EPTEmergency Mini Mafia! - Page 36
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
| ||
|
MrZentor
United States1648 Posts
Sorry scum. ##vote: blazinghand | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
| ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22630 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
1. BH is scum and lying about being roleblocked or 2. Mafia have two roleblockers. Option one is the most plausible one explanation. Even if BH comes off as a bit towny to me, I think that the probability of my read being wrong is higher than the probability of mafia having two roleblockers. Sorry BH. ##Vote Blazinghand I also think that the discussion needs to move on. The BH situation has been overhashed a couple of times and arguing more about the possibilities of different explanations with different power roles will net us nothing. I think that it's likely that MrZ is scum. There's not much content to analyze as he posts mainly one-liners. His only lenghty post is the one where he is defending himself (and even that post is only long because he quotes a lot). Granted, this is more of a feeling + non-contribution read, but I don't think there's much else to go by, and I think we really need to shift attention towards the guys who are barely posting. In the games where I've played before, mafia have always had 1-2 lurkers just skating by without posting anything. | ||
|
ghost_403
United States1825 Posts
@Artanis: I'm happy to discuss lynching Snarfs, but I really think that we have to take care of blazinghand first. Are you just more certain that Snarfs is scum, or do you think that blazinghand might be town? | ||
|
ghost_403
United States1825 Posts
| ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22630 Posts
Would you say snarfs is someone I need to read up on? | ||
|
ghost_403
United States1825 Posts
My goals this round are to (A) get blazinghand lynched, because he's scum, and (B) start working towards lynching the rest of the scum. Working towards accomplishing (B), Snarfs seems like a reasonable place to start. | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
On June 11 2012 14:08 Blazinghand wrote: It can't be snarfs, can it? I don't see why not. He's the only one that's been "certain" of you being innocent, therefore he's either your scumbuddy or the roleblocker you're desperately looking for. On June 11 2012 21:26 ghost_403 wrote: @Artanis: I'm happy to discuss lynching Snarfs, but I really think that we have to take care of blazinghand first. Are you just more certain that Snarfs is scum, or do you think that blazinghand might be town? I'm more certain Snarfs is scum. We've lynched based on blue claims twice and we missed twice. I think it's time for a lynch on behaviour for once, and Snarfs is looking damn bad to me. I also don't like how everyone's ignoring my case on him, which further gives me the idea I might be on to something here, especially how Shraft said himself that the discussion on BH has been beaten to death, yet doesn't comment on the case I just made and points at someone else without building a real case on him instead. But I don't want to spread my accusations too thin, let's discuss Snarfs first. The way I see it, there is no way Snarfs is green. He is too certain of BH's innocence, which means he either has information proving that he is (DT/roleblocker), or he simply knows because he's scum. If there's a roleblocker out there (whether their name is Snarfs or not) they should really come out right now with whom they've blocked. We need that information and we need it ASAP. I've also contemplated the thought that there might be a mafia team with 2 roleblockers. A 3 player mafia team with two power roles could be seen as a good way to balance things and mess with the minds of town. This is why I'm worried about a setup based lynch too; we don't know how WBG balances his game. Host, can you tell us how many Mafia are in the mafia team, or is that information hidden? | ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22630 Posts
Furer's filter basically makes him/me confirmed town. Lynching claimed millers is always 100% the correct play, and it's dumb as hell to actually claim miller, but if someone does he needs to be killed. It's irrelevant that VE turned out to be town. The correct way to play miller, for future reference, is to be so ridiculously active and pro-town that mafia has no choice but to shoot you and there is no chance town DT roles check you. VE is very good at looking town, so what he did was dumb, and Furer's response to it was correct. We should kill Blazinghand, he has been pushing a bad lynch based on inactivity, and when the inactivity is explained (the player is simply not playing anymore) he doesn't look at the evidence from the only point furer seems to have been playing the game, instead keeps his tunneling up. Also, I could not find where furer states there being 4 mafia. He speculated about there being a maximum of 4, which is only reasonable in a 13 player game. ##Vote Blazinghand | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
| ||
|
Shraft
Sweden701 Posts
