EPTChrono Trigger Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
| ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
| ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
| ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
As far as who I would vote for potential party leaders, I'm extremely biased towards people I've actually played with, because I just innately trust them more. Of course, I mean no offense to sandro/syllo/kita/Toad/whoever, but unless I get scummy vibes from marv, I'll be voting him for party leader, purely because I *know* how intelligent and capable he is, while the others are just hearsay. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 11:30 kushm4sta wrote: IMO: Put the scummiest people on the team. The event will probably involve losing hp. We want scum to lose hp. Also it will give us more play to analyze. But we have to succeed in the events to progress the game forward (or at least thats what I expect), which would mean that scum is inherently trying to make us NOT succeed. Setup speculation, but I don't like your idea. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 11:32 Promethelax wrote: I also forgot that Kier was in this game, he would probably be on my team because <3, first guy to ever catch me as scum. Teehee <3 Also, remember, we aren't necessarily voting for the TEAM, just the leader. Then the leader chooses the team to go with him. Of course, whoever we elect for party leader has to be accountable for his choices, but just throwing out 3-4 names for a team isn't really a "read". | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 11:33 marvellosity wrote: Unless I missed something setup-wise, I'm not getting your linking who gets shot and who is in the party together. If for instance syllogism is town, what difference does it make whether he is in a party or not? Doesn't he just get shot anyway? How does people being in a party, mission successful or otherwise, 'confirm' anything? I think what sandro is trying to say is that scum may try shooting people in the party to sabotage town's chances of succeeding in it, rather than necessarily just shooting the vets. Who knows if that is actually how any of this works, but if you think about it like that (the scum trying to do whatever possible to sabotage the missions), then his idea does make some modicum of sense. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 11:49 Hapahauli wrote: The more I think about this, the more I like Sandro's line of thinking. Our ideal party leader in this scenario is a skilled player with a very distinguishable town/scum meta. From what I've heard about Sandro's play in the thread so far, it fits the bill rather well. That was a quick flip-flop read.... | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 11:50 Hapahauli wrote: Your point is? It's not like I'm making a read - we're still almost entirely in setup speculation no? It's just a super weird change of opinion from "You're suspicious for even suggesting that." to "Okay, I actually like that idea, let's do it" | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 11:55 Hapahauli wrote: Ok, but again, your point is? Do you disagree with me or something? If so, speak up. Otherwise, these random passive accusations are pointless and stupid. Why are you getting defensive? There was a very simple reasoning for your change of opinion, which was already obvious; you thought events required some interaction from the players. Once you realized they didn't, you happily changed your mind. Of course I knew that, but I called you out anyways to see how you would react, and that wasn't the correct way. My goal is to be narrowing down who I plan to vote as party leader. Yes, I already said I will most likely vote marv, but there are definitely other options. You being one of them. But this exchange pushes you down my list a ways. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 12:09 Hapahauli wrote: Damnit you hurt my feelings - you will not be getting my vote either so THERE! But why do you want to vote marv? Did you miss the entire discussion over the last few pages? Ideally we want to vote a veteran who is easy to read and we can be clear on his/her motives. Marv is certainly a veteran, but not someone I can read convincingly enough after 1 day of play to be sure of his motives. I said I would vote marv, barring a scummy vibe from him. And, yes, I feel I have a decent grasp of when marv is acting scummy. The key is, though, that I thoroughly trust marv's ability to make town reads. In the event that he is scum, though, even a scum marv can't afford to pick other scum without some damn good reasoning that they are town, which I believe could be seen through. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
| ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 12:16 Promethelax wrote: Keir: how many scum does it take to sabotage a mission? My guess is that even a single one will fuck us so a scum Marv would not need to pick any scummers. How the hell am I supposed to know? I doubt one scum would sabotage a mission, unless they were the scum with the highest hidden modifier in a team full of low modifiers, and even then I kind of doubt it. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 12:23 marvellosity wrote: I would quite like to know what people were "expecting" from a town hapa as well. I already said what I was expecting. The answer you gave, rather than getting defensive. There really was a very, very simple answer, but instead he decided to call my aggression pointless. Doesn't have anything to do with his town meta or whatever, just on my willingness to trust him. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 12:38 Hapahauli wrote: @ Kier No, nonononononnono. No. First of all, marv is really aware of this part of his game and already compensated for it (i.e. "town read" on iamperfection in GSL III). Second of all, don't trust a hypothetical scum marv to include town people on the team. Hell for all we know electing a scum member as the party leader could be an auto-mission fail. We need to vote someone as party leader who we are sure is town. Not rationalize picking a vet because he makes accurate "town reads" as either alignment. That's fucking stupid. You have a point here. We don't actually know what would happen if scum is elected party leader for an event. However, if the consensus is to elect a "vet" as party leader, I trust my ability to read marv correctly more than I trust my ability to read any of syllo/sandro/Toad/whoever correctly. In the event that I feel like marv is giving off scummy vibes, I would be super hesitant to vote to elect any of the other "vets", and would then vote for someone else that I am comfortable reading. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 12:54 Hapahauli wrote: @ Kei I'd like to think I know marv's meta as much as anyone here, but I'm still nowhere near as comfortable as you are reading him on Day 1. He's capable of doing some crazy shenanigans as scum early on. Lastly, I'm a bit surprised you're willing to dismiss voting all those other potential vets without having looked into them. For all we know they could have really transparent metas. You're right, he is capable of pulling off big plays as scum, even day 1. But it's not like I'm giving him a town read already, nor do I plan to vote him until I do. I'm paranoid as fuck when it comes to him, but again, I'm much more confident in my ability to read him than I am any of the other vets, purely because I am extremely familiar with how marv thinks and acts. As far as dismissing the other vets, its mostly because, besides being boring as fuck, I don't think reading through old games (or even obs'ing current games, to an extent) is a particularly good tool for picking up on a person's meta. I believe you really need to actually play a game with someone before you can start to get a grasp on their meta, and how you expect them to act. You need the emotional investment in the game to pick up things thats you quite possibly miss in the emotionally distanced reading of an old thread. I'm not saying its impossible to get town reads on someone you've never played with, but I would never ever make a meta read on someone I haven't actually played with. And I would be much, much, much more confident making a town read on someone like iamperfection than I ever would making a town read on someone I haven't ever played with before. Mostly because my town reads have, in the past, generally not been very good. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 13:17 Hapahauli wrote: @ Kei Err... but you said... Do explain good sir. What is there to explain? Both of those things you bolded say the exact same thing :o | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 13:25 Hapahauli wrote: 1) "I'm not going to vote marv unless I have a town read on him." 2) "I'm going to vote someone unless he's giving me a 'scummy vibe.'" Those two statements mean very different things. The first expresses reservation - that you're not going to vote someone UNLESS you have a town read on them. The second expresses no hesitancy - that you're vote is determined unless marv shows you otherwise. Okay, I guess I see what you're getting at. Just poor wording on my part, I guess. But really, there is no "neutral" ground for me when it comes to marv. Either I believe that he is town, or he is giving off scummy vibes that give me pause. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 13:31 Keirathi wrote: Okay, I guess I see what you're getting at. Just poor wording on my part, I guess. But really, there is no "neutral" ground for me when it comes to marv. Either I believe that he is town, or he is giving off scummy vibes that give me pause. EBWOP: No, you know what. It wasn't poor wording. It's just you trying to poke holes where there aren't any. If marv isn't giving me scummy vibes, then I'm going to have a town read on him. If I have a town read on him, I will vote him today 100%. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On November 21 2012 13:41 Z-BosoN wrote: @Hapahauli Yes, it's definitely two different things. In one instance he has his vote on marv until he gets scummy vibes, and in the other, his vote is not on marv until he finds him town. Obviously it's not intentional, but it 100% is not the same thing. I was about to dismiss it as just poor wording when he explained it later, but he just said: Trying to make out this flip-flop. Wth? He's not even referring to his vote in this latest post, just on whatever he thinks of marv. Kei, is your vote on marv or not ffs. Wat..? The whole thing was about who I *PLAN* on voting. I'm not voting anyone right now, nor will I probably vote anyone in the next 24 hours. However, my current plan is to vote for marv, but if I decide that I don't trust him to be most likely town, I will instead vote for someone that I do think is town. | ||
| ||
