EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXIV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
These players all just played in the same game:- - Corazon - Mocsta - Omni - Spag - Sylencia Of which:- This is Corazon's second game, he has only got experience playing scum, which he did very well for the most part. This is Sylencia's third game. He played town last game fairly well, but was hindered by life commitments for the time I remained in the game. This is Omni's second game. Last game he played very aggressive as town. This is Mocsta's second(?) game. He played as enthusiastic pro-town, and was NKed for his positive contributions. This is my third game. First game I played standard town as cop. Second game I played as VT and was a little(lot!) too passive. I was lynched day one for not scumhunting, and in doing so saved their MVP scum player. I think I might dally with standard play once more to get my confidence back up :D My filters for all my games are: Spag's XXV filter and Spag's XXXIII filter @the following Jamp Zare Strix TeMiL Could you please give us a little information on your experience of TLmafia so far (including role and playstyle), and whether you have played outside of TL before. For those that are new, please at the very least skim through one or two of the guides provided, talk to the appropriate coach if you feel the need (you should), and inform us of any RL transgressions against the sanctity of TLMafia in advance of them actually occurring. DO NOT LURK. IDGAF WHO PLAYS SCUMMY I WILL BE VOTING THE LURKIEST PLAYER DAY ONE PERIOD. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Does that sound right for Tasmania Mocsta? You were the one from the mainland weren't you? my memory is terrible. Regardless, my sleep pattern is all mangled, I'm currently on my 26th sleepless hour. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I have the feeling Mocsta's contribution shall be substantial regardless (an educated guess). How much experience do you have? @Mocsta You are supposed to differentiate between lying scum and lying town by attributing motive to action. If I lie and don't have any plausible town explanation, I am scum (or terrible town). If I lie and only have possible town motives, I'm town (or intricately clever scum). If I lie and have both town and scum explanations for my behaviour, you need to infer the likelihood of the possibilities and arrive at your own understanding. This third option is not a null read in most instances, as town should strive to keep things simple (an thus not lie) unless they see a very good reason not to. Town should not lie without town motive, and part of that motive is not having their lie detected and blown out of proportion by hungry town and scum alike. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I've bumped up my lurker response to Code: Lynch. I was all about being flexible with interpretation before, but not any more (at least not for lurkers). My approach to lurkers is fresh for me, so you will not find it in my filter. My policy on liars remains the same. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Confirming oneself as town is not the only objective of town players, thus Mocsta should continue regardless of whether it confirms him as town or not. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
 | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
Do scum get access to their private thread immediately or do they have a period of non-communication. I have seen a scum chat before but this detail eludes me. Are scum able to communicate right now? | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I wouldn't be so certain about your read on Mocsta. This is exactly the way you would expect him to act if he rolled scum. He has a meta to conform to regardless of alignment. I have a near null read on him. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
(2) I did not want to look at the OP. I chose to elucidate it out of laziness, but also because of the small potential to generate discussion. There was no downside in my mind. (3) Other scum behaviours? I popcorned if that's what you're talking about? I'll be more than willing to talk about that later. I also both supported and posted lists? I'm not sure if this question is empty or not. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
| ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I'm a pretty slack guy, this is not news. Is it not curious, at this early stage in the game. Spag ALREADY feels the need to distance himself from being town PERCEIVED as knowledgable in "scum behaviour". - MocstaI am relatively knowledgeable in scum behaviour. I am not knowledgeable about the specifics, though I was not trying to tell you this, I was merely asking for information. In no way am I claiming not to know about scum behaviour, as this would damage my ability to further my agenda whether I be town or scum. Your claim is wishful thinking or deliberate misinterpretation. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
I hear it's going to be considerably hotter tomorrow, but that's in Tasmania. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
In regard to your question to Omni: (1) You mentioned not lynching lurkers D1, instead town needs to actively scum hunt. Between myself and Spaghetticus; who do you think needs to be questioned first? Please lead the discussion. - MocstaThis is scummy. You know that Omni and I have a very different approach to mafia, and last game we both found it almost impossible to not see the other as scum (we were both town). You also know Omni has a tendency to bandwagon as town, and that between you and I the current atmosphere favours you over me (you haven't been called out, I have). By having attention brought upon both of us, you expect pressure to only be put on me. This post on it's own looks like you are trying to get someone else to set up the bandwagon for you, so you can remove responsibility from yourself when I flip town. This play in a void makes you look scummy IMO, however you do later offer yourself as a target of suspicion when rousing Zare: (2) If stuck on items to discuss, please direct any concerns you have over my play to me to address. - Mocsta In my eyes this goes some way to dilute your guilt, though not dismiss it. You know this is Zare's second game and that he has zero town experience. You do not expect him to be able to make a case on you, and up until your last post, there was no sign of one. By inviting people to scrutinize your play you have not taken a risk be you town or scum, but you have increased the pressure on me from other players, which is scummy. This is not mere rousing, you have lit a fire under people and slyly directed it at me. Just so it's clear, by "dilute your guilt", the second quote dilutes the first it by being closer to a null read, it is still half scummy. You have also been leaping on irrelevant details (from my perspective), inflating them beyond their importance. Soft claiming 'not scum' is far too crass a move for my style and you know it. I can see that you are doing everything you can to promote town activity, and I believe this is within what is reasonable to expect from you, so I won't call scum read on this. I would like to point out however, that picking on small and probably* meaningless discrepancies is a great scum tactic for promoting confusion, and so would suggest you lay off the UberHolmsing if you feel that the balance of probability dictates that you are more likely to mislead town. This is not a defense of my slip*. By all means, hammer me for the mistake I have already made (it was a mistake whether I be town or scum), but for the sake of town please consider the potential implications. I will now address your questions that were directed at me. | ||
