Witchcraft Mini Mafia II

On November 03 2013 10:20 WaveofShadow wrote:
I'm thinking I'm going to enjoy this game. Player list includes a bunch of people I've never had the pleasure of playing with yet, some I play with all of the time, and some I haven't played with in a while and am happy to be playing with again.

Looking forward to this one, guys. ^o^

On November 04 2013 09:50 Vanesco wrote:

I don't really like this. You don't really put effort in to even cross-check the players from the last game (of witchcraft) which is really simple to do. The only player to play in the last one is Thrawn who was shot night 1. But I think that is not very relevant since each game can turn out different. I think you should come to your own conclusions on how to play this themed game instead of hoping others tell you how to play. It just seems like your not willing to put the effort in to even try to solve this game for yourself. It's also very dangerous to discuss strategy because scum can see everything also and can use that against town. I'm of the opinion that everybody should play the way THEY think is the correct way to play.

On November 04 2013 12:33 hzflank wrote:
Umasi's first post was too how-to-look-town-101 for a first post with no follow-up.

“I will be firm and call someone scum because that is a town thing to do. That guy was not being firm, so he is the guy that I will call scum. Raaaar, I'm so townly!”

Umasi is my biggest scum read right now. Nothing to ask him really as I expect he will make a response to Van's response anyway, which is what I want to see.

On November 04 2013 11:03 Vanesco wrote:
Yes that was me WaveofShadow (what name abbreviation do you prefer?). I haven't played with anybody here but ObviousOne was host of my only TL game (Newbie Mini Mafia 50). If you just look at like first 1-2 pages of day 1 of that then you realize that I start off pretty similar. I don't like to start of games with "oh how is everybody doing, lets have fun and make jokes guys". That contributes very little to town in my opinion and just putting something on someone will always get the conversation rolling. Overall I'm happy the game is being started (more seriously) and that suspicion is being put on people (even if it is me). We are never going to gain anything just sitting around and making jokes all day.

On November 04 2013 13:44 Vanesco wrote:
I don't get where this idea of my calling out Syl for not being firm is coming from. I just didn't like what he had to say and I decided that instead of people joking around I wanted to actually start the game, so I called him out. I didn't really take much of a stance because nothing in his response made me feel like he was scummy.

I'm having a really big scum read on Umasi currently. As explained before, in his first post I think only consists of 1 real accusation which is that I do not like talking about strategy since scum can meta it. To me it seems that he wants town to discuss strategy which leads me to the two most likely conclusions.
1) He doesn't know what to do, usually means a weak town and can be tricked easily by scum, or
2) mafia that wants to know the towns plans and how to use it against them
His only other post is him making a joke at somebody who thinks he's scum and then saying that I didn't pressure Syl hard (which I explain in the paragraph above). He then talks about how I don't like to talk about strategy which I explain why above. He mistakenly calls strategy "mechanics" when they are completely different things (in my opinion). I view mechanics as the rules of the game where strategy is how to play the game. I don't know if this is just me but it seems like he wants to blame that I'm not allowing people to discuss the rules of the game when infact I just don't like when people discuss the strategy they are going to use.

On November 04 2013 09:56 hzflank wrote:
To clarify, perhaps:

On night X+1, each person claims what actions they took on night X (if any).

Then each person claims who they voted for on day X.

The three people who used actions should be roughly the same three people who had the most votes. It could be slightly out as we would be missing information from the people who died on Day X (if town), night X and Day X+1.

Come to think of it with up to three people's votes missing it might not be worth claiming who we voted for, so this may not have any merit.

On November 05 2013 06:04 ObviousOne wrote:
Umasi is now a person of interest. Meta-mechanics discussion/finger pointing is the core of his contribution.

On November 05 2013 12:42 ObviousOne wrote:

Umasi is on the radar, repeat, he is ON THE RADAR.

Super outspoken against discussing the coven powers and thinks Vanesco is the scummiest guy in the thread. And that's pretty much it. And that's pretty underwhelming. But it's not necessarily scummy to have an out-there scum read. Would rather like to know another two scum reads from him as well because I could put his filter through a sieve and only the word Vanesco would filter out. So I'll wait 'til we get that.

On November 05 2013 12:50 ObviousOne wrote:

Yeah I think I misunderstood your post a bit but really this response is what I was looking for. Just some justifications for each would be helpful.

Also since sn0 is there what would it take to get a vote out of you for him?

On November 05 2013 12:57 hzflank wrote:


One of the things that you dislike about Vanesco is his stance on power roles. That's all? What do you think about Vanesco's interactions with people?

On November 05 2013 13:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:
It's not the point Umasi. You are supposed to tell us why the interactions are scummy.

On November 05 2013 13:14 WaveofShadow wrote:
Alright let's play a game.
It's called, 'What are people's reads on Syl?'
When I get 3-4 answers I will explain my own and why.
Bonus points to hzflank if he is one of them. Umasi too. Also Rayn.

On November 05 2013 12:56 Sylencia wrote:


Have you actually read the thread? I'm sure you would've already dismissed your idea already because we already discussed revealing witchcraft votes and it was either too risky or there were problems in regards to the overlap of blues because we're not likely to change our votes that much between the days, so it's a simple blue shot no matter when we really reveal... I don't really buy the fact that there's an algorithm which would work in our favour 'depending on certain actions in the games' because there are so many things which can happen.

Following on from that, why would it ever be a smart move to try gather WC votes so obviously when it just sets you up to be a vig target?

The vote on WoS in your very first post sets you up here for a long long tunnel which I'm still currently getting through (though I've taken a skip over the wall of text for now) - if anything I feel like you decided to target WoS after seeing recent posts and then did the long filter dive process to back it up at a later point. This is obviously baseless conjecture but I can see that happening from a scum player.



