EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
So far my thoughts on FirmTofu are nonexistant. He posted once, 40 minutes into a game. It's a 48 hour day/24 hour night cycle, so I see no reason to be chomping at the bit to lynch him. I'm in agreement with him that we should give everyone a chance to post. Game just now started, and depending on your timezone most of the time it's been running was overnight. Instead, I'm much more in favor of what you just did actually. Point out specific names--who isn't posting, hasn't been contributing--and start looking for responses. Anyone entirely inactive is going to get modkilled, so let's force activity out of those we can, get discussion rolling, and build up a bigger body of posts to analyze. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 10 2012 23:26 Anacletus wrote: I am only voting because I don't have much to add. I would also like to point out that *if* we hang tofu for his suspicious behavior and he is mafia then we can rule out those voting as being mafia, no? But if he's town, shit. This is an awful reason to vote for a lynch. We've got almost 36 hours of day 1 left, and while we should be drumming up discussion, this doesn't help. You say you have nothing to add. Why vote based on that? You don't give any reason for your vote at all, and if you have nothing to add then why vote Tofu over anyone else. A vote like that is absolutely unhelpful to town. You mention his "suspicious behavior," but what behavior was that? How was his post overly suspicious to you? You haven't posted anything of note yet either, why vote Tofu for no reason and then be surprised/demand a reason for someone voting you? Moreover, no, we can't confirm town/mafia based on votes that easy. If we have multiple lynch candidates, then sure, maybe the majority of the mafia vote for a townie. But so far, we just have some random votes on Tofu for no real reason. Mafia can just hide votes in there, even if he were scum, and you learn nothing from the votes. If we want any info from voting, we need more candidates. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 10 2012 23:41 Anacletus wrote: I think it makes more sense for the mafia to try and be passive in voting yet vocal in chat to try and rule who otherw vote for and keep their hands clean. I can agree with this to a point, but they're going to have to vote at some point. I'm more suspicious of someone who votes just to vote, but without a decent reason, than I am of someone who hasn't voted. Not voting is the sensible play if you don't have a reason to vote someone yet. Voting just to vote doesn't help town at all, and sheeping someone else's vote, especially when there's not really much reasoning behind that vote, certainly doesn't help town. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
All you've said is: suspicious behavior In your original vote. But you didn't tell us what you found suspicious. On May 10 2012 23:41 Anacletus wrote: I doubt that the mafia would try to be hyper-aggressive day 1. I think that the people who aren't voting are suspicious. I think it makes more sense for the mafia to try and be passive in voting yet vocal in chat to try and rule who otherw vote for and keep their hands clean. Say you think this, why vote Tofu? He posted once, 40 minutes into the game, and hasn't been active. That's not vocal in chat. His activity so far this game doesn't fit the pattern that you believe to be scummy. Town's job isn't to care about what gameplan mafia may or may not have. Our job is to hunt scum. To me, your vote on Tofu, especially as it runs against your own reasoning, looks scummy or newbie townish. Yet you say you've played games elsewhere before. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
In reference to your read on dahdum in Newbie XII, I remembered this quote from the postgame there: Yay! I was very active in the QT thread....the idea was to be sketchy enough to get Tofu to check & clear me, while avoiding an outright lynch. I'd agree that his playstyle is different in XIII, but I don't really want to try and read anyone's meta off of one newbie game. He IS posting more, but that could be anything out of: (a) being more comfortable, (b) being town and keeping activity in the thread and not QT, (c) having a different strategy for his play as scum. Now that we've got some more posts and activity, I'll take a look through filters this evening and try and actually post some cases. Still suspicious of Anacletus, but we've created quite the wagon for him here, and so for now I'm just going to leave him be until he responds to our concerns. I do like that we've started discussing the field as a whole, good to make sure we don't tunnel too hard on Anacletus so that we've got more reads to work off of and more pressure to get everyone active. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