My initial read on Snarfs was that he was a townie. This was due to him having sound viewpoints and him delivering valid criticisms on other's cases. See for example this post: + Show Spoiler + On June 06 2012 11:47 Snarfs wrote: I'm quite happy with where my vote is right now. blazing's case on MrZentor is weak and contains what is certainly an appeal to our emotions: Seriously? Says "I can't wait" as though that's analysis? I agree that it's a null tell for someone to claim to make a case, then not follow through with it. Town and scum both do that for different reasons. But I don't believe that MrZentor seriously thought that "I can't wait" was a good case, nor do I see how you could think that either. Also, as others have pointed out, there was a clear difference between MrZentor claiming not to know blazing's alignment, and ghost's claiming to believe VE's claim but also not trust his reads of VE. RE: Ghost: I had a look through his filter and I'm not impressed. The one good post he's had was an analysis of blazing's behaviour. Unfortunately, he followed it up later with a pretty lame interpretation of blazing's case on MrZentor: I don't think blazing's case on MrZentor was aggressive at all. Several people had already expressed their suspicions of MrZentor and I'd say he was a pretty easy target to go after. RE: Navillus: He both says a lot without saying a lot (i.e. I get the impression that he is summarizing facts) and he focuses on calling out inactives. Both this post and his more recent post seem much too wordy for the points they are attempting to get across. Also, he both claims that pressure voting is ineffective when the person knows it's just a pressure vote AND he leaves his vote on hyaa as a pressure vote. Care to explain this contradiction? I actually read your case twice, and it prompted me to reread Snarfs' filter. I'm not that sure that Snarfs is town anymore, but I also don't think that your case is damning. It only uses 4 of his posts, and I don't think that the first quote has anything to do with him being town/mafia. It's basically just a null tell. What I do find troubling about Snarfs is this post: + Show Spoiler + On June 07 2012 11:32 Snarfs wrote: I've reread the thread and I still believe that Hyaach is the best lynch tomorrow. Look at what he's done: a) He hasn't contributed to any scumhunting. He hasn't asked questions and he hasn't used his vote to pressure people. b) His vote on Pandain seemed very forced, as Navillus and I have both mentioned. c) He blames his lack of content on the time zone difference. There were a ton of things he could have talked about when he was online. Not being online at the same time as others is not an excuse for not commenting on things that have happened in the game. Now there are still over 48 hours for things to happen in the thread, but if I had to decide a lynch at this exact moment, it'd be Hyaach. As far as zelblade goes, I think the questions he's asking are leading questions and are effective at putting pressure on his targets. He's not just asking people questions that are easy to answer, he seems to be implying a certain answer and this is very similar to my own method of scumhunting. I'd much prefer to lynch Hyaach. He puts his vote on Hyaach, and then he does not comment any more on Hyaach. It's almost as if he doesn't care more about the lynch after he's placed his vote. Here are his posts from between the post above until the flip: + Show Spoiler + On June 08 2012 14:06 Snarfs wrote: Notes on Katina: - Noticed the same thing I did about blazinghand's 'off' play. Now that I think about this more, it lines up with his vig claim - being a well known player, it makes sense to try and survive until he could get his shot off. - Puts thoughts down in the thread in a clear, concise manner. Offers thoughts on multiple players without needing to be urged to do so. - Isn't afraid to push the stronger players when they're not under pressure (blazinghand, VE) I don't agree with everything Katina's saying, especially since the case on VE essentially boils down to "VE is being VE so he's scum". But I don't see anything particularly scummy in her posting and I do see some things which I don't think scum would be doing (i.e. pushing VE and blazinghand). On June 08 2012 14:14 Snarfs wrote: Also, I'll be here for a little while going over the thread so if you have any questions feel free to ask. On June 08 2012 15:22 Snarfs wrote: So just gave the thread a reread/skim through certain parts. Sticking with my plan of not wasting an entire day cycle, assuming furer doesn't even come back, I'd like to hear some opinions on ghost_403. Specifically from Artanis, zelblade and Hyaach. What are your guys' stances on him? Hyaach, I'm still waiting for some of your other thoughts, if you wouldn't mind adding this to the list. Please note though that I am not suggesting ghost as a lynch candidate for today. The last thing I want to do is provide too many candidates for scum to choose from on where to put their vote and kill our vote analysis. On June 09 2012 11:24 Snarfs wrote: So, VE, you're saying that you don't