EPTwarbaby (0):
ObviousOne (7): TestSubject893, mocsta, zarepath, Sevryn, Sylencia, warbaby, Sn0_Man
No vote: ObviousOne, Mandalor, cDgCorazon
ObviousOne is currently set to be lynched. 29 hours until the deadline. Voting is mandatory
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXVII - Page 57
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Acrofales
Spain17712 Posts
warbaby (0): ObviousOne (7): TestSubject893, mocsta, zarepath, Sevryn, Sylencia, warbaby, Sn0_Man No vote: ObviousOne, Mandalor, cDgCorazon ObviousOne is currently set to be lynched. 29 hours until the deadline. Voting is mandatory | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
 @OO You may wish to vote for not-getting-warned purposes (future games and all that). @Mandalor I know you have been around since this all came out. If you would like to weigh in on the ObviousOne situation or even acknowledge it that might be a good idea. | ||
|
zarepath
United States1626 Posts
/s | ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
| ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
On February 14 2013 13:34 ObviousOne wrote: I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further. The rebels shall bow before the power of this fully armed and operational battlestation. I love the star wars reference, but the answer is no. Its just not worth the risk for town, plus my gut says you're scum not SK anyway. (This post + Show Spoiler + On February 15 2013 00:33 ObviousOne wrote: I just wanted to kill someone with my newfangled power. As for how to play it after the tracker claim I really just winged it. I'm not the best of liars and didn't read the OP super well replacing in nor did I do any setup speculation based on my own role. Really think it could have gone differently without Test's claim but as they say, "They say it don't be like it is, but it do". On a side note, if OO is SK, this post + Show Spoiler + On February 14 2013 11:50 Mocsta wrote: I have serious problems with this claim as TestSubject pointed out. Then there is: Now, i said @ 10:03 it is SAFE TO SPEAK UP, you are now VT note @ 10:23 ObviousOne says ##Vote: ObviousOne You just fucked up majorly Mr.SK On February 14 2013 13:49 cDgCorazon wrote: Are you fucking kidding me... + Show Spoiler + On February 14 2013 05:33 cDgCorazon wrote: Why I voted for Glurio I've justified this vote in a few posts, but since it's obvious none of you are interested in reading my filter, here I go. First of all, the point has been raised that I didn't follow through on this quote: And this one: Anyone who says this should also have looked at this quote: Take notice of the bolded part. Me making this change to actually take out scum reads D1 would only work if the whole town bought into the change. This did not happen. Everyone continued to try to get lurkers to talk and to make arguments against 5-6 players (which isn't the best idea in the closing hours before the lynch as we needed to consolidate). I pointed this out in a few posts why I did not vote for WB: I felt like Sn0 made great points and the fact that he said he was open to voting for WB later made me feel secure that I wasn't going to lose all of the traction in my case due to new developments happening. That's why I switched onto Glurio. But why Glurio? I made a few explanations: My justification for the vote was there. I put three people who I felt like voting for: Geript Mandalor Glurio I didn't vote for Sylencia because I think WB is scum, why would I vote with him? I didn't vote for Geript because it was obvious he wasn't going to get lynched. I had to choose between Mandalor and Glurio. Glurio's ridiculously stupid town claim put my vote on him and his OMGUS vote stayed me on him. I've stated multiple times that there wasn't much to choose from between the 4 players. Glurio's actions the last hour of play (a majority of his posts) looked the scummiest to me and so I voted for him. I didn't jump on Syl's vote because 2 wasn't enough to lynch Warbaby and (as I've said) it was obvious that no one wanted to lynch him. I didn't want to stay on WB because the vote was 3-2-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 (exaggeration) and I didn't want to add another "1". My plan of "sticking with my guns" was assuming for a vote of 5-3-1 (or something similar). I did not want to waste my vote when it became a lot more valuable. So I committed to someone who was going to get lynched today. If you guys have any questions, feel free to ask. On February 14 2013 13:51 cDgCorazon wrote: Just so I can be the first one to point it out... Corazon still has my eye as the scummiest player (other than OO). When I read through D1 I kept asking myself "how does this turn into a glurio lynch?". The answer was Corazon's vote. It made glurio the first to 3 votes, effectively guarenteeing that either glurio or sevryn would be lynched. I also read the begining of his N1 will as "Look at me, I'm town just like everyone else". The first part is just more long-winded than it needs to be, of course you think you can die tonight if you're town; there's no need to explain that. On February 14 2013 23:14 zarepath wrote: I don't see how my case prevented consolidated votes; the foremost problem was the lack of a clear, compelling case from ANYONE. I can hardly take responsibility for everyone else's lack of strong cases. I can certainly take responsibility for my last-minute Mocsta vote based mostly on the fact that I didn't feel that strongly about any of the other candidates. I