His play does not feel like good townie play. I brought that up earlier, we've all discussed it by now, and I think we all seem to come to the same conclusion. While I would support a lynch of Anacletus, I think we have better targets. I'll look through his responses more today, but for now I would prefer to look elsewhere, and see how Anacletus continues to play. Right now, "not good townie play" is my read, but I'm not convinced that his play is scummy and not just bad townie play. However, we've got a quarter of D1 left, and I want to throw this case out and push it a little, see what comes of it. My top scum read: BroodKingEXE. BroodKingEXE filter - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=334707&user=233869 Skip 2/3 of the first page. It's pregame. He's active, vocal, chatting a lot with everyone in the pregame. Doesn't really mean anything. First posts: + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 12:53 BroodKingEXE wrote: /confirm Lynching lurkers in the early game not a good idea. My reasoning is that people need to be able to post before we persecute them. Something to think about lurkers, Mafia will try to lurk, but their posts will have more intent behind each one. Why? Every post they make is going to push its own idea of an agenda, but the more they post the more the idea could be misinterpreted. Before we lynch a lurker let's look at the intent of the post: a Mafia agenda push or a helpful Townie post. + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 13:18 BroodKingEXE wrote: Not true, lynching an inactive is a waste. Scum wants us to not lynch them. We can call lurkers out, and they have to respond. They don't respond, we start looking at them. Lynching, because they are lurkers is stupid. + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 13:48 BroodKingEXE wrote: What are you implying here? We should wait for everyone to post before coming to conclusions? That seems scummy to me, we should be analyzing peoples posts right now. You just created a reason for you not to post. Convince your not scum. ##Vote: Firm Tofu These aren't entirely incompatible. Lynching lurkers bad, pressuring them good, let people post before we jump to conclusions. That seems townie, fine and dandy, but then he fires off the very first vote of the game on FirmTofu. Why? Because FirmTofu posted + Show Spoiler + On May 10 2012 08:36 FirmTofu wrote: Hi again dahdum! I hope you aren't mafia again >< I'm all for lynching a lurker, but we should definitely wait a bit for everyone to have a chance to post. Look at the bolded part of Broodking's first post. Now back to me. Now back to the bolded part of FirmTofu's post. Now back to me. Anything? That's the same exact thought process. And yet when FirmTofu vocalizes that, Broodking fires off the first vote of the game. I still don't agree with that vote at all, even if it was just to "pressure" someone, because there's absolutely no grounds for voting someone because they express a thought you just expressed slightly earlier. From then on out, it's a series of one-liner and response posts, but never really DOING anything. Last night (eastern time), BroodKing had one of the longest filters, and yet the only substantive post was him voting FirmTofu off the bat. For example: + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 03:30 BroodKingEXE wrote: You can withhold your vote but you still need to scum hunt. + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 04:01 BroodKingEXE wrote: This post makes sense, Anacletus' play has been pretty wierd. I need to hear a response from him before I vote though. This line stood out to me. BroodKing threw out of FIRST vote of the game on Tofu, before there was play to analyze and before Tofu responded to anything. Why does he need a response now to vote? After that, he starts giving responses to other people, specifically ShiaoPi's reads, but doesn't really add anything of substance. scummy + Show Spoiler + On May 11 2012 04:05 BroodKingEXE wrote: @Hyaach Why did you put your vote on Ancletus? You had just as much reasoning as him. That is none. On May 11 2012 04:33 BroodKingEXE wrote: WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH!!!! ShiaoPi are you defending Hyaach? A