EPTWelcome to the game! Yes, night ends in about 6 hours.
Newbie Mini Mafia XVII - Page 15
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
sciberbia
United States1359 Posts
Welcome to the game! Yes, night ends in about 6 hours. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
| ||
|
s0Lstice
United States1832 Posts
Roflewaffles55 I won't rehash. If you are still not convinced go have a look at sciberbia's and alan's cases. This is a done deal in my mind. Suki She learned a lot from her first game as scum, and it showed this game. She looked pro-town enough for me to set her aside in favor of other endeavors. That said, there is plenty of incriminating evidence in her filter to be had. I'll organize this as best as I can. Let's look at how she has been going after the town win condition: Her case on trackd00r: + Show Spoiler + She divebombs the thread with this accusation as her first post, and then in short order backs down from it when it doesn't gain any traction. On June 14 2012 00:06 suki wrote: As has been pointed out, the contradiction isn't as severe as I initially thought it was. ##unvote trackd00r I thought at the very least I could rouse a response from trackd00r, however my case was too weak and I feel that no useful information can be gleamed from people simply agreeing on its flimsiness. On June 14 2012 13:21 suki wrote: Quite simply you (and several other people after you) answered your question. The motivation is to get the ball rolling some way, any way. I feel I failed a bit in that regard as my attack was so full of holes that there hardly was any discussion developed from it, but it was made with good intentions. On June 14 2012 00:06 suki wrote: My case on trackd00r was/is a flop, and up until your vote on alan no one has really pointed out anything suspicious about any other player On June 14 2012 13:36 suki wrote: @sciberbia I think a lot of your argument stems from the impression that I was absolutely sure trackd00r was scum. I definitely worded my post that way on purpose, in spite of knowing my case wasn't solid. I was genuinely surprised that my case was as weak as it was. Basically one good post from you was strong enough to let everyone basically say 'yeah, I agree.' My comment that 'at the very least I could rouse a response from trackd00r' was because I thought even if my case was really weak, I could aggravate an interesting reply from trackd00r, but it didn't. Regarding the contradiction, and the comment that the contradiction isn't as severe as I thought it was. It's simply not taking the time to really think about the topic, after reading the rebuttals and being disappointed. There is no contradiction, it was just me being careless with my choice of words. Actually, the offhanded and subtly confident way he deflected my attack is a townie point for him in my book, so as it stands I don't suspect trackd00r at all. On June 14 2012 13:36 suki wrote: As for opening the game, I posted my policy post after the accusation because I wrote the accusation first. I did want to start the thread off boldly, I'll give you that. Look at how she dances around. She explains what was going through her head in 3 different ways: -I knew the case was weak when I posted it -I didn't know the case was weak until people told me after I posted it -I thought my case may have been weak, but I was just trying to get the discussion going. Also that last quote is scum-slip. Sciberbia pointed it out earlier. A townie has one agenda: finding scum. Scum have several agenda: stay alive, sow confusion, cause chaos. Admitting to adhering to an agenda of aggressiveness for it's own sake is very scummy. Suki has addressed this point, calling it WIFOM. Minus her comment on the matter, it would be WIFOM. It is her stated reason for wanting to appear aggressive that makes it a scum-slip instead. She has returned to trackd00r recently, and I'll address that later. Her case on alan133: + Show Spoiler + She starts out defending him from her scumbuddy, naturally. Frankly, what she says is right, so it's whatever. After alan defends himself, she goes on the attack. Her case was not a bad one. You could find in a lot of games a townie making a case using the same type of ammunition. That said, there is really only one strong point, and that is his knee-jerk defense. The rest is that he accuses his accusers, and his neutrality on day 1 I advise you to go look at it for yourself, and notice her vigor. She really goes after this read. As we start approaching lynch time, the people who joined her on being suspicious of alan133 begin changing their minds (me being one). HeavOnEarth was increasingly looking like the day 1 lynch. She drops her read on alan133 like it's hot, and commits to bussing her teammate. This is how I can tell she learned from her first scum game. She parrots the reasons for pardoning alan133 pretty effectively, and actually does some grunt work by adding to the case on her teammate before jumping aboard. The fact of it is though, even after all of that she looks like a shapeshifter. She's very aware of what is