking advantage of all this vig policy talk to get in some questions that ultimately don't really matter and expand his filter. He does say that he has suspicions, but immediately nullifies them by saying that it's too early to even mention them. I don't know about everyone else, but I'd like to hear them and the reasons for the suspicions. What do ya'll think about him so far? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 22 2012 06:03 Ottoxlol wrote: As a townie, I find myself useful pressuring everyone to clear up their game. If I were the one coming up with a plan we discuss i would be the one spamming the thread. If they don't understand something, after asking it twice and getting the same answer they get on my watchlist. I would rather not accuse someone because he is dumb, that's not scummy enough for me. It seems like we won't have a consensus on the vig situation, but it was a very helpful debate to get infos. Too bad not everyone posted yet. May I ask for just one person on your "watchlist" then? I'm not asking for a full case necessarily, just a read with a little reasoning. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
Paqman, it's like you're purposely misunderstanding Mattchew about VE's claim, I understood exactly what he meant the first time he said it. Either that, or you just don't want to believe that Mattchew is actually making sense, which leads me to believe that you're tunneling him a bit too hard. Please, try to step back and objectively read what Mattchew is saying. At the moment, none of the cases are terribly convincing for me. I also hate the fact that we're well over half through with day 1 and there are still players who haven't said a single word since the game started. I don't know if scum is among them or not, but at this point, it's impossible to tell. The one vote that does make sense to me right now is Bill Murray. He's proven that he's in the thread, he's posted a few times, but he really doesn't seem to care at all. All his posts are entirely void of content, which makes me think that either he's scum trying to get away with not saying anything or he's a townie who just doesn't care about the game. Bill, if you DO care, start being more useful please. ##Vote: Bill Murray I won't be on for another 14 hours or so, I'll be back in the thread around then if anything happens. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 23 2012 05:37 Risen wrote: It came up in post game chat in LI, and I've never considered it b/c information is information, but why would a no-lynch be bad in this game. Mafia KP isn't determined by the number of people they have alive, it's determined by who their goons are. Aren't accurate lynches therefor that much more necessary? Or is the information gained from a lynch that valuable even in a setup like this. TL;DR: Get the hell off VE and on to anyone else. I'll no lynch over lynching VE 100% It's a plurality lynch. Unless you get a large number of people to go to the voting thread and ##Vote: NoLynch, it's not even possible. In other words, suggesting a no lynch at this point is hugely unhelpful. I agree that VE probably shouldn't be the lynch today, but someone WILL be lynched. I really want to see your reads/cases that you promised, because Gonzaw's case looked pretty solid to me. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 23 2012 05:33 Risen wrote: I know I was against it before, but I don't see how marvel could be pushing a lynch on VE right now. We can't lynch our claimed JK. It's been stated in the thread but I'll state it again. You don't lynch a claimed doctor, and we shouldn't lynch the closest thing we have to a doctor. Is it possible VE is lying? Yup. He might be lying and be a vigi, or a tracker, or scum, or vanilla. Doesn't matter. The only shitty thing is that the person who is jailed doesn't know they were jailed, so I don't know how to confirm his claim. Regardless, a vote on VE is stupid. It's just like everyone who voted for me when I claimed a guaranteed sane detective with a red check. Only an idiot would vote for said blue unless it was LYLO. It's applicable here. We can't lynch someone who claims such a powerful blue role right now. Is it a shitty claim? Yeah. I don't think it was smart, but we have to roll with it now that it's in the open. Any trackers watch him, I guess. I'm voting marvel. Pre-EBWOP I just looked at the voting thread prior to hitting post. What the hell is going on? How can you lynch a claimed blue? This is so stupid. If need be I'll vote BM b/c I'm all for lynching someone who's being useless, but for now my vote is resting on marvel. ##vote marvellosity Risen, the only reason you've given for voting Marv is that he's voting VE. You haven't really even mentioned him before now, you haven't mentioned the other cases on him, just that you don't like his vote. This seems to be a really weak reason to me. What's different about Marv that made you vote him as opposed to the other players voting VE? You even mention that BM is being useless, AND he's voting for VE. Just judging from what you said, he'd be a better vote candidate. There's a total of 7 people voting for VE, are all 7 scummy in your mind (Or 6, since one of those is VE himself)? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
## Unvote ##Vote: Risen | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
You know what I think about Risen already, I'd say he looks townier now because his attempts to get votes off of VE really did feel legitimate to me. Right now, he's not who I would prefer to lynch today. One of Zephirdd's most recent posts really made me do a double take when I read it On April 24 2012 10:16 Zephirdd wrote: It was one hour before the deadline, there wouldn't be any bandwagon. Besides, I suggested marv there because people had been voting him. In that specific post, I hadn't had analyzed people yet. I meant that marvellosity was a reasonable player to place a vote on and not look bad for voting VE. There was nothing wrong there. It looks to me like he's saying that he was looking for a person to vote that wouldn't look bad? I don't know, maybe I'm just reading that wrong. It's a confusing post regardless. If I AM reading it correctly though, that's super scummy. No town player should even care about if their vote makes them look bad, they should vote with their strongest scum read. Sentinel, what I don't understand is why he came back to the thread after the night deadline, says he has stuff to post, then doesn't post it. It's after the deadline, so scum can't change their target based on what gets posted. Not only is he assuming that he'll live, but he's holding back when based on what he said, he's fully prepared to post a case/read/whatever it was. Seems a bit scummy to me. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