null read? He has provided zero evidence for his vote. Your whole list is terrible, it provides nothing more than a bunch "I'm leaning town, but you can never be sure reads". I smell a scumwagon. On May 11 2012 05:38 BroodKingEXE wrote: Your big post brings up a list of null reads. Its misleading due to its size when its content is a bunch of reiteration of events. Scum will make posts like this to make themselves seem useful. If you actually read your reasoning for voting for anacletus it is: he was not eager, a post lacking logic, and a bandwagon. The first two could be townie mistakes and bandwagons aren't very effective when people have strong objections to the canidate. On the other hand, you have voted with the person you first thought was scum and had dropped your suspicions based on...nothing. On May 11 2012 09:09 BroodKingEXE wrote: Just needed explanation for your vote/post. This canidate seems really rushed though, people haven't looked at his latest posts for signs of scumminess. I agree that his past posts are suspicious, but we need to look at his current posts. Too much like a wagon for me to vote for him yet. Note that at this point, ShiaoPi has just thrown out the first real list of reads we had from anyone. BroodKing posts a couple times concerning the list, but doesn't really add anything. While he gets information out of ShiaoPi, he doesn't really provide any himself. At no point in those posts does he agree with a read or disagree with a read, rather, he simply acknowledges that reads were made and ShiaoPi voted. This is also the first point we begin to move AWAY from the Anacletus discussion (which has run its course at this point), and BroodKing continues to ask for information based on ShiaoPi's vote for Anacletus. Finally, compare his filter from this game with his filter from Newbie VIII, where he was town. + Show Spoiler + There are some posts in a similar style to his posts here, but a LOT of @x and @y, what do you guys think about z. Lots of longer discussions, paragraphs, lists. SOME of that is because he was the lynch target D1 and so had to be active and defend himself. But his townie posts from VIII feel more robust and they contribute, whereas his posts so far in XIII do not. ------------------------------- Anacletus's play still feels more bad than scummy. I would like to let him live for now, and see if he starts to really contribute. Right now he has 0 town cred, so if he's mafia he can't actively muck up town discussion. If we back off the pressure, MAYBE he mounts a decent defense and provides some good reads, because...he's got to do that to get any cred back. If not? We lynch him later, or we see if we can get any information N1 from blue roles that push us forward. Compared to Anacletus though, BroodKingEXE looks actively scummy. So far he hasn't contributed anything of note except the first vote of the game, which made little sense. He's supports getting responses before voting, but then votes without a response from FirmTofu. He wants scumhunting and reasoning, but has provided none. Again, I'm not opposed to an Anacletus lynch, but I would prefer to lynch the player that seems scummiest, which is BroodKing. ##Vote BroodKingEXE ##FOS: Anacletus Dahdum, I'm especially interested in hearing your thoughts on this, as you read BroodKing to be scummy as well. I didn't really notice him until I looked through all the filters last night and realized he was my best scumread. Do you agree with my reasoning? Did you have different reasoning? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 00:22 ShiaoPi wrote: @austinmcc: Considering your thoughts on Anacletus: There is always the possibility of bad town play instead of scummy play. But doesn't the defense of Anacletus (or more the lack of) seem weird to you? Also his lack of good contributions? I guess bad townie play is always a possibility, but for now I stand by my vote. On the accusations on BroodKingEXE: You bring up some good analysis. I guess I overlooked those aspects of his posts because I was more busy defending my posts against him than analyzing. I'll have to reread his filter thoroughly though, before doing anything. I think that Anacletus has contributed very little. And that's generous. If I were breaking down everything he's posted, a statement that he reads BioSC as mafia is the ONLY remotely pro-town thing he's posted, and he doesn't back that read up or post a case, so it has absolutely no value. His lack of a defense does seem weird to me. Weird, but not entirely scummy, for a few reasons.