making her look town and adjusts accordingly. Trackd00r doesn't look scummy? Get off trackd00r. Alan133 is looking town? Get off alan. HeavOnEarth is looking scummy? Get on HeavOnEarth. Back to trackd00r: + Show Spoiler + Remember this first On June 14 2012 13:36 suki wrote: Actually, the offhanded and subtly confident way he deflected my attack is a townie point for him in my book, so as it stands I don't suspect trackd00r at all. Following the lynch of her 1st teammate, and the certain death of her 2nd teammate, she is back to full throttle on trackd00r, with no in between. There is a lot of effort in this new case. There's a few things I want to point out: On June 15 2012 14:01 suki wrote: He targets Crossfire. At this point Crossfire is under pressure by austin, roflwaffle, Milton, and sciberbia. Golden and I have been the ones backing crossfire up. Here is her 'backing Crossfire up.' On June 15 2012 00:06 suki wrote: Crossfire99: I spent a lot of time trying to figure out if he is scum or not. Looking into the filter of his two previous games, I found that his posting style is more or less the same. In game 1, he rolls blue and lurks quite hard. He states out of game reasons for lurking, but he plays more or less non-commital, pointing out suspicious behavior but not really heavily pressuring anyone. In game 2 as mafia, he starts out the game by doing two things. First, he posts a defense of a townie that had come under scrutiny. Second, he immediately starts pointing out errors in one particular person's posts. He actually tunnels this person for the entire Day 1 and only just fails to get him lynched. He survives for the whole game without really being under fire and mafia wins the game. In this game I see a lot of policy talk, a lot of guidance talk, and hardly any pressure at all. I find it quite different from his previously successful mafia play. In addition, his helpful tone is quite present in the mafia QT from the previous game, which makes me feel more inclined to think he's actually trying to help, despite his posts not really pressuring or helping town much. Basically, his meta has changed from his last scum game, and it's changed in a confusing way, and he isn't using the tactics that lead him to a win in the previous game. I'm waiting for more contributions from him before deciding whether I think he's scum or not. To me that looks like: I don't know. I'll go through her summarized points. On June 15 2012 14:01 suki wrote: I've gone through trackd00r's play in detail, now I'd like to summarize the points and explain why each point is suspicious. 1. Soft aggression vs Mouldy early on but later says he's not convinced. Slightly important point because Mafia want to avoid all targetting the same people. 2. Goes after Crossfire and Golden. Crossfire was a sort of easy bandwagon since so many players were after him. The Golden push is suspicious because so few people targeted him, one of whom was HeavOnEarth. 3. Does not comment on HeavOnEarth at all until the very very end. Definitely scum motivation for avoiding this. trackd00r was around back when s0lstice first started his push on HeavOnEarth. That was when trackd00r was pushing his cases against Crossfire and Golden. 4. His cases are all weak. He never points out scummy play despite singling out the three people who he would push for a lynch. His arguments are weak and consist of not contributing and not playing 'satisfactorily'. There's no townie motivation that late in the day to simply target people for unsatisfactory play, as opposed to finding scummy play. There is plenty of scum motivation to try to find something, anything, to attack, while not putting themselves fully on the radar. 5. He bandwagons at the last minute on HeavOnEarth. A pointless move. His analysis is flaky. He says, "I must admit that he looks suspicious at this stage of the game." 1- Being undecided on Mouldy was not weird, because his filter was empty. 2- Newb townie making the wrong reads. Hell I've pushed Golden myself when I was town, his play was similar to this game. Him being on Crossfire99 is a point, as that movement ran counter to a scum lynch. 3- Yup he came late to HeavOnEarth. Possibly scummy. Also possibly busy town. 4- Weak arguments can be scummy. They can also be newb town. Just ask our newcomer Unforgiven, who made some kick-ass reads but couldn't argue them effectively. 