think that this logic makes sense? And you don't think that the fact that he was "AVOIDING DOING SCUMMY THINGS" could be attributed to a vigilante trying to survive until the night? On June 10 2012 06:30 Snarfs wrote: In order to believe that bh would fake-claim vig night 1 as either mafia or SK, we have to believe that he: either) If mafia, thinks he can argue his way out of there being only a single night kill or) If SK, thinks he can go the rest of the game without shooting someone else or being a likely target by mafia because otherwise he'd be under a ton of suspicion I really don't see either of these being legit, mainly because I know that I myself would have been all over his ass if either of them occured. In order to believe that Hyaach would fake-claim JK as either mafia or SK, we have to believe that he: As either mafia or SK is worried that he's about to be lynched and wants to buy himself at least one more day to argue out of the situation. I'm going to take a gamble here on the fact that our town is good enough to lynch the shit out of blazinghand for dumb vigilante claims should they end up not matching up with our expectations of the game. I believe blazinghand thinks this too and wouldn't try to pull off something this risky. On June 10 2012 06:37 Snarfs wrote: Playing by connections before anyone has flipped scum has only ever ended poorly in my TL mafia experience. It's all WIFOM and until we see some red on the board, I'd highly recommend against it. On June 10 2012 06:40 Snarfs wrote: Maybe I just don't remember playing in a game where scum made such a bold move on night 1. I've had a scum read on Hyaach since day 1, but do you think they could both be town? On June 10 2012 06:51 Snarfs wrote: There are 6 on Hyaach and 5 on blazing. On June 10 2012 06:57 Snarfs wrote: I could totally see that happening, with a "That's how we play over at epicmafia, I'm totally not scum". The only post in which he speaks of the lynch is the one that I bolded, and that post does not even contain much thought. It's basically just some rationale for his vote based on setup speculation and BH not being a dumb player (at this point the different scenarios had already been argued to death). | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
| ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22630 Posts
On June 11 2012 23:34 Artanis[Xp] wrote: I hope that's not an excuse to just go AFK for the rest of the day, Palmar. What's your thoughts on my case on Snarfs? I have not read your case, nor his filter. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On June 11 2012 23:21 Palmar wrote: We should kill Blazinghand, he has been pushing a bad lynch based on inactivity, and when the inactivity is explained (the player is simply not playing anymore) he doesn't look at the evidence from the only point furer seems to have been playing the game, instead keeps his tunneling up. Is this actually your only reason for voting me? | ||
|
Palmar
Iceland22630 Posts
On June 12 2012 01:44 Blazinghand wrote: Is this actually your only reason for voting me? Yes. The fact that you even consider furer's inactivity a factor in the equation makes you scum. | ||
|
Snarfs
Canada1006 Posts
On June 11 2012 09:08 Artanis[Xp] wrote: Ah, so we'd need 4 roleblockers to solve the puzzle then. One to block Hyaach, one to block scum KP, and one to block you, the fourth being Hyaach himself as JK. That or 3 roleblockers and an SK. Both sound unlikely. I hate voting based on setup speculation given our 'success' with it so far. If you're speaking the truth, I urge the RBer to come forward. I've had a change of heart regarding not revealing my blue read as I feel there's a strong possibility he's red. I present to you: Snarfs. It was pretty clear to me that this was pressure on lurkers to make them post more rather than actually trying to get her lynched. For the rest he also posted a bunch of questions yet didn't really chime in much until figuring out where people stood. Joined the BH bandwagon until BH started posting seriously, and suddenly went full on against Hyaach, whose case he had against him was very weak. Just trying to get 2 things here: 1) More information about Katina 2) Some sort of reaction from VE, even if it was just in the form of more information on Katina. Obviously, I was provided neither. a) That's not a mafia trait, that's a lazy player trait. b) A townie being pressured also does strange things. His vote looked a bit sheepish but not that strange. c) He never blamed his lack of content on the time zone difference. He he looked sheepish with his vote on Pandain because he woke up when the case already took off, which is a legitimate argument. It was the combination of the three things that made me think he was scum. His vote on Pandain encouraged me to look back through his filter and when I didn't see anything that indicated to me he was trying to find mafia, he jumped to the top of my scum list. The fact that he kept stalling in providing analysis on players was enough for me to keep my vote on him and remain convinced that he was scum. Then fails to name any examples of why Ghost is scummy or anything with his own opinion, despite claiming he just read the thread again. How come you didn't provide any reasoning here yourself? I try to get people to place their thoughts on players I find suspicious down in the thread. Ghost was a null read for me at the time (still is and I think there are higher scum targets for us to be going after) and by gauging other players' thoughts I work my opinion of both the player I'm interested in and the players who respond. Often town players respond well to such statements as it gives them an opportunity to try and find scum and I can usually cross people off my scum list. If I lead with my own thoughts then I just give the other players on opportunity to say, "Hmm yea, I agree with you, he is looking suspicious" which is often a null tell, as opposed to someone actually coming forward and being willing to offer thoughts on a player. His defense on BH is absolutely damning with only ONE clause out. That being that he's the town RBer. This defense makes absolutely no sense. He's basically saying it's dumb for Blazing to claim vig unless he's town because anything else is wifom. Given the amount of roleblock roles available in the rolelist, it's not a stretch that he could claim being roleblocked, especially since vigis only get one shot and don't get their shots refunded even if they get roleblocked makes it very easy for him to claim it as scum. Calling someone like Blazinghand who loves to do funky stuff town simply because he claimed vigi is incredibly shortsighted. I also don't see how him claiming vig is going to get him shot if he's sk. He said he fired his only shot so mafia would think he's just a VT now, which would be great if he's SK. Given the amount of suspicion town still has it'd make sense for mafia not to shoot him. If he's SK he could've still been roleblocked too, and he could've expected that his kill on furer would go through. The claims on this last post show me you're incredibly convinced BH is town, meaning you know things I don't. Given your play so far I'd expect you to be smarter than this. Therefore you are scum or you're a RBer, in which case now is the time to claim. ##Vote: Snarfs Sorry to say I'm not the roleblocker. TL towns lynch people for dumb reasons all the time and I've been on those wagons a few times in the recent past. See MrZentor in Wheel of Fortune for a good example of what I'm talking about. See Pandain this game for another example. That's not to say they might not be mafia, but people need to stop assuming that just because someone does something stupid/suspicious that they must be mafia. In fact, often doing something stupid/blatantly suspicious is a town tell. I'm trying to be better than the average TL mafia player. My reads have actually been half decent the last few games I've played. From now on, if I think we're going to mislynch then I'm going to tell you that I think it's a mislynch. Especially if I'm in a game where we haven't nailed scum once yet. I'm also going to provide who I think is a good lynch instead (in this case, Katina), and reasons why (as I gave at the night post). Show me a game where someone has actually been dumb enough to claim vig night 1 and has then survived and gone on to win the game in a situation where the killing power of mafia was messed up on the night he claimed vig. I don't think people are that stupid. I mean, look at this game, people are already ready and willing to lynch him. Do you not think that he would have thought, if he was mafia, about the fact that people would probably want to lynch him? @blazinghand: Your suspicions of me arose from the fact that I'm not pushing you to get information, but do I really need to? Look at how many people we have pushing you, one more isn't going to get anything else out of you. I'd rather focus my attention elsewhere for now and come back if mafia still haven't killed you in another day or two because if you're town then you're probably a pretty high target on their list. (NOT TO SAY I'M JUST GOING TO FLIP OUT AND ASSUME HE'S MAFIA IN TWO DAYS, JUST THAT HE MIGHT REQUIRE MORE ATTENTION THAN I'M CURRENTLY GIVING HIM) | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On June 12 2012 01:46 Palmar wrote: Yes. The fact that you even consider furer's inactivity a factor in the equation makes you scum. That's interesting, because I think my case was pretty straightforwards: On June 11 2012 07:22 Blazinghand wrote: Palmar needs to move mountains to make up for Furerkip's silence. ##vote Palmar He has not. I'm not voting you because Furerkip was lurking, I'm voting you because you were lurking. Furerkip's silence means we have no read on him. The fact that you still haven't read the filter and the case on the only non-me vote indicates to me that you're not doing what you need to to establish yourself as town. After we mislynch me, tomorrow is LYLO (at 5-3), and you're a liability unless you can make some serious contributions. You still have not. So you still have my vote. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
FINE FINE THEN I SEE HOW IT IS | ||
| ||