So that's my reasoning. He got no help, even though a mafia lynch this early would be crushing to the scumteam. He kept giving poor responses to everything, which makes it seem like he didn't sit down and think. I'm not saying we remove the FOS. I'm just rather see what happens if we let him be for a little bit. Make it known that he has no town cred, and needs to stop, really dig into the thread, and give us some good reads and analysis (Make a real case against BioSC if you think he's scummy), which we might not even care about because he lost his cred. If he doesn't give us anything useful, he's a great candidate for tomorrow. I just want to see what he does, how he plays, when he's not getting voted or questioned every 15 minutes in thread. But in my gut, his play screams "bad" more than it screams "scum." Whereas with Broodking, his posts, his logic, and to the extent that we newbies have meta, his meta, DO scream scum to me. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Don't try and discredit me. Try and discredit that case on you. Or maybe you're hoping it sits there and gets buried before the end of D1 so that you don't get lynched. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 00:18 Nova_Terra wrote: Vote Count: Anacletus(8): Hyaach, FirmTofu, ShiaoPi, Dahdum, Darkfirex5, Anacletus, BioSC, BroodkingEXE BroodkingEXE(1): austinmcc Not Voting(4): Mufaa, Jailbreaker, Crossfire99, Unforgiven_ve Currently, Anacletus is set to be lynched. Please feel free to PM me if my vote count is incorrect, just let me know. This appears to still be the vote. We've got less than 5 hours til lynch. My vote is locked in unless I see a great defense quick. Otherwise I'm assuming (a) Scum hopes the BroodKing case doesn't get read before the deadline or (b) Scumteam taking its time in QT to work out how to play things. Town, do us a favor. Don't let (a) happen. If we mislynch because we have bad reads, fine. We just need to work on our analysis, and that's one reason we're in a newbie game. But if we mislynch because of inactivity, that's not a good town environment. Especially people like Anac. You're voting yourself. If you want to, fine, but that doesn't really speak in your favor. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
As to a plan, I don't think we should discuss that. I do hope that votes swap over and we lynch Brood. However, if we start discussing in the thread, "If x happens, town should do A. If y happens, town should do B," then mafia knows exactly how to play the rest of D1. Find the outcome they want, act accordingly, and let town do the work. So personally, I'm more for everyone voting their strongest read. For me, Brood is the scummiest player. I think his content and his actions have been scummy, and they don't mesh up with his play as town in VIII. I think Anac's content and actions have been either scummy or just...bad play. Just more convinced on Brood, so he gets my vote. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
I don't have anything more to add to the case, other than Brood's response posts didn't do anything for me. He's yet to really post a defense. He sort of called me out as scummy, but didn't push that at all. However, I think the overall behavior today supports a lynch of Brood over Anac. Think about these possible scenarios: Anac is mafia, Brood is town. Someone jumps in with a case against another player. It makes sense, has some analysis there. If you're mafia, don't you jump on that? Don't you try as hard as you can to swing the vote towards Brood over Anac, pushing for a wagon as hard as you can? Why, if Anac is mafia and Brood isn't, would we not see more people coming in, sheeping my posts, pushing Brood hard? (Yeah, I'm pushing Brood. No, I'm not mafia. Just defending and pushing my own case and read, rather than jumping on an already-present wagon). Anac is town, Brood is mafia. You've got anac swinging, you've all but ensured a mislynch D1, you're sitting pretty as mafia. Then a case comes out on Brood. Wtf. Not good. Bury it, don't respond to it, stifle discussion, keep your sights on Anac. Until there's a critical amount of pressure, you don't have to do anything. But above all, you wait and you see what happens, and you start planning your responds. Both are mafia. Well, you're just probably boned. If town's two strongest reads are 2/3 your team, enjoy the loss. No way can you present a third candidate in time and hope for a mislynch. Both are town. Who cares? No way is town lynching mafia, you can sit back and relax. The response so far basically fits into almost any of those categories. No big pushing response. The ONE category that the response doesn't fit is Anac scum and Brood town. If that were the case, mafia should be trying so hard to start a wagon rolling. But they're not. So to me, the case AND the response fit Brood being scum (not counting the scenario where both are town and a mislynch is guaranteed). Just consider that. How would you expect the scumteam to play this, and has that actually happened? They're not giving us a lot to work with here, waiting things out and not slipping up within the last few hours. But is that lack of content a tell in and of itself? If that makes sense, and recent action just doesn't support a scenario where Anac is scum and Brood is town, then we should take out Brood. We can deal with Anac later if he IS scum, because he's got no chance to be really disruptive after his start. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 05:07 BroodKingEXE wrote: The reason I have not addressed it is because it doesn't make me look scummy. I voted for Firm Tofu, because he implied that we should wait for everyone to get a post up before discussing. At least this is how I read into it. By lynching lurkers early, I mean we shouldn't lynch for being lurkers early. I'm not for lynching lurkers early because at least one person is going to point out a scum, and that scum will have to defend himself or other Mafia. If we can find that guy we can draw out the rest of the scum. Also, lynching scum lurkers don't provide any information as to the other scum members. Too many times I have seen lurker bandwagons based only on their lurker. I have been drawing information according to you, and that is my plan to call out others and form opinions on them so we can lynch scum. In the first bolded passage, you say it doesn't make you look scummy. Yet
That's 5 people. Not quite half of the players in the game. Most of the players who have been active today. And your response to all those people questioning you is to say the case "doesn't make you look scummy"? Clearly there's something there. If you really think that the case doesn't make you look scummy, then why does everyone else seem to think otherwise? As to the second post, you're going to "call out others." Great. When are you going to do that? I see that you tried, you posted two weak reads in hopes of shifting the discussion. What was the response to those reads? + Show Spoiler + On May 12 2012 04:42 ShiaoPi wrote: BroodkingExe on the other hand just disappeared, ignoring the case completely and if you examine the last two posts of his you will see the recurring things austinmcc mentioned in his case. He again shifts a bit of focus on other people who have not really been called out until now, but does not start his own case (see this:+ Show Spoiler + Okay I've looked at the filters and have come up with two other people I view as posting scummy. Jailbreaker. So far he has offered nothing to the conversation at all. He pointed out lurkers, defended himself, and gave a bunch of half-ass responses along with another unsupported scum list. He's trying to point fingers with no real direction, scum behavior to me. BioSC. His posts have for the most part been defensive. Even his big post against Darkfire was like that. He starts off saying that Dark is trying to push attention toward him, but then goes on to try and justify his past actions. The conviction seems more like a diversion to save his own hide than to lynch scum. You throw out a few names. Write a sentence or two. Really calling them out there. It didn't convince ShiaoPi; it doesn't convince me. You claim my case doesn't make you look scummy, but we all seem to disagree. You claim your plan is to call out others, but you never really do so. And most damning? You wait 5 or 6 hours to post that defense. Moreover, you posted during that time, so it's not like you were entirely away from the thread. You came back to post those comments about Jailbreaker and Bio, to respond to my FoS of all things, but you didn't take a moment to write out your defense? Why not? Waiting to form a decent response in scum QT? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
QT = quick topic? Whatever it is. It's a separate forum that the scum team has access to. They can post in there, plan their actions, discuss how to respond to town. If you check some old games, usually the host will post the scum QT and an observer QT so everyone can read over what scum was thinking during the game and what anyone observing was thinking. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 05:23 dahdum wrote: I'm backing off of anac at this point, he's still suspicious but I'm thinking reckless/bad town vs bad mafia. Too many people are after him first day, some have to be mafia, and his defense should have been better if he's getting help in a QT (as austinmcc mentioned). Will support a lynch of BioSC or BKE, do we have a current vote count? As of 3 EST we had Anacletus(8): Hyaach, FirmTofu, ShiaoPi, Dahdum, Darkfirex5, Anacletus, BioSC, BroodkingEXE BroodkingEXE(1): austinmcc Not Voting(4): Mufaa, Jailbreaker, Crossfire99, Unforgiven_ve Shiao unvoted. Crossfire voted Anac. Anac unvoted and voted BroodKing. So as it stands Anac(7) - Hyaach, FirmTofu, Dahdum, Darkfirex5, BioSC, BroodKingEXE, Crossfire BroodKingEXE(2) - austinmcc, Anacletus Not Voting(4): Mufaa, Jailbreaker, Unforgiven_ve, ShiaoPi As I count it, but don't take it as gospel. If you are thinking of swapping, and Hyaach was suspicious this morning and waiting to see Brood's response, that could potentially take us to 5/4, with 4 undecideds. We NEED active town to do anything though, otherwise we're already locked in. Mafia's got 3 votes to throw around, we might have a no-vote or two, so we just need clear decisions and stances. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Currently at 6 on Anac. 3 on BK. 4 not voting. Unless I've miscounted anyone. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Anac(5) - Hyaach, FirmTofu, Darkfirex5, BroodKingEXE, Crossfire BroodKingEXE(4) - austinmcc, Anacletus, dahdum, BioSC Not Voting(4): Mufaa, Jailbreaker, Unforgiven_ve, ShiaoPi Hyaach, Shiao, and Unforgiven have all come in and posted today, as has Cross. Cross came in and voted Anac, gave some reasoning as to why he still preferred that case. Hyaach I know you did the same, and were waiting on BK's answer. Any thoughts after seeing it? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 06:17 Darkfirex5 wrote: I'd suggest filtering BKEXE's posts. From what I'm reading of what he has posted, there isnt anying that makes me want to switch the bandwagon onto him (fairly) last minute. There isnt enough posts from him to make the acusation he is more mafia than that of Anacletus. I dislike this massive wagon switch because instead of going with the safest mafia guess, we switch it last minute to someone i think we need more posts from to prove he is mafia. Filter both. Anac hasn't posted any more than Brood. If you think Anac is scummy and Brood isn't, keep your vote on Anac. But if you don't have enough posts to make a decision about Brood, I'm not sure how you had enough posts to make a decision about Anac. Granted, Anac's posts early were...bad. Bad bad. @Firm, I keep making stupid long posts with spoiler tags and quotes and colors, but that's really the meat of my argument at this point. On May 12 2012 06:40 FirmTofu wrote: I think Broodking's responses to the pressure are much more telling than the actual initial pressure itself. austinmcc is completely right that Broodking is the scummiest person alive now. I believed in that case. I thought Broodking looked scummy and wanted answers. The timing and content of those answers has sealed the deal for me. I'm now convinced. @ShiaoPi, how it's been playing out today is really what has me convinced. I'm still suspicious of Anac, but Brood has surpassed him in scumminess. Anac still feels scummy. Brood feels like scum. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 12 2012 06:52 BroodKingEXE wrote: What about my response doesn't convince you? I've made a couple responses on this. Your response maintained that the case "didn't make you look scummy" or something to that effect. Clearly it did. Clearly it continues to do so. It's not really a defense if you start it with "I've got nothing to defend." I'll let the old reasons lie. If nothing else, look, here's a NEW REASON I think you're scum. On May 12 2012 06:13 BroodKingEXE wrote: Am I not entitled to my own opinion? The things you have posted in your original case don't make me look that scummy. The thing that Tofu said and I said are different. He wants to lynch lurkers and I don't (at least not till a couple more days). I have called out others, do you see all those "useless one-liners"? They are calling out things I saw as potentially scummy. Do I have to wait and post a culmination of these posts all at once? For the most part you haven't actually looked at the majority of my posts for their content. Your final sentence doesn't make sense in terms of scum. Why would I not defend myself (as scum), when the town was obviously against me? Look at where waiting has got me, second-highest lynch canidate for day 1. It could just be I didn't see your post like I didn't see this response. You know, that could be it. That does give a reason why it took you so long to defend yourself. Makes sense. EXCEPT. Wait. What? What is that. Oh. + Show Spoiler + On May 12 2012 02:12 BroodKingEXE wrote: You can't keep a FoS on someone and be on the fence about them being scum. You obviously think he is town, but are setting yourself up so that it looks like you had suspicions on him. Hedging would allow you to say "I didn't think he was scum" if he flipped town. This strikes me as scummy. That's right. You quoted my entire post in your first set of responses, hours before you mounted any defense. Not only that, you addressed the FoS that was in my post. You clearly read it. If we mislynch you, I'm going to feel like such an ass. But you actually asking "What if I didn't read it?" when you QUOTE it and address one part of it? Not buying it. | ||
| ||