5- Again, being late could be scummy, but also busy townie. At that point, everything that there was to say on HeavOnEarth was said. He agreed, so he said so. The case feels contrived, trumped up. I invite you to read it and see if you agree. Concerning her teammates: + Show Spoiler + On June 15 2012 00:06 suki wrote: About HeavOnEarth: HeavOn's attack against Golden is weak, and his offhanded comment on MouldyJeb is simplistic. His points against Crossfire are thought out and straightforward. While he has not taken a strong stance against anyone, he's also not been wishy washy. He's also kind of aggravating, mocking and provoking MJ and golden while waiting for their responses. He hasn't contributed much, especially in the way of the major cases of the day, which is a big point against him. I feel HeavOn isn't as suspicious as people are making him out to be, and am waiting for his response on topics such as me, alan113 and crossfire before making a decision. This is a non-opinion opinion. She lists points for and against, dances around a hard stance. This is what scum looks like when they talk about their teammates with no public opinion to go off of. Remember that shapeshifter thing I was talking about? She goes from 0 to 60 on this guy, when the thread was telling her it was time to. Add another: she busses the shit out of her other teammate roflwaffles just after the paint dries on target painted on him. Summary: + Show Spoiler + She made a big blunder early game with her first case, contradicting herself and retreating from it as if it was leprous. Following that, she basically bounces around like a ping-pong ball, based on the current temperature of the thread. She is aggressive when she feels it's safe, and withdraws when it's not. All-in-all I feel she played a pretty good game, but the evidence is still bountiful. disclaimer: + Show Spoiler + I know others have been on Suki's case, in my haste I didn't have the time to cross-reference what I'm regurgitating and what's new. I'm gonna have a look now that I'm done typing this, and I hope everyone else re-reads other's cases on suki as well. Off-hand I know sciberbia, milton, and alan have posted things on her. | ||
|
s0Lstice
United States1832 Posts
| ||
|
alan133
Malaysia159 Posts
@Crossfire I love your analysis post on who voted Heave. I hope you can do one based on Heave and rolf's actions, FoSes and votes too. I did a quick look myself, but I think it will take too much time for me to write it out, and it is going to be really hard to read anyway. I think we can used this to rule out bad townie play from scummy methods. @Unforgiven Welcome! Given that Heave is Godfather, and rolf being second scum, their actions suggests MJ was simply being a very bad town player. I suggest people reread their filters @me on Golden Based on the patterns of both scums, I lowered my suspicion towards Golden. To refute my own point about trusting me and suki, there are already a few posts ahead of him indicating our innocents. I still don't like how he changes his judgement based on other people's opinion. For now, I want to rule him out because it is inconsistent with heave's and rolf's motives. @suki on trapd00r I do not have time to evaluate trapd00r's filters and it is really late now. Upon quick investigation, I somehow found something that I never really pay attention to before. On June 13 2012 23:48 alan133 wrote: @trackd00r This is a weird speculation, as there is no indication nor proof I was not doing otherwise. I guess there is no way to say "I swear I was backing you up even before I read anything else!!111", but oh well. I did edit my post after I saw ss0lstice's post, mostly shortening what was already mentioned by ss0lstice, as most of my points were agreeing with him. Expand quote to see trackd00r's attempted to put words into my mouth. Rolf bandwagoned later. If rolf and track are really scums, I feel like that picked a wrong target. It is 3:14 am here and I am going to bed. I will most likely be back after the day post, so just in case I die, here is my current view and hopes for future town direction. I think rolfwaffle55's case is decisive. Tomorrow there will be a kill so if rolf was not shot, please evaluate that kill pattern. Who did they went for, what was their stand. Think about if they were trying to push a victim's misread before he die. Think of all the possibilities, and if there are too many clashing possibilities from both sides, skip it. It won't lead you anywhere. I hope crossfire can contribute by evaluating HeavE's and Rolf's actions in day 1. I hope suki can continue to pressure trackd00r the way she pressured me. I hope rolf dies in a night kill  Stay focus on getting the last scum, don't throw out FoS all over the place, work together and analyse one player at a time, and we should be on our way to an "Overwhelming Town Victory" | ||
|
trackd00r
Chile284 Posts
On June 15 2012 14:01 suki wrote: I've gone through trackd00r's play in detail, now I'd like to summarize the points and explain why each point is suspicious. 1. Soft aggression vs Mouldy early on but later says he's not convinced. Slightly important point because Mafia want to avoid all targetting the same people. 2. Goes after Crossfire and Golden. Crossfire was a sort of easy bandwagon since so many players were after him. The Golden push is suspicious because so few people targeted him, one of whom was HeavOnEarth. 3. Does not comment on HeavOnEarth at all until the very very end. Definitely scum motivation for avoiding this. trackd00r was around back when s0lstice first started his push on HeavOnEarth. That was when trackd00r was pushing his cases against Crossfire and Golden. 