|
On February 20 2013 12:59 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 12:58 geript wrote:On February 20 2013 12:43 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you think I played like an asshole, you need to go look at NMM XXXVI. That was a shitfest.
It gets frustrating when your case does not gain any traction (especially after WB's emotional reaction to it), and then you have to go with a lynch that you really wish you didn't need to make, get called out for it (it was a fair case) multiple times even though you've already answered it, and then have to deal with another guy tunneling you for the same reasons. Perhaps if you guys didn't irritate me with your play so much, I wouldn't snap as easily. Ever thought about that? If your case doesn't gain any traction, then maybe your case is bad. I know that when I saw your initial case I thought it was both hasty and weak at best. I didn't feel bad about the Mocsta case being set aside as I didn't think it was a great case; I kept on wanting to make a better case on him but just couldn't find it. My point was that how you acted in the thread didn't help to either the atmosphere or to your case being taken seriously. Also, if multiple people are re-asking the same question, then perhaps you should go back and look at your answers and see if you actually answered the question. There were a number of times in the game when you deflected answers and questions instead of just being straight up. Are you still waiting for an answer on the Glurio question? All I got from your argument was that I didn't vote for WB and that I voted for Glurio. I'm not trying to be mean.
The very first point was: how does glurio flipping town have any effect on the read? It went seemingly unnoticed by everyone. The next points were that you didn't stay consistent with any of your 'scumtell' preferences or your 'lynch a voice' preference. I wasn't asking, "why did you vote for glurio?" at all but really "Why can we trust anything you say?"
+ Show Spoiler +On February 14 2013 01:19 geript wrote:Case 1: Cora Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 09:23 cDgCorazon wrote:
Lynching Glurio would go a long way in either proving or disproving my case towards WB. His town claim is even stupider than WB's as well. There's not much else to say.
##Vote: Glurio Ok, the only thing that I can think that helps prove Cora's case versus Warbaby is that if Glurio flips scum here, that makes Warbaby scummy as reading him worse than Sylencia or Sevyrn. I find that fair enough. But Cora goes a step further and notes that it also goes a long way to disproving his case versus Warbaby--which to me can only mean that if Glurio flips town then it makes Warbaby look better. But after the flip, Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 10:22 cDgCorazon wrote:
I'm still incensed that Warbaby did not get lynched. If his mistakes had come out later in D1, I'm hoping he would have been lynched.
I've played a bunch of games of Mafia, and I still have yet to get a scum D1. I was hoping that the town would be up for doing something different, but I guess old habits never die. I'm not too happy I had to choose between two people who were basically playing the same game and not getting the support I needed behind my vote for my top scum read. But his previous comment makes no sense in light of still being frustrated about Warbaby not being lynching. Next, Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 05:59 cDgCorazon wrote:
Geript starts off by throwing a ridiculously silly vote out for Warbaby:
The time for being silly was in the pre-game. It's over now. Take your votes seriously. Okay, that's all fine and good, but it makes no sense considering his actions at the end of the day... namely the point here. Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 09:51 cDgCorazon wrote:
Glurio, I've outlined my reasons why I'm not voting for WB, but still think he's scum.
I would love to see WB get lynched today, but I know it's not going to happen. I have to choose between little things like your OMGUS vote and the fact that I'm not going to make the same vote as my top scumread... Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 09:52 Mocsta wrote:
Now it is obvious you aren't reading the thread
cora and I, have been the proponents of warbaby all game.
TOWN LYNCH THIS SCUM MUDAFARKER
There's one vote on Warbaby; 3 votes at this point quite possibly could take it and, if not, there's still time to move to put another reasonable target over the top. So why not move his vote when he can get the person he wants to vote for and expressed such so voraciously. Remember, Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 00:08 cDgCorazon wrote:
I'm sticking to my guns. WB is going to be my vote. He's my scummiest read, and I'm trusting my gut feeling.
and Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 10:22 cDgCorazon wrote:
I'm not too happy I had to choose between two people who were basically playing the same game and not getting the support I needed behind my vote for my top scum read. What's the real point in not staying consistent? Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 14:38 cDgCorazon wrote:
I want to try something different this game. If we keep LAL-ing we're not going to find scum. We haven't found scum D1 in a long time, so perhaps we should take a look at how we evaluate D1 in order to have a better chance of lynching scum (which would put them at a huge disadvantage if we could get one). We're never going to get better at Mafia unless we analyze what we are doing wrong and trying to make an effort to fix it. We can't just keep sitting here and say "Ok, we're gonna LAL. Cross your fingers everyone". I've said this before, but we need to have faith in our ability to find scum. I'm putting my confidence in scum-hunting into this vote. I think you should too (with whoever you think is scum). Additionally, he's been seemingly interested in lynching me; a point that WoS and Mocsta seemed in favor of. The only thing that I get from it is that he doesn't actually want to lynch any of his 'intended' targets now and intends to bring him up again later. On top of that there are other issues: Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 14:12 Sn0_Man wrote:
Warbaby: "All these damn lurkers. I can't even pick which one to lynch"
Cora: "Warbaby you are so indecisive and won't stand on anything. no strong reads. That makes you scummy"
Warbaby: "Fine. I think Sylencia is especially scummy. He is playing like he did last game he was scum"
Cora: "OMG WB so retarded there are lots of other lurkers too. Picking one makes you scummy"
...
