EPTWorld Heavyweight Championship mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On September 30 2013 18:58 marvellosity wrote: I don't know how to meta any of you really Curses it's because true champions have no meta | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 05:17 marvellosity wrote: I'm gonna lynch all of you. ANTI-HYPE Just adds to the HYPE | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 05:25 marvellosity wrote: Hmm. your newbie game suggests you're going to be unbearable. Policy lynch? :D The last one is not the same as my first 2  | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 09:11 Blazinghand wrote: 19886995 mod 9 = 1. That's Oatsmaster. ##vote Oatsmaster ##vote Oatsmaster Seems reasonable for now. In the meantime I do not know anyone's playstyles so I do not have an adequate basis for a policy lynch as of yet but that will most probably change after I've dug around into peoples playstyles. For now, does anyone know other people's 'metas'? Do some people play differently when they are scum compared to their town play? I know it may not be glaringly obvious differences but I'd like to know who the weaker people are in this game (guess you can add me to that). | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 09:16 marvellosity wrote: Not doing anything funny at all. No random lynches or policy lynches, even on Holyflare. Straight up. Why no random lynches? How do you propose we move forward with the day then? | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 11:55 Risen wrote: Why would you say that? There's so many other reasons you could get behind an rng lynch "rng'd" by someone else (quotes because sure that long explanation sounds random, but couldn't he just find something and guide it to Oats?). Reasonable is not the first thing that springs to mind. And no, "Ho ho! I was merely FAKING my vote old chap!" isn't a good excuse for finding it reasonable. I find it reasonable to vote for you, though. I don't trust people who proclaim themselves as weak, especially in a game titled "World Heavyweight Championship mafia". You saw the name, you knew what you were going for. You didn't feel weak when you signed up, so why do you feel weak now? ##vote: Holyflare Barring any reasonable alternative (hence the writing about finding information about people's playstyles later) I would be fine with an rng vote. There are not 'so many reasons' to get behind somebody elses rng vote however. You rng because in the first day you have almost no information and so statistically your best bet of finding scum would be to random vote a person. His method seemed the most reasonable method to me and the for now implies that I'd like to hear alternatives otherwise I will stick with the vote. Even so, I understand that an rng'd vote can be tampered with or created in favour of him, however, he in no way can control the TL random generated post number or the number of people in the game to divide by. Weaker by no means implies weak. The whole notion of being weak is subjective, I was referencing that people (i.e, marv.) had pointed out previously that I would be a pain to play with (based on a previous game he briefly checked) and wanted to know others that shared a similar mindset to him. I certainly do not feel weak, in fact, I am most confident in my ability to analyse posts and exhibit townlike behaviour throughout the game. Whether people agree with this though is not my place to say. | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 09:14 Risen wrote: This seems normal. I'm town. Risen starts straight off the bat seeing your post about the RNG determining method, he doesn't mention anything other than this. It implies that your method is fine and he does not mind the RNG in general. Following this up you asked him why he wouldn't want to vote Oats even after your sound RNGing to which he replies he will not random vote. It's only when it comes to his 'silly' post that he has jumped on me for agreeing with your RNG methods. If he even read your post it was pretty obvious that it was totally random and there was nothing factoring the RNG other than RNG itself. The thing which seems the most questionable to me is while, yes, I did call myself a weaker player in comparison to the rest of you, I asked several other questions about other players playstyles which he has completely glossed over which is no help to me or other people whatsoever. Dedicating a post on me was a stifle to conversation that I see as useful. Not only that but he questioned why I would call an RNG vote reasonable? It's more than reasonable to RNG given the circumstances. As for you BH. I like the RNG voting in general. It's a means to an end. You also state that you're for a policy lynch, this I can only get behind on a case by case basis. While policy lynching is most definitely an underused tactic on this forum I feel that it will mostly be down to RNG (what game of mafia isn't?) anyway and so a system that was pre-devised (like the one you posted) would be my prefered alternative. The fact you had to explain that your random system was in fact random baffles me. There is another person that I am confused about however, raynpelikoneet. I do not know if he's a troll