4. His cases are all weak. He never points out scummy play despite singling out the three people who he would push for a lynch. His arguments are weak and consist of not contributing and not playing 'satisfactorily'. There's no townie motivation that late in the day to simply target people for unsatisfactory play, as opposed to finding scummy play. There is plenty of scum motivation to try to find something, anything, to attack, while not putting themselves fully on the radar. 5. He bandwagons at the last minute on HeavOnEarth. A pointless move. His analysis is flaky. He says, "I must admit that he looks suspicious at this stage of the game." Trackd00r has been noncommital, he's been weakly targetting people for playing unsatisfactorily as opposed to playing scummy. He went for the easy target of Crossfire, and you can argue he tried to push a bandwagon on Golden with HeavOn. He refused to comment on HeavOn, and comes back at the last minute to appear like he's supporting town by voting against HeavOn as the last, and wholly unnecessary vote. Going point by point: 1) Your argument about that says ''target the same people is wrong''. It varies from game to game, from context to context. In my first game, for example, I was town (bad played >.<) and in the third day pretty much 3 of the mafia players went against me, even though they lacked of anyone else's support. About mouldyJeb case, it was indeed suspicious, then I backed off my pressure to him because I considered that it was just confusing bad town play. Anyways, unforgiven has replaced him, so now we can see the same role but with hopefully understandable posts. 2) I don't get what you are trying to say here. You say that I go after crossfire because it was most affluent case, and then I go after golden because it had a few followers. Well, what player should you think I just push then? Because, those 2 conditions you mentioned are opposite one each other. I don't see any other option. 3) About heaven, I didn't really put a lot of attention to him. After quite a few people pushed the case, more logic I found on it. I didn't even had a read on him. Anyways, I was expecting to post some more, since in that time, his pressure against golden was quite interesting. 4) That's how I judge D1. People who don't actually contribute much anything, having the potential to give more elaborated opinions, are the ones which I wanted to push. About my play, I tried to do some questions, that didn't really get me to nowhere. I have to admit that my cases are weak, but again, that doesn't mean I'm mafia. * Trying to contribute is town play. * Appearing to contribute is mafia play. 5) You are basically underestimating the power of a vote. I want to emphasize your statement ''and wholly unnecessary vote''. Why do you think is was not necessary? For town, every vote counts. Just imagine, like a mafia massive vote switch in the last minute. Or, What If golden forgot to format his vote and it wasn't counted in? Any situations should be considered. Oh and by the way, I think you say that the vote was so unnecessary because you were 100% sure that Heaven was mafia. | ||
|
alan133
Malaysia159 Posts
I wrote: I started writing before I refresh and saw s0lstice's post. As he already pointed it out, there are no contradictions between the two statements. trackd00r merely states that NL is bad unless it is a "serious" mislynch in both highlighted sentence. If I am missing something, please correct me. On June 13 2012 23:48 alan133 wrote: @trackd00r This is a weird speculation, as there is no indication nor proof I was not doing otherwise. I guess there is no way to say "I swear I was backing you up even before I read anything else!!111", but oh well. I did edit my post after I saw ss0lstice's post, mostly shortening what was already mentioned by ss0lstice, as most of my points were agreeing with him. Cheers. | ||
|
s0Lstice
United States1832 Posts
| ||
|
suki
Canada1159 Posts
Look at how she dances around. She explains what was going through her head in 3 different ways: -I knew the case was weak when I posted it -I didn't know the case was weak until people told me after I posted it -I thought my case may have been weak, but I was just trying to get the discussion going. It's a matter of degrees. I pushed my case against trackd00r so early on day 1, I wasn't expecting it to be that strong. At the same time, I wasn't expecting it to be so weak that everyone can just say 'I agree that the case has no merit'. Thus, I knew the case was weak. I thought it may be weak but I was trying to get the discussion going. I didn't know the case was as weak as it was until after I read the responses. I see no contradiction or 'dancing' here. It is her stated reason for wanting to appear aggressive that makes it a scum-slip instead. Wanting to start the thread off boldly is a scum slip as much as wanting to get discussion rolling ASAP is a scum slip. Her case on alan133: Your analysis comes down to, my case wasn't bad. I really went after the read. When I switched my vote you said I drop the case like it's hot. I clearly stated the reasons for dropping the case, and it makes no sense for me, as town, to go after