I mean, it isn't like your points are wrong, but you are hammering him pretty unnecessarily. Browbeating people doesn't make them play better, and honestly how can you say that Warbaby is legit scum? Yeah he started off really poorly ("I was MVP last game bow to me. I WAS MVP OMG GUYS NOW I"M PLAYING MY META") but still, he has figured out that that was the wrong approach and has (in my eyes) cleared up some of the other issues with his play. I can see him as a townie who just can't find anything substantial to hang a case on. Its a realistic possibility. YES HE COULD BE SCUM TOO but it isn't like he has proved it anywhere that I've seen. I can point out numerous things to argue that Cora's actions haven't been conducive towards creating a positive town atmosphere, but I think this is the most telling for two reasons. One, it isn't me pointing any of this out in this post. Second and more importantly, I'm going to repeat the key quote: Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 14:12 Sn0_Man wrote:
and honestly how can you say that Warbaby is legit scum? This sums up the entire reason Cora's been on this kick. At least I can understand where's he's coming from on his posts toward me, but it's obvious that even Cora doesn't think his case versus Warbaby is that good. He's willing to pull off of Warbaby pre-deadline, then revotes him, then shifts off. He has the chance to form a 3 vote majority, but doesn't. Why? Cora doesn't think he's made his case. He doesn't think that his case against Warbaby is defensible. He doesn't want to take the credit/blame for if/when Warbaby flips town. One last quote: Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 14:25 Sn0_Man wrote:
I'm saying you are pressuring him for something, so when he tries to fix that by doing the opposite you pressure him for that thing instead. It smacks of last game really. I'm not saying he isn't scummy (again, much like last game).
I legitimately am OK with day-1 mislynches. They generate lots of information and are a tool town can use to cull the useless members. Addition by subtraction and all that. Sure, I'd *love* to hit scum day 1 but sometimes I feel like removing active voices from the game just makes it easier for scum to glide like last game where Slay/Glurio posted essentially nothing and got away freely while cases were thrown at everybody who dared open their mouth and actually post a semi-intelligent thought. The fact that our blue roles bailed us out last game doesn't mean that the town atmosphere wasn't very scum-favoured for quite a while. I'm not sure the risk of trying to hit scum by lynching contributors is worth it if the downside is basically silencing town if we are wrong. Establishing the expectation that posting content on a decently regular basis is required to avoid getting lynched goes a long way towards making scum slip.
I mean, you played scum, you know how attractive it must be to just glide if town is actively trying to silence all the loud voices... Sn0_man and Mocsta: Please contrast Cora's play towards the end of 36 with his play now. Please evaluate the case. Mandalor: Please evaluate the case.
|
On February 20 2013 13:05 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 13:02 Mocsta wrote:On February 20 2013 12:54 Aquanim wrote:On February 20 2013 12:49 Mocsta wrote:On February 20 2013 12:38 Aquanim wrote:I'ma quote something I wrote in obs QT.
The thing which has really frusturated me, even just watching this game, is the tendency of certain players to tell everyone else what they can and can't do.
"Make cases on lurkers!"
"Don't make cases on lurkers!"
"Don't make cases on your scumbuddies!"
"Don't make cases on my scumbuddies!"
"You're not allowed to ask questions!"
It obviously hasn't helped them find scum at all and it's made the game really painful to read, let alone play.
Believe it or not; I agree - because it leads to confirmation bias (ironic coming from me) HOWEVER.. I think the above is an unwritten 'law' regardless. Some things can only be achieved effectively when you have sufficient town cred/established innocence. Otherwise it is likely to just fall upon deaf ears; this is human nature - whether tunneled or not. e.g. If a 3-post lurker makes a case on the most active/vocal person; who has been speaking within logic/reason. Most likely the 3-post lurker post will be ignored. Sure, sure... but if you tell the 3-post lurker to shut up and do whatever you tell them when they DO make a contribution, you'll be left with a 4-post lurker for the rest of the game. Which is hardly ideal. I can agree with that point; clearly there are multitudes of cons. But to lambaste corazon solely is unwarranted. - I know that you are generalizing; but the majority of the thread is targeting corazon. Corazon was not the only proponent of "damned if you, damned if you don't" logic in this game. Sn0_Man (i think?) exhibited the same tendencies - and I did call him out on it. (Coulda been TestSubject, cant remember) I called TS out on it.
