Newbie Mini Mafia XXII
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
On July 20 2012 23:57 ghost_403 wrote: Less than a million billion years. There are still three slots left. I'd guess in the next couple of days? Ah. Wasn't sure how many slots there were. | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
Step up step right up! | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote: Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game. I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time. On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy. Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do. Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time. aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
Warning: Nub question::::We HAVE to lynch someone each day, right? | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
On July 27 2012 08:12 Shady Sands wrote: From a logic standpoint, it makes sense to always have a lynch target each day, because voting patterns, voting times, and the order in which players vote are some of the most important clues that the town can use. For example, if the target turns out to be green or blue, then we can backtrack and start seeing who started the bandwagoning and go from there. If the target turns out to be red, we can see who did the last minute voting or tried to swing the balance away from them, and add those to the list. But if we simply go for a no-lynch, there's no pressure on the scum to actually put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. This makes perfect sense to me, so how we determine who to target initially? | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
Estimated time of analysis post: 11:00AM EDT | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
Just got finished reading the thread pages 10-14. First off on the advice of Promethelax, my schedule for this weekend is that I'll be following this thread throughout the day until about 4PM EDT, then I'm off to a Blue Jays game. Tomorrow is a bit of a milestone birthday for me (official old man), but I'll be back and active Sunday afternoon. Before I talk about the Mordanis-Keir thing, I want to answer Promethelax. The reason that my opinion from "lynch all liars and lynch all inactives" to not feeling as strongly about it is just because I was not aware that a non-lynch was possible. Mordanis's Case on Keirathi I actually got atown vibe from this post. We've all heard about how it is self contradictory and based on a false premise (Keir claiming RB), but I buy Mordanis' explanation that he rushed the case and that the lack of consistent logic and difficulty to follow the case is a result of this. On the same subject, I'm a little suspicious of those players who were so completely convinced that Mordanis is a scum based on this one post, as this was not a reaction I had. Among these people is Shady Sands: On July 27 2012 13:29 Shady Sands wrote: When you look at all that, and the weak logic against Keir, then what you see is the following pattern: Mordanis first claims that Keir is the likeliest candidate for lynching because he a likely candidate to be red. Then he backs off and claims that Keir could go red or green. Then he argues that we should lynch controversial candidates first. The point is, lynching controversial candidates would be fine, if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. This totally smacks of a Red finding out his original tactic for generating a bandwagon has failed, acknowledging that he is the only one arguing for a lynch, and then stating that because he is the only one arguing for a lynch, the person is "controversial" and should be lynched. What? I see this as a GIANT leap of reasoning, and I still see Mordanis's case as an attempt (albeit a clumbsy one) to get the ball rolling in XXII. Another of these people is Golbat: So far, Golbat has, in this order: voted Mordanis unvoted Mordanis FoS Mordanis His unvote seems to coincide with Mordanis's making a case on him. He claims he backed off the vote because: On July 27 2012 18:51 Golbat wrote: The reason I backed off of Mord is because I felt like I may have been pushing too strongly against him based on his first bad read. I didn't want to appear to be scum myself, so I backed off for the moment. I still have a sneaking suspicion about him that he may be mafia, but I didn't want to lynch myself by pushing too hard on a bad read. I feel like i've been talking in circles around mord, "He's scum, no he's town, no he might be scum, no he's probably town", so I feel like I need to take a definite stance on the matter, and that is #FoS Mordanis + Show Spoiler + This reminds me of that futurama ambassador from the neutral planet. "All I know is that my guy says maybe." I'm not sure what this could mean, but I think that it's worth pointing out. It's one of the stranger seeming posts I've read in this game. Is the deadline today at 17:00 EDT? I am suspicious of both of these players right now, but there's lots of daylight left. | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
##vote: golbat | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
On July 29 2012 08:09 Shady Sands wrote: Another thing to note: Zorkmid and Obvious both ended up shifting to Golbat with minimal analysis at all. I'd say Zork looks the quietest between the two, but Obvious also strikes me as a little odd too, since he popped into the thread 10 minutes after Golbat's lynch without commenting once in the prior six hours, even though he was trying to get me lynched and people were busy bandwagoning Golbat. Normally, I'd expect someone who was trying to aim for a lynch on someone to at least argue their case before the lynch when the town was heading in the opposite direction. I have a few hunches on where we should go next, but I'd like everyone to read through the above posts first. I've been Partying for the last two days, just had a birthday. I did post ample reasoning for my vote against Golbat, it's here. I made my vote post from a Blue Jays game, (we won 8-3 yea!) but basically nothing of note happened in the thread since that analysis post, so I felt his strange play best merited my vote. (How fucking wrong was I? And 6 others as well. Not a good start). I'll make another analysis post in a little while. How long until night? | ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
On July 30 2012 06:04 marvellosity wrote: Day post is flavour only, there are no clues to night events within it All that we really know is that we have a roleblocker(medic or otherwise), and that that roleblocker saved a kill. (I don't buy the idea that mafia didn't use a KP, especially not in a newbie game). From this I can infer that the same person viewed as most dangerous by mafia, was viewed as the most valuable townie by the roleblocker. I'm too tired to do any analysis. And frankly from the tone about my posting, I don't have much desire to. I'll answer some questions: On July 29 2012 13:19 Obvious.660 wrote: Zorkmid's vote comes off to me as a bandwagon vote. Evidence against Golbat was that Golbat finally settled on a decision for his best scum read?Pretty arbitrary reason to vote for someone. Can you explain what you mean by town vibe in that post? (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15625737) I could understand not having a definite scum read from it, but implying the opposite it a bit premature. It does seem to be a fairly arbitrary reason to vote for Golbat, I agree. I'll be honest that at the time of my vote, I hadn't been following the game very closely, and Golbat was just the player I thought most likely to be scum as of the time of (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15625737). When I said "town vibe" (refering to Mordanis' case) I just believed he was just trying to get a conversation going, and the reasons he gave for it being a weak case rang true to me. Just saw this question as I was working on my post: On July 30 2012 08:44 Keirathi wrote: I'm pretty saddened by your lack of participation so far. You've shown the ability to make constructive posts. Therefor, I question your vote onto Golbat without much in the way of explanation. Was it just to avoid a no-lynch, or did you actually think he was scum? Also, this quote bothers me: I am curious as to why the possibility of no-lynching makes you feel less certain about lynching liars and lurkers. Not stating a solid stance just because of the possibility of a no-lynch doesn't make much sense to me. Because why risk killing a townie without a good reason. If we lynch MrMedic (as an example of a lurker) and he flips green, what was the point? About Golbat, my reasons for voting for him are re-iterated in this post. I feel a little funny defending my vote to lynch a guy to someone who voted the same guy. Why'd YOU vote for him? Oh right, he played scummy as fuck. Rantddendum: On July 30 2012 07:58 goodkarma wrote: Okay. I'm putting together my notes and writing my long-promised suspect list. Wouldn't usually waste a post stating this, but one-line fluff posts seem to be all the rage.. -_- (MrMedic and Zorkmid...) Tbh it shouldn't really matter exactly how no one died last night. Now that Golbat has flipped, and day two has begun, let's not waste any time getting our cases put together. Not so much a fluff post, but I'm sick of being called out for inactivity on a fridaynight/saturday. I was busy, handle it. On July 29 2012 14:39 Shady Sands wrote: Weird, why didn't he mention he had a wedding to attend in any of his earlier posts in the thread? This seems like a pretty strange after-the-fact excuse for any strange patterns of activity. Same goes for this shit, stop it. You too Keir. I've heard it from several people already. I'm busy, SHUT THE (expunged) UP. | ||
| ||