gave up the shenanigans because I determined that in the long run it would do more harm than good, and that we needed several hours of clarity in order to put forth a good lynch. Honestly, a clear lynch target didn't come out of my fake case. I'm curious to see how Obvious flips tonight, because he visited Wave, and if he were mafia I think that people who completely ignored my case look scummier (they saw the DT claim and decided to kill him at night, although there's no nominal DT). I was looking for two things -- people who liked my case and would agree with it but not actually do anything, and those who do not really process it or look at it critically. Those would be people who knew that person was town but didn't mind them dying and want to take credit for discussion/participation (ie, scum). This is why Warbaby, Sylencia, and Mandalor have all looked scummy to me. Warbaby immediately latched onto the case with no analysis, it was the first case Syl said anything about at all and he pretty much entirely agreed while adding a minor point to it, and Mandalor did something similar. Mocsta, actually, first said "quite a few good points in that case," calling some educated assumptions and others anti-town, but not explaining which ones. In the end, he does do an analysis of Wave's defense as opposed to Warbaby's defense and concludes that Wave actually looks town in comparison to Warbaby. This is at a point when the fake lynch still hasn't taken off, it's sitting at 2 votes (myself and geript). So this makes your reaction to my fake case less scummy than that of Warbaby, Sylencia, and Mandalor, imo. Sn0 "liked the case" but didn't want to lynch an active player D1, but then really disliked his defense. He wasn't super eager to go after him at first, so I didn't see that as scummy. Corazon liked specific parts of it but cautioned that the same points could be brought up against others. Geript is the one who actually broke down my case the most, and while in the end it led to him voting for Wave, he was obviously thinking critically, which led to my town read on him. So while I could say that as a result of this tactic Warbaby, Sylencia, Mandalor, and Mocsta are three scum and 1 SK, that's obviously going too far. Sometimes town just says they like a case and don't think real hard about it. Perhaps a desperate Warbaby was just happy to see any case that wasn't on him, etc. But I still think that they are strikes against these people. My read on zarepath right now and his D1 anit-case or whatever it was is that zare is just overthinking things for a newbie game. I think he did add to the confusion D1, but I see it as a bad town play, not a scum play. On February 15 2013 01:00 Sn0_Man wrote: This whole SK situation is pretty awkward. Due to the lack of counter Vig claim by now, it is clear that we do have an SK. On the other hand, we can't prove that it is ObviousOne. If he were mafia, then there is NO WAY the real SK would claim. Either way, OO is an anti-town role. However, at this point his actions still make me think it likely that OO is the serial killer not somebody else. If that is true, then town can think about "manipulating" the SK. Because at this point, the SK wants to kill scum anyway (since killing too much town leaves him vulnerable to scum, who are more coordinated than town). So if we let the SK live on the premise that he will shoot scum, then it is good. However, a) I don't think OO knows who scum is any better than anybody else and b) given the roleblock happening, and assuming it is scum, they can roleblock the SK every night and still kill with impunity until they have lynch-control. Because the SK has veteran status (+1 night life), I'm guessing scum want to lynch him not shoot him. So we arrive at a funny point where scum wish very much to lynch the SK rather than shoot him, yet I believe it is also in towns best interest to lynch him (because scum fairly clearly has the tools to shut down the SK, and because I'm not convinced the SK will be able/willing to hit scum anyway). As previously mentioned, I don't really see how town can "Control" the SK since our votes are so awful. I mean, if we all ask the SK to NK a different person, he can do whatever he wants to right? Another point of interest: If you read how C9++ setups are rolled, there can be either 2 OR 3 mafia associated with a 13 player SK game. While I'm aware that this setup is obviously not C9++, I'm assuming the balance would be similar. An interesting note is that I'm guessing the power level of our blue roles is lower than that of those in C9++, which would lead me to believe that a more accurate balance would be 2 scum not 3. This is just speculation. I will point out that if there are only 2 mafia, I expect that they can guess that there is an SK. In that situation, it might be valuable to look and see if anybody "jumped" to the serial killer conclusion (aka already knew). Long post, but TL:DR; My vote stays. I agree completely. Good analysis sn0_man. On February 15 2013 03:20 warbaby wrote: I'm not quite done talking about the TestSubject/ObviousOne situation. Right now I believe TS's claim, but I'm not sure about OO's SK claim. A few scenarios I don't think we can rule out (although it's very tenuous logic): 1) Both TS and OO are scum, TS is bussing OO in a very elaborate way. OO is not SK, so we still have to deal with 2 night kills after OO flips scum. This seems very unlikely, but would be a huge problem for town. 2) TS is Watcher and OO is scum. OO is trying