alan who started acting in a way that negated my case against him. She parrots the reasons for pardoning alan133 pretty effectively, and actually does some grunt work by adding to the case on her teammate before jumping aboard. The fact of it is though, even after all of that she looks like a shapeshifter. She's very aware of what is making her look town and adjusts accordingly. Trackd00r doesn't look scummy? Get off trackd00r. Alan133 is looking town? Get off alan. HeavOnEarth is looking scummy? Get on HeavOnEarth. Adding the case to my 'teammate' by bussing him is a funny way to phrase 'finds more solid evidence against a potential scum'. You are saying I adjust my actions accordingly to what make me look town... But the simplest explanation is that I am town, and I'm acting like a town should. I pressured both trackd00r and alan, and backed down when I found my cases weren't valid anymore. I did my research on HeavOnEarth and voted him based on my own reads. Following the lynch of her 1st teammate, and the certain death of her 2nd teammate, she is back to full throttle on trackd00r, with no in between. This is consistent with my playstyle this entire game. Here is her 'backing Crossfire up.' ... To me that looks like: I don't know. Rather than calling his behaviour suspicious, I gave a null read (pending further information), where I rebute some of the arguments against Crossfire and state that he's not playing like he did the previous game as Mafia. I also noted that his helpful tone was consistent with his helpful tone in the mafia QT, 'which makes me feel more inclined to think that he's actually trying to help'. Regarding my current case on trackd00r, four of my points you said 'could be scummy, could be newb/busy town'. You call it a contrived case yet you admit that my points can be seen as scummy. A decent scum isn't going to make one big mistake, they're going to make a bunch of small mistakes that all add up later. The fact that I can find so many examples of possibly scummy behaviour, but no real actions that have good town motivation is suspicious. I'd rather call him out on it than just assume he's a noob town. Also: 4- Weak arguments can be scummy. They can also be newb town. Just ask our newcomer Unforgiven, who made some kick-ass reads but couldn't argue them effectively. The difference between Unforgiven and trackd00r is unforgiven had no reservations about labelling people as scum and pressuring them. He just couldn't or wouldn't explain his thoughts. Trackd00r did not call out any of his three primary targets for scummy or suspicious behaviour, and then conceded that HeavenOnEarth was suspicious at the very end of day 1. This is a non-opinion opinion. She lists points for and against, dances around a hard stance. This is what scum looks like when they talk about their teammates with no public opinion to go off of. Remember that shapeshifter thing I was talking about? She goes from 0 to 60 on this guy, when the thread was telling her it was time to. Add another: she busses the shit out of her other teammate roflwaffles just after the paint dries on target painted on him. I was busy with my case against alan at the time, and a quick read over his filter didn't ring any warning bells. I have nothing to say on roflwaffle. You can call it bussing or you can call it agreeing with a well-presented case. Summary: She made a big blunder early game with her first case, contradicting herself and retreating from it as if it was leprous. Following that, she basically bounces around like a ping-pong ball, based on the current temperature of the thread. She is aggressive when she feels it's safe, and withdraws when it's not. All-in-all I feel she played a pretty good game, but the evidence is still bountiful. Did not contradict myself. I do not think I blundered. I did not bounce around. I analysed the game and based on my judgement I focused my attention on the one person I believed was the most scum, and I didn't let off until I was convinced otherwise. The only evidence against me is from viewing my actions from a biased point of view. I've played a strong town game, and you're trying to spin it like I'm playing a strong mafia game by playing a strong town game. As for trackd00r's self defense 1) Your argument about that says ''target the same people is wrong''. It varies from game to game, from context to context. In my first game, for example, I was town (bad played >.<) and in the third day pretty much 3 of the mafia players went against me, even though they lacked of anyone else's support. About mouldyJeb case, it was indeed suspicious, then I backed off my pressure to him because I considered that it was just confusing bad town play. Anyways, unforgiven has replaced him, so now we can see the same role but with hopefully understandable posts. You back off mouldy, possibly because it was just confusing bad town play, but also possibly because rofl and heavOn both were attacking him. 2) I don't get what you are trying to say here. You say that I go after crossfire because it was most affluent case, and then I go after golden because it had a few followers. Well, what player should you think I just push then? Because, those 2 conditions you mentioned are opposite one each other. I don't see any other option. Bandwagon on crossfire is scummy. Pushing golden when heavOnEarth is also pushing him is scummy. Like you said, mafia play varies from game to game, from context to context. The fact that you bandwagon on an obvious target and also attack a non-obvious target isnt suspicious. It's that you bandwagon weakly on an obvious target, and you attacked golden weakly alongside HeavOnEarth. 3) About heaven, I didn't really put a lot of attention to him. After quite a few people pushed the case, more logic I found on it. I didn't even had a read on him. Anyways, I was expecting to post some more, since in that time, his pressure against golden was quite interesting. A simple argument to make. Still suspicious considering all the other things you've been doing. 4) That's how I judge D1. People who don't actually contribute much anything, having the potential to give more elaborated opinions, are the ones which I wanted to push. About my play, I tried to do some questions, that didn't really get me to nowhere. I have to admit that my cases are weak, but again, that doesn't mean I'm mafia. * Trying to contribute is town play. * Appearing to contribute is mafia play. My argument is you didn't contribute at all, but you attempted to put on the appearance of contributing. In other words, mafia play. Out of everything this is the most important point. 5) You are basically underestimating the power of a vote. I want to emphasize your statement ''and wholly unnecessary vote''. Why do you think is was not necessary? For town, every vote counts. Just imagine, like a mafia massive vote switch in the last minute. Or, What If golden forgot to format his vote and it wasn't counted in? Any situations should be considered. I'm saying you look scum for jumping on at the last minute. Oh and by the way, I think you say that the vote was so unnecessary because you were 100% sure that Heaven was mafia. Interesting attempt to twist my words. I never said anything of the sort. I'm not convinced by either s0lstice's defense of trackd00r or trackd00r's defense of himself. I want to hear other people's thoughts on the matter. | ||
|
Unforgiven_ve
Venezuela1232 Posts
to sciberbia and s0lstice, you guys being very good analyst and posters. i want you please read austincc's filter, be in his place, he is(should be) pretty confident about his posting skills, the avoiding of the Heaven issue, he kept his vote on crossfire and relys on his defense/persuassive skills. One of you two will die tonight i think | ||
|
Unforgiven_ve
Venezuela1232 Posts
| ||
|
s0Lstice
United States1832 Posts
| ||
|
zelblade
Australia901 Posts
| ||
|
Miltonkram
United States310 Posts
The case against roflwaffles is the closest I've seen to a slam dunk case in any of the games I've played in. There's not much I can add to it. Proceed to string him up with my blessing unless of course we have a vigi, then just shoot the poor bastard. Not much to add in suggestions for blue players either. Just breadcrumb your night actions so we can come back to them later. I'll have more analysis up shortly. | ||
|
Miltonkram
United States310 Posts
| ||
|
trackd00r
Chile284 Posts
On June 16 2012 05:50 suki wrote: Bandwagon on crossfire is scummy. Pushing golden when heavOnEarth is also pushing him is scummy. Like you said, mafia play varies from game to game, from context to context. The fact that you bandwagon on an obvious target and also attack a non-obvious target isnt suspicious. It's that you bandwagon weakly on an obvious target, and you attacked golden weakly alongside HeavOnEarth. Sorry Suki, but I don't follow your logic. Why would I attack head on an obvious target? Wouldn't it be better to leave it there meanwhile I try to look for other targets which are actually more important? On June 16 2012 05:50 suki wrote:} You back off mouldy, possibly because it was just confusing bad town play, but also possibly because rofl and heavOn both were attacking him. I hope that statement was a satire of s0lstice post, because you used his exactly same logic to prove your point, which you didn't because you haven't answered it yet. | ||
|
trackd00r
Chile284 Posts
Mafia players might be using this tactic to make a blue-slip by someone. It doesn't just mean that they might have start this, but instead, they could get the information indirectly if they want. This is bad because, the most people commenting and giving their views in the situations, the most probable that someone might leak implicit information saying he is X role. I'm going to check all the filters again, to see who can we lynch on D2. It's been a busy week for me (unexpected) so I have to give it all now. | ||
|
suki