Gonzaw seemed like the only 100% town player in my mind, especially during N1. I'll definitely take his reads into account, and I hope everyone else does too. He gave reads on almost all the players in the game, so that should help. I'm not terribly surprised he died. At the moment, I'm most in favor of a Zepherrd lynch Day 2. Specifically, the post I quoted before seems fishy to me. I agree with the case against him as well. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
Ottoxlol, my question to you is this: You say you want to lynch to gain information. Ok, fine. That's not a good mindset, but I'll accept that you think it's a good idea for a minute. What I don't understand is why that makes BM the best lynch. He himself hasn't given any firm stances, and as far as I can tell, there hasn't been anyone who hasn't at least questioned him for lurking, and NO ONE has defended him. So exactly what information will we gain from lynching him that makes it the best choice? Working from the mindset that lynching for information is a good idea, it would make more sense to me to lynch a more controversial target. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 25 2012 02:55 Janaan wrote: At work so I don't have much time. Ottoxlol, my question to you is this: You say you want to lynch to gain information. Ok, fine. That's not a good mindset, but I'll accept that you think it's a good idea for a minute. What I don't understand is why that makes BM the best lynch. He himself hasn't given any firm stances, and as far as I can tell, there hasn't been anyone who hasn't at least questioned him for lurking, and NO ONE has defended him. So exactly what information will we gain from lynching him that makes it the best choice? Working from the mindset that lynching for information is a good idea, it would make more sense to me to lynch a more controversial target. At the moment, you're leaning red for me, and I just want to hear your train of thought on this particular issue, even though you apparently AREN'T voting BM anymore. In fact, in addition to what I already asked, why did you change your mind on the issue? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 25 2012 09:09 Risen wrote: I just posted a giant case and spoilered it, but it seems no one is going to read it b/c it's spoilered. Do I need to repost it in all its massive glory so that someone will respond? Wtf :/ It's a good case. I was already considering voting him today before, now it's more likely. The only comment I had was on your first small point, I think the reason he said he hadn't played any TL games was because he was specifically asked. But that's not really an important point anyways. I still want an answer from him about my question, though. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 25 2012 11:13 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: What I'd like to know about Janaan is how he came from this to this: Namely how he went from BM being his one true stance to saying we shouldn't lynch BM because he's so scum nobody would drop information or give intel. Otherwise, he just seems to agree with the general mood of the thread on everything. So he's either decent town or clever scum. I'd be betting the former at this point because I have nothing to accuse him of. Keep in mind first off that these two quotes are 2.5 days apart. A lot happened between them. I've had other scum reads, BM actually started posting a little bit, etc. At this point I don't consider him "so scum" as you put it. Definitely still scummy, but not the scummiest. The second quote in particular, I didn't say anything about him being "so scum". I'm basically noting that there isn't really anyone in the thread who is defending BM. This was in response to Ottoxlol suggesting that BM be lynched because it would provide information that would lead to scum lynches. I was trying to get him to tell me just what information he expected that would be so valuable that would be worth lynching someone that Ottox didn't actually say he specifically thought was scum. Maybe he did, I don't know, but if he did, he sure didn't say it. What I was getting at with that post was this: I wanted Ottox to tell me essentially why he picked BM instead of other people he had listed. He said he wanted "information", so what information was he expecting to get that would make it worth a possible mis-lynch in his mind, since he hadn't specifically said he thought BM was scum? I honestly couldn't think of anything that would be worth that, even stepping into his mindset that lynching for information in the first place is a good idea. Since no one had taken a "pro BM" stance (just anti or ignore), if a bandwagon started and he is scum, it would be all too easy for scum-mates to just sidestep the issue, say he's just a lurker, and pass on by OR if the bandwagon looked strong enough, make an easy case that he's been lurking and get on the bandwagon no questions asked. I can't think of a piece of incriminating evidence that could potentially come out of lynching BM, if information is the goal of the lynch in the first place. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On April 25 2012 11:20 marvellosity wrote: I'd like a couple of other people to answer on Sentinel too (jdub, BM as you're here for a change) Sentinel is still scummy to me right now, at the moment, though, I'd prefer a Zepherrd or Ottoxlol lynch today. Sentinel has slowly started looking better with his last couple posts, so I suppose he does have that going for him. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
##Vote: Zepherrd I'll be back on tomorrow a few hours before the deadline. Start consolidating those votes, right now we have them FAR too spread out. It would be too easy for scum to force a no lynch if things stay the way they are. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
Also, it's fairly obvious that layabout didn't just claim vig. Not only would it be a dumb claim, if he really wanted to do that, he would've just done it instead of saying it cryptically. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
| ||