to save his ass, and anybody giving credence to his SK cooperation offer may be scum trying to help him survive longer. This is also a big problem for town because SK and 2 scum are still alive after OO dies. 3) Assume the game balance is currently 6:3:1 (town:scum:sk). If we lynch OO and he flips SK, this leaves the game balance at 6:3 (town:scum). D3 will be 5:3. If we mislynch D4, we'll be at 3:3 and lose. So if we commit to lynching OO as SK, we can't mislynch. Thoughts on other stuff: + Show Spoiler [Some Mocsta Meta] + Mocsta's filter from Normal Mini IV where he was Town. Note that he posts a fairly comprehensive analysis of several players shortly after replacing into that game. He didn't do that in this game until the end of N1. Mocsta's filter from LIX as town. Note the lack of massive wall of text posts and bullshit spewing on D1. Also note the way he's more open to discussing many players, not just the 2-4 players he's willing to lynch. Mocsta's filter from XXXV as scum. Note the proliferation of big posts D1, lots of aggressive attempts to define the town agenda. Very similar to his D1 play in this game, IMO. So based on purely this meta analysis, I believe Mocsta could be scum. Maybe he realized he was giving himself away too much, so now he's cooled his jets a bit, to blend back in with the less aggressive towns? + Show Spoiler [Zarepath] + Zarepath tried a fake case on D1 to see if he could get any information either by pressuring WoS or analyzing the reaction to his case. My reaction to the case was "that's interesting, let's see what WoS says, before I consider voting him". Zarepath implies I got all excited about his case, which I did not. He continues to tunnel people based on a fake case from D1 -- he needs to move past this. + Show Spoiler [Mandalor] + Also tunneling me over a falsification of my reaction to Zarepath's fake case. Looks scummy, continues to lurk and make shitty posts. After OO is dead, I'm much more interested in lynching mandalor at this point than sevryn. As for number 1, if you've got any questions for me, go ahead and ask away. I'm not sure what else to tell you. I think number 2 is a very likely scenario, but also consider that there could be only 2 scum. As for your numbers concerns in 3, if he is scum the numbers are 6:2:1 after lynch, and then 4:2:1 for D3 if SK hits a townie. We mislynch and then we're either at 1:2:1 or 2:1:1 and probably lose both of those too. I'd say no matter what we can't mislynch tomorrow without being in a bad spot. On February 15 2013 04:06 Sn0_Man wrote: The 2 replacements are going to get lynched and NK'ed and we are gonna end up in much the same situation as if they were modkilled rofl. (okay we have more info hopefully). Either way, what now becomes interesting is what happens tomorrow. It will be EITHER 5-3 OR 6-2 depending on setup. However, we can't know which. This is a fascinating situation because I think it may actually call for a no-lynch. Or at least, I don't know yet who I wish to lynch and a No-lynch is remarkably reasonable. In the 5-3 case we go down to 4-3, which is extremely risky but hopefully town should be able to locate the scum in such a situation. In the 6-2 case we go down to 5-2, which isn't even MYLO so town then has a safe mislynch. While town won't know, it doesn't seem that unreasonable. Keep in mind that in the 3-scum case, mislynch tomorrow is GG. Jailer save me~ | ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
On February 14 2013 12:35 Mocsta wrote: hmmm, Corazon hasnt been on my mind to be honest; I think someone made a case (?Geript IIRC) - which I guess is suspect, knowing that that OO killed WoS no matter alignment. I can look into it; but I still want more information from zarepath first. this SK dilemna has clouded the thread somewhat (deserving though albeit) so things like my questions to zarepath are buried. Taking a break regardless | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 14 2013 10:05 Sylencia wrote: I was roleblocked last night. Unfortunate for WoS and geript, but I believe it's more likely to be an SK over Vig here, since I mentioned Vig shooting N1 and was told it was 'too risky' for them to do it by Warbaby. Note that there is only a mafia roleblocker. If sylencia is not lying, there will still be a mafia roleblocker on N2 (unless we lynch the mafia roleblocker today). So there's a good chance if TestSubject is not night killed, he will be role blocked instead. We definitely should not have any more towns claiming blue at this point, in case there is a mafia roleblocker alive N2. And no, because I used the word "blue" in a post does not mean I'm soft claiming blue =_= | ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:09 warbaby wrote: Note that there is only a mafia roleblocker. If sylencia is not lying, there will still be a mafia roleblocker on N2 (unless we lynch the mafia roleblocker today). So there's a good chance if TestSubject is not night killed, he will be role blocked instead. We definitely should not have any more towns claiming blue at this point, in case there is a mafia roleblocker alive N2. And no, because I used the word "blue" in a post does not mean I'm soft claiming blue =_= On January 28 2013 09:38 Acrofales wrote: Jailkeeper Every night you may choose one person to jail. You will protect them from 1 KP and prevent them using any role they might have. Neither you nor your target will be informed of successful saves. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
| ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:05 TestSubject893 wrote: Also this post + Show Spoiler + On February 14 2013 12:35 Mocsta wrote: hmmm, Corazon hasnt been on my mind to be honest; I think someone made a case (?Geript IIRC) - which I guess is suspect, knowing that that OO killed WoS no matter alignment. I can look into it; but I still want more information from zarepath first. this SK dilemna has clouded the thread somewhat (deserving though albeit) so things like my questions to zarepath are buried. Taking a break regardless Since I believe you are Watcher, I am willing to collaborate with you on a Mocsta/Corazon case -- please review the Mocsta filters I linked earlier. But since I believe your claim, we must kill ObviousOne first. If Obvious flips scum, I'm less likely to believe you are actually Watcher. I'm more than happy to entertain the idea that you've fake claimed and are bussing Obvious. If there is a real Watcher, your fake claim might force the real Watcher to counterclaim, and then you can kill the real Watcher. Watcher is a powerful role and it might be worth scum trying to trade a goon for a Watcher by fake claiming. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:12 TestSubject893 wrote: Also we already talked about this. Did you skip part of the thread, warbaby? Yeah, I've been busy with work and I must have glossed over it. I'll review the thread before I post more  | ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:13 warbaby wrote: Since I believe you are Watcher, I am willing to collaborate with you on a Mocsta/Corazon case -- please review the Mocsta filters I linked earlier. But since I believe your claim, we must kill ObviousOne first. If Obvious flips scum, I'm less likely to believe you are actually Watcher. I'm more than happy to entertain the idea that you've fake claimed and are bussing Obvious. If there is a real Watcher, your fake claim might force the real Watcher to counterclaim, and then you can kill the real Watcher. Watcher is a powerful role and it might be worth scum trying to trade a goon for a Watcher by fake claiming. I'm not saying he's SK for sure, so I'm not sure why him flipping scum changing anything. If anything, you should be wary of me now and him flipping SK makes you trust me more, not giving me the benefit of the doubt. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:17 TestSubject893 wrote: I'm not saying he's SK for sure, so I'm not sure why him flipping scum changing anything. If anything, you should be wary of me now and him flipping SK makes you trust me more, not giving me the benefit of the doubt. I am wary of you. That's why I'm trying to figure out if there's a reason you may have fake claimed. The only reason I can come up with is you're bussing OO in a very, very elaborate way. But that's rather insane, because if you fake claim Watcher and bus a scumbuddy in the process, and then the real Watcher claims, scum is now giving away 2 members. And if you fake claimed and attacked a random town, the town wouldn't have freaked out and claimed SK like that, lol. Therefore, the "Keep It Simple, Stupid" paradigm seems to strongly indicate TestSubject is in fact Watcher, and OO is in fact SK. Sorry if I'm repeating stuff, I feel the need to make sure everyone is looking at this from every possible angle, in case we're being epically hoodwinked. | ||
|
zarepath
United States1626 Posts
| ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:24 zarepath wrote: How do you know that it's purposeful? Cuz he keeps doing it. Your random ideas are quite similar as well (ROFL guys WoS made a DT claim...). Both of you are gumming up the thread and making some of the more obvious things really strange. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:24 zarepath wrote: How do you know that it's purposeful? My purpose is to analyze the situation fully. We are in a very interesting situation, and we need to analyze how the game could play out going forward. I've also given some thoughts and put a lot of effort into looking up and linking Mocsta's filters (since he doesn't put them in his profile). I'm not just speculating about setup and possible future scenarios, I'm analyzing everything I can as well as I can. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:24 warbaby wrote: Therefore, the "Keep It Simple, Stupid" paradigm seems to strongly indicate TestSubject is in fact Watcher, and OO is in fact SK. I've repeatedly stated that I'm happy going with the obvious, simple explanation. But we also need to consider the possibilities, and how they will play out going forward. Anyway I've said more than enough about the OO/TestSubject situation, so I'll drop it for now. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
On February 15 2013 06:30 warbaby wrote: I've repeatedly stated that I'm happy going with the obvious, simple explanation. But we also need to consider the possibilities, and how they will play out going forward. Anyway I've said more than enough about the OO/TestSubject situation, so I'll drop it for now. I mean, we just discussed this last page where I went through all the possibilities (more or less) and established that OO is anti-town (probably SK but could be scum) and that TS is Tracker. And you agreed with me. Now you decide to crap up the thread with more speculation and casting doubt on the only confirmed town around, all while making sure to confuse the terms "Watcher" and "Tracker". And then announcing that you believe in "Keep it simple". Yeah... | ||
| ||