in other games but this game so far his posts have been more lacking to say the least. | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 12:41 Oatsmaster wrote: ##vote holyflare Yeah I didnt roll scum!!!!!!!! Man that first post. On October 02 2013 12:44 Oatsmaster wrote: Also I think BH might be scum because there is no reason to RNG in a 9 player mini and he was just trying to emulate his behavior from last game. So you think that BH is scum but don't vote him. That's a good stance. | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 12:51 Oatsmaster wrote: except that we have 48 hours to find scum and its only 2/9 chance that we get scum. And probably another 4/9 that we hit an obvious townie that is obvious town after 48 hours. Now its not so useful is it? Do you even read what is posted? On October 02 2013 12:18 Blazinghand wrote: Also to all the RNG doubters: RNG has a 2/7 chance of hitting scum today! Not 2/9 as you might think. Why is that? Well, first off, I'm talking to people who aren't Oats and are town. You personally know that of the 8 non-you players, 2 are scum. So you'd think it would be a 2/8 chance of an RNG hitting scum. Pretty lame right? WRONG. If the RNG is on the doctor and the lynch starts to gather steam, he'll surely claim. This means that the doctor isn't even in the lynch pool, and we can roll again for a new RNG. this means we can discount one town player from our odds, meaning that you have a 2/7 (over 30%!) chance of lynching scum with RNG! | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 12:51 Risen wrote: You could read people's posts and judge them by that? Seems to be a pretty common way to vote. Did you not just jump on my post for saying 'reasonable for now' and the rest of it pretty much asking about other people? Or are you taking care to ignore everything I have been writing. Of course I am open to peoples posting and habits, that's why I asked for you to tell me what you know about other people which you have still neglected to do. | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On October 02 2013 13:34 Blazinghand wrote: @Holyflare: weigh in now on these interactions. state opinions, draw / refine reads, interact with the people voting you. refine your reads on them, and their reads on you. I live in the UK so my timezones are a bit off from yours. That being said. + Show Spoiler + On October 02 2013 13:36 Oatsmaster wrote: Literally a newbie doesnt mean you play the noob card unless you think it helps you. I only remember playing the noob card in my first few scumgames but none of my towngames because it served no purpose. Why do you think Holyflare is a complete and total idiot that is bad at mafia? I find Oats the most confusing player here, and by confusing, I mean a person with scumlike tendencies from what I can read. I mentioned one thing in one post and the rest of my posts have been trying to stimulate some other topics of discussion, yet, he is still adament that I've been calling myself a noob this entire time. The thing that drives me to suspicions is the fact that he has linked me and BH together as a scum team (why would either of us be that bad), and has had not so much interaction with me but a lot with BH. On October 02 2013 13:26 Oatsmaster wrote: I think you're scum for pulling the RNG bullshit again. I didnt attempt to find out what was up with holyflare, I laid some smackdown! So am I scum for that too? Holyflare is scum because he instantly jumps on a policy and then writes a whole bunch of stuff saying he is a noob. Without actually saying those words. He even says so himself, he hasn't attempted to find what's up with me (even though I posted why I liked RNG voting specifically for my case) yet, here: On October 02 2013 13:16 Oatsmaster wrote: it's the top scum play to stifle discussion. With his sure stance on me being scum and despite me resonding why I posted what I did is it not he who is in fact stifling the discussion? Stifling discussion is top scum play for calling someone scummy when they are being agressive and shit. Holyflare is the right lynch!. His posts do not analyse or point out reasonings, they state. He has responded poorly to questions arisen from BH, and even though BH and me are supposedly a scum team, it's enough for his vote to stay on me despite the constant accusatory nature he has against BH from the posts he see's. Not to mention; On October 02 2013 13:42 Oatsmaster wrote: If you think (you said you KNEW) a person was scum, your orientation as a townsman should be to prove to your allies that the person is in fact scum. If you do not interact with the person at all how can you garner anymore information than the one post you base your entire 'analysis' on? The fact that you say everyone else agrees with you in this thread is just testament to the fact that you have put no effort or thought into your stance and are just going with the flow to follow up for an 'easy' lynch.So you vote for someone then you ask him to explain? If I think a guy is scum, then why do I have to have interaction with him? And if everyone else in the thread thinks the same way, then why do I have to have interaction with them? | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
| ||