Canada1159 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Sorry Suki, but I don't follow your logic. Why would I attack head on an obvious target? Wouldn't it be better to leave it there meanwhile I try to look for other targets which are actually more important? As mafia it makes sense to attack a target who is under suspicion by several players. I'm not sure what you mean by looking for targets which are more important. I hope that statement was a satire of s0lstice post, because you used his exactly same logic to prove your point, which you didn't because you haven't answered it yet. The argument is basically that its easy to pick out scum motivation with this play. I just realized something. Regarding mouldyjeb, your first and only post about him pre-lynch was, "Anyways, I can't tell if this is scum play or just plain bad town play". In your defense against my recent case against you, you reiterated this saying "I considered that it was just confusing bad town play". But your case against crossfire and golden was that they hadn't "brought anything new to the table", that their opinions were nothing more than an "influence from other players". That basically their play was 'unsatisfactory'. Why then, would you list crossfire and golden as lynch candidates, and not Mouldy who you clearly said and reiterated was playing confusing bad town play? I originally made the point to point out possible scum motivation, but delving further, I find this inconsistency really suspicious. Maybe you can chalk this up to noob town play on your part? You simply forgot that you found Mouldy's play confusing and bad when you were writing your 'unsatisfactory' cases against Crossfire and Golden? (While also forgetting to post your case on me, I might add) | ||
|
suki
Canada1159 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Sorry Suki, but I don't follow your logic. Why would I attack head on an obvious target? Wouldn't it be better to leave it there meanwhile I try to look for other targets which are actually more important? As mafia it makes sense to attack a target who is under suspicion by several players. I'm not sure what you mean by looking for targets which are more important. I hope that statement was a satire of s0lstice post, because you used his exactly same logic to prove your point, which you didn't because you haven't answered it yet. The argument is basically that its easy to pick out scum motivation with this play. I just realized something. Regarding mouldyjeb, your first and only post about him pre-lynch was, "Anyways, I can't tell if this is scum play or just plain bad town play". In your defense against my recent case against you, you reiterated this saying "I considered that it was just confusing bad town play". But your case against crossfire and golden was that they hadn't "brought anything new to the table", that their opinions were nothing more than an "influence from other players". That basically their play was 'unsatisfactory'. Why then, would you list crossfire and golden as lynch candidates, and not Mouldy who you clearly said and reiterated was playing confusing bad town play? I originally made the point to point out possible scum motivation, but delving further, I find this inconsistency really suspicious. Maybe you can chalk this up to noob town play on your part? You simply forgot that you found Mouldy's play confusing and bad when you were writing your 'unsatisfactory' cases against Crossfire and Golden? (While also forgetting to post your case on me, I might add) | ||
|
Miltonkram
United States310 Posts
We all seem pretty set on lynching roflwaffles tomorrow if he doesn't get shot tonight. I am fine with this. We need to move the discussion forward though. I'm looking at the three players whose voting patterns look scummy at the end of D1: Golden, trackd00r, and austinmcc. Golden- He's been playing semi-similarly to his last two games as town. It's difficult because his town play in the past looks scummy. I think I'll read him the way I should have read him last game, he's a townie that's underconfident in his reads and has difficulty expressing his opinions. I reserve the right to change my opinion on him given further evidence/information. austinmcc- He had a read and he stuck with it. There's possible scum motivation behind that. He could've been attempting to get a mislynch on Crossfire and simply stuck with it. However all of his actions included analysis backing them up and, in my eyes, a genuine attempt at logically convincing us of his read. I'm reading that as townie. trackd00r- Of the three his voteswitch looks the scummiest. It reminds me a lot of Xatalos's voteswitch in NMM XV in which he moved his vote "just to make sure the lynch happens." The lynch was a sure thing anyway. Anyone attempting to derail it with a ninja vote was forfeiting his/her life during the D2 lynch cycle. I'm not buying it. To sum up, Golden and austinmcc are off my scumdar at the moment. After roflwaffles dies I'd suggest we all take a good look at trackd00r and possible scummy motivations for his play. I'm leaving for work so I won't be around for a little while. If I'm alive come the day cycle I'll have more time to contribute since I'm finally out of classes for the summer and I only have work competing for my time. GL everybody :D | ||
| ||