Its not a competition BUT since you asked 
On February 12 2013 14:41 Mocsta wrote:
Cora
u approach warbaby as damned if u do. Damned if u dont.
On February 16 2013 08:55 cDgCorazon wrote:
Why is it "damned if you do, damned if you don't"? That's the same stuff I did that took all of the momentum out of the WB case... 4 days baby
|
Wow, the post-game has way more activity than D2->N3 lol already Nicely done guys.
|
On February 20 2013 13:16 Mocsta wrote:
Wow, the post-game has way more activity than D2->N3 lol already Nicely done guys.
Now that I know you are scum, that almost sounds like a taunt 
|
On February 20 2013 12:14 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 10:59 TestSubject893 wrote:
Cora: Why were you trying so hard to discredit me? Its not the end of the world to be suspicious, but the more you refused to scumhunt and spend effort hating on me, the more I thought there was no way you were town. Literally, your one contribution to the game was getting the sk in your blue role. The rest of your game was spent tunneling me. I almost asked the host to IP test you and Geript because you two were making the same exact argument, the same one that I had refuted 1000 times and yet you still pushed me on it. When you finally told me that my actions "weren't justifiable", it was ridiculously pissing me off because you kept pushing me on the same thing and gave me no room to scrutinize your argument or even to defend myself from it. In your eyes, I was only scum, and that's a terrible mentality to take as town. You really just claimed tracker and once you had the SK you sat around and threw geript's arguments at me. You refused to even give him credit or admit that they were the exact same arguments that Geript used. I was about to make a case on you because it looked so obvious that scum TS would've killed Geript and made it look like they were killing someone on the right track. The fact that you were confirmed town both nullified the case and made me frustrated that the only thing you decided to do in your power was tunnel me. I'm not going to sugarcoat this: It's shit play. You just basically took the fact that you were 99.9% confirmed town to sit there and make shitty arguments. Had you not claimed, I would've pushed for your lynch.
I'm not going to keep arguing with you over this, but you're still putting words in my mouth that I never said. On top of that you're still accusing me of things that are easily contradicted from reading what I posted. Its clear that you and I just can't seem to communicate with each other with any effectiveness.
|
|
|
On February 20 2013 14:15 TestSubject893 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 12:14 cDgCorazon wrote:On February 20 2013 10:59 TestSubject893 wrote:
Cora: Why were you trying so hard to discredit me? Its not the end of the world to be suspicious, but the more you refused to scumhunt and spend effort hating on me, the more I thought there was no way you were town. Literally, your one contribution to the game was getting the sk in your blue role. The rest of your game was spent tunneling me. I almost asked the host to IP test you and Geript because you two were making the same exact argument, the same one that I had refuted 1000 times and yet you still pushed me on it. When you finally told me that my actions "weren't justifiable", it was ridiculously pissing me off because you kept pushing me on the same thing and gave me no room to scrutinize your argument or even to defend myself from it. In your eyes, I was only scum, and that's a terrible mentality to take as town. You really just claimed tracker and once you had the SK you sat around and threw geript's arguments at me. You refused to even give him credit or admit that they were the exact same arguments that Geript used. I was about to make a case on you because it looked so obvious that scum TS would've killed Geript and made it look like they were killing someone on the right track. The fact that you were confirmed town both nullified the case and made me frustrated that the only thing you decided to do in your power was tunnel me. I'm not going to sugarcoat this: It's shit play. You just basically took the fact that you were 99.9% confirmed town to sit there and make shitty arguments. Had you not claimed, I would've pushed for your lynch. I'm not going to keep arguing with you over this, but you're still putting words in my mouth that I never said. On top of that you're still accusing me of things that are easily contradicted from reading what I posted. Its clear that you and I just can't seem to communicate with each other with any effectiveness.
It's whatever now. It wasn't a main reason why we lost but, imo, it's just a small part the whole shitfest that was our scumhunting skills.
|
No, we lost because I was lazy. Sorry.
|
On February 21 2013 00:38 zarepath wrote:
No, we lost because I was lazy. Sorry.
+10 points for the correct (post-game) attitude.
|
I tried to say this more gently earlier, but I don't think my point got across.
IMO Mocsta didn't win this game, nearly as much as town lost it. For most of D2 onwards the game was 2.5 towns (Corazon, soon-to-be-dead TS, and myself) vs Mocsta, Mocsta's active lurker puppet. Town had already lost at the beginning of D2 when we all agreed to stop hunting scum, and especially N2 and D3 when most of town just AFK'd and we were literally 2:2 with the scum.