How is actively choosing not to give reasoning behind your votes ever townie here? Especially when you make a 'serious' vote on the first post which means that literally no one knows that your train of thought has been before you voted? Choosing to present thoughts only when asked is basically allowing yourself to reveal as little about what you think as possible, which really only has scum motivation behind it since it reduces the likelihood of inconsistencies popping up in the future, no?

Skimming over your case, half the points honestly seem like a stretch and rayn's covered pretty much my thoughts on that, I'll have to get back to your reply soon but honestly it's taken me an hour to hit this point because everyone seems to want to write essays these days :{

Conclusion: I don't really buy Ceph's case, and his entrance to me looks like a forced tunnel into WoS.

That said, I still need to look at a few other filters before getting deeper reads but Ceph's on my radar at the moment.

On November 05 2013 13:24 WaveofShadow wrote:
Alright Umasi you get an A for effort. And I'm not sure if the second part was a slight in Ceph's direction but I liked it nonetheless.
What about Vanesco's treatment of him makes him town? Is this an association read? Because that's a no-no....

On November 05 2013 13:28 Umasi wrote:

it's an association read :|
Just from the opening post, again.

Here, I'll defer to everyone I guess.
##unvote: vanesco
thoughts on him still haven't changed, but it's pretty clear he won't be lynched today, and I might just be dead wrong.
Still think sylencias town though.

On November 05 2013 13:30 WaveofShadow wrote:

So what about the fact that Vanesco calls Syl town later on in his filter?

On November 05 2013 14:18 hzflank wrote:


We cannot work with you unless you tell us why you think someone is scum.

You mentioned ET and Sn0, why do you think that they are scum?

On November 05 2013 21:23 raynpelikoneet wrote:
##Unvote:
##Vote: EchelonTee

There are a couple of huge problems in ET's posts and actions this game.
This is his reasoning for thrawn's rayn vote originally:

There is a very clear reasoning in thrawn's post yet ET "fails to see it". It is a pressure vote and anyone who pays even a little attention should know it, at least when thrawn unvotes me immediately when i start contributing. He also brings up this quote from Desert:

There are two problems with the bolded part.
(1) The post in question is from day 3. There are over 100 pages of content in that game at that point. Thrawn is scum because he fails to make analysis like in Desert 7 irl-days into the game compared to this game's 24 hours? Does that sound a legit reason? I can tell you it is a ridiculous reason.
(2) In the end of the bolded part EchelonTee clearly implies he in fact knew why thrawn voted for me, something he brought up in the very same post of his. So the earlier reason for thrawn being scum for voting me "with no real reasoning" is a lie and the wording he uses earlier is designed to make thrawn look worse than it is. It is scum motivated act, i use it a lot when i am scum - specific wording that makes the target look much worse than they actually are and what is said can be interpreted in many ways so i already have an out in the first place. There is absolutely no reason to do that as town.

When he is being questioned more about his reasoning behind thrawn's vote on me he says this:

I can tell you this is a straight out lie. I know he has been in thrawn's filter in Desert game, but i can also tell you he has done absolutely nothing in that filter, "skimmed" is a very strong word. Because of the following:
- If you enter thrawn's filter from Desert mini mafia, this is the first post in his filter. I will make it so big everyone understands:

If you go into someone's filter and miss what the first post there says there is no way you have done anything at all in that filter. If you are unable to pay that little attention i do not believe you have done anything there.

thrawn smurfed in that game and forgot his pasword on somewhere during N2 or D3. If EchelonTee had read the first post in thrawn's filter, he would know he actually needs to read this filter instead:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=426387&user=Tutankoopa
Now if you actually skim through this filter you will notice that that probably 40% of thrawn's posts are about me. There is a huge massive interaction with me and thrawn during the game. I don't even know what ET means with saying "If I missed some huge, obvious interaction that shows that you must be town and rayn believes so.." because noone is talking thrawn being town here, ET is acting like someone needs to prove thrawn is town, otherwise he is scum which is not how this game works. It is ET's job to prove someone is scum, which he is flipping upside down here.

This is what EchelonTee says about my case on gumshoe:

This is exactly why i am arguing for gumshoe being scum in my case. The first post ET quotes is a fake case on WoS, therefore it is not a contribution as i have pointed out. Therefore it does not matter if it's effort because in any case regardless of gumshoe's affiliation it is faked effort as i have already pointed out. The second post also does not contribute anything. I already quoted what that post in fact says and nobody has proven me wrong. ET does not prove me wrong, he just says those posts contribute, while i am asking him especially how they do contribute. This is not an answer to my question, this is misrepresenting my argument.

---

TLRD;
(1) EchelonTee's reasoning for thrawn being scum changes half-way through D1 for some parts of his argument. When townies do this they add new content to their case. EchelonTee, instead of doing this, changes his reasoning for old content to fit his case better. There is no town motivation for doing so.
(2) EchelonTee does "skim through player's filter from another game" without actually even skimming through it. There is no town motivation to go into other player's filter from another game and then do nothing there.
[u](3) EchelonTee when being called out for his case says "prove to me he is town". This is not how the game works and everyone should know this. This is a justification to sit on his vote when he can't actually prove (as it seems) thrawn is scum because nobody can possibly prove thrawn is town at this stage of the game.
(4) EchelonTee is not paying attention and making up stuff on the fly. This has been proven by many things. His filter skim, his change of reasoning, his answer to my gumshoe case, him asking people's opinions on his case on thrawn and when people give them he misses it.

None of those things i can see a townie doing in any situation.