|
Spaghetticus
Australia451 Posts
(1) What do you make of cDgCorazons play so far. What do you think of his reaction to my lynch vote? I assume you’re done with the questioning of Corazon for now? I like people to play things out before giving reads, allowing people the most opportunities to make mistakes. By asking for my response now, I take no responsibility for any decrease in pressure applied to Corazon. I assume you’ve moved on to me anyway. Corazon attacked your list making without thought for your motives, he assumed the only point of making the updates was to garner towncred, which is either log-headed or scummy. He was either too immersed in appearing town, and projected this motive (scummy), or is letting forum prejudice against lists colour his view, giving some easy content (spammy or unthinking). Your suspicion of Corazon’s waiting to give an answer was weak, I assume you just wanted to make sure you were pressuring (which is fine). His response was adequate, though I had a simpler explanation in mind (that he wanted people to develop their own opinions). Corozan’s reprimand on Zare is entirely expected, I believe I did precisely the same to OrangeRemi last game (I was town). Corazon then concludes that he gets a mild town read off of you (Mocsta). I have already stated my opinion on this (that it is an unfounded read). He later stated that he had a null read, whether this was because he was pressured to change, or he genuinely agreed, is still in question. So you would rather lynch a lurker than a strong scumread D1? Yes. Strong scum reads have already revealed a lot about themselves, and you can expect pressure on them later. Lurker scum have the opportunity to sit by and let the town destroy themselves, which is a well-known phenomenon in newbie games. From my perspective, which has changed over the course of my mafia career (this is my third game), there is no scummier behaviour than lurking. If a scum is lurking you have zero information on him day two. They have an entire 72 hours worth of chat to adjust their playstyle to. They are the most dangerous scum (second only to a scum that has managed to be confirmed town). If me or Mocsta were scum, come day two you would have a massive paper trail with which to track us down with. For that reason alone, there is no way I will be voting Mocsta day one. From what I’ve seen, newbie games are dictated almost entirely by lurkers and their allocation of alignment. XXXIII was won by town simply because scum was two lurkers out of three players that were so lazy they didn’t even attempt to defend themselves once the bandwagon came knocking. We had OrangeRemi modkilled, and Threesr replaced. For the sake of town getting a clear scumhunting environment, for what I see as a positive move towards town victory, and for my own enjoyment of the game, I will be voting the biggest lurker unless I somehow find a completely active game (damn unlikely). @Sylencia My LAL policy is not laziness. It is thought out, and I genuinely believe it to be the best policy for me to have. My enthusiasm for pondering conceptual queries knows no bounds, for scabbing up readily available info, not so much. How do you characterise your standard play? So far, your post count to post quality ratio is skewed heavily towards post count [NOT a good sign] My standard play is to actually post cases day one. My play last game was non-standard because through a mixture of laziness and curiosity, I attempted to get through day one by both being active and not scum hunting. It did not work. While I expect I will continue to tinker with this element of the game, I have scaled down my experimentation for the sake of my self-esteem (and town win-rate). You already know most of my meta from XXXIII. I am highly analytical and loathe posting accusations that imply a reality I do not believe. I adhere to theory over empiricism, which gives me difficulties with the more aggressive players. I play for the long game, and think little of the chance of day one scum lynches. I try to encourage town play through indirect means. I emphasise original content, and am strongly averse to bandwagoning and recycling opinions. I try to keep a flexible understanding of the game, but am having difficulties converting flexible thinking into anything but WIFOM (hence the LAL update). Admiting laziness is not a solid town trait Spag. You know this. Its not indicative of scum play either. You know this as well. As they cancel each other out, let us now consider your potential to generate "small discussion" due to Scum QT. What did you have in mind? Please lead this discussion. I did not have much in mind. I wanted to know about scum QT so that I’d know whether scum were organised or tentative. Generating discussion was the only foreseeable outcome, though it was not my motive. The information was for my own use (not discussion), any discussion that was generated would be in people picking me up for soft claiming town. A minor and non-committal scum trap if you will. I genuinely thought it was an entirely small deal, and anyone picking up on it would be making a mountain out of a mole-hill (something I still believe). Unfortunately, you (Mocsta) picked it up, and my read on your behaviour is that it is consistent with a town Mocsta, and it seems to be backfiring pretty hard, considering how much attention you’ve brought to bear on me (normally something I welcome, but after XXXIII I’m a tad apprehensive). (b) I never stated you were directly claiming to have limited scum gameplay knowledge. I called you out, because I expect a player of 3 games to know the answer to what you asked. Even as a player of 1 game, I knew that answer. There must be a motive, and that is what I want to find out. I have never been scum, and I’ve always assumed they had immediate and direct communication . In between this game, and last, however, I came across some information that implied that scum were alone to begin with, and got the QT come night. I did not think on it much at the time, but once I was motivated to know the answer, it became paramount. I am now certain that I was mistaken, or reading information on a variant | ||
| ||