If I ever host a mini game, I certainly will take a more proactive stance towards replacing or modkilling people who fail to play the game for extended periods, and even more so as the game progresses. I feel these mid-game mass lurk scenarios can really imbalance the game towards mafia (eg when a majority of the living townies fail to play for full day and night cycles vs a scum who checks in every 10 hours to post what his buddy tells him to).
It's nice that Mocsta was able to control the 2 active towns using his 2 scum accounts (eg, posts 237 and 238 in the scum QT) for the large majority of D3, but IMO this is hardly an accomplishment, or even good scum play in a game with a functional town -- as evidenced by the fact that he lost the last time he tried these tactics.
Mocsta 02-18-2013 03:19 PM ET (US)
/m272 kk. i be asleep by then.. Good luck
/m271 yeah.. WB is gonna be SO SO SO pissed when he reads this lol
so is Sn0 he actually figured everything out LOL (that I was writing ya cases etec haha)
I'm not pissed at Mocsta at all. I do think his attitude is rather loutish and unsporting at times, but nobody's perfect.
I am mad at the town in this game, myself included, however it's just a game and I'll get over it. I just wish I had the guts this game to go after my #1 scum read -- which was Mocsta, as you can see in my filter before D3, when I basically gave up because I realized the rest of town was making zero effort.
|
On February 21 2013 07:28 warbaby wrote:I tried to say this more gently earlier, but I don't think my point got across. IMO Mocsta didn't win this game, nearly as much as town lost it. For most of D2 onwards the game was 2.5 towns (Corazon, soon-to-be-dead TS, and myself) vs Mocsta, Mocsta's active lurker puppet. Town had already lost at the beginning of D2 when we all agreed to stop hunting scum, and especially N2 and D3 when most of town just AFK'd and we were literally 2:2 with the scum. If I ever host a mini game, I certainly will take a more proactive stance towards replacing or modkilling people who fail to play the game for extended periods, and even more so as the game progresses. I feel these mid-game mass lurk scenarios can really imbalance the game towards mafia (eg when a majority of the living townies fail to play for full day and night cycles vs a scum who checks in every 10 hours to post what his buddy tells him to). It's nice that Mocsta was able to control the 2 active towns using his 2 scum accounts (eg, posts 237 and 238 in the scum QT) for the large majority of D3, but IMO this is hardly an accomplishment, or even good scum play in a game with a functional town -- as evidenced by the fact that he lost the last time he tried these tactics. Show nested quote +Mocsta 02-18-2013 03:19 PM ET (US)
/m272 kk. i be asleep by then.. Good luck
/m271 yeah.. WB is gonna be SO SO SO pissed when he reads this lol
so is Sn0 he actually figured everything out LOL (that I was writing ya cases etec haha)
I'm not pissed at Mocsta at all. I do think his attitude is rather loutish and unsporting at times, but nobody's perfect. I am mad at the town in this game, myself included, however it's just a game and I'll get over it. I just wish I had the guts this game to go after my #1 scum read -- which was Mocsta, as you can see in my filter before D3, when I basically gave up because I realized the rest of town was making zero effort.
I really hope that by "the rest of town", you mean everyone besides me and you (and Moc of course but he was scum).
|
No, I included you and myself in that reference. The entire town derped hard N2 and continued derping for the rest of the game.
|
On February 21 2013 07:35 warbaby wrote:
No, I included you and myself in that reference. The entire town derped hard N2 D1 and continued derping for the rest of the game.
|
You cannot just modkill people who don't play the way you want them to play, lol. Finding replacements is not easy, and we were lucky we could even find 2 this game. That leaves modkilling, which, in a mini, is a very draconic measure.
That leaves changing the rules, which can be thought of. However, in the end, lurkers will lurk and it is up to town to pressure them into contributing.
|
On February 21 2013 07:43 Acrofales wrote:
You cannot just modkill people who don't play the way you want them to play, lol. Finding replacements is not easy, and we were lucky we could even find 2 this game. That leaves modkilling, which, in a mini, is a very draconic measure.
That leaves changing the rules, which can be thought of. However, in the end, lurkers will lurk and it is up to town to pressure them into contributing.
Yeah but when people don't look at the game for days at a time they won't see the pressure...
|
Thanks for hosting acro & dandel, the flavor was awesome.
|
The lurking situation is difficult and to me is the same as cheese rush in sc.
Somehow can get u 2 masters/diamond, but u actually need real skill to get to gm.
Its funny was reading some guides last night from 2011. Content was identical to complaints in 2013. Too much lurking, not enough analysis... Fact is, lurking leads to relatively easy mislynches in most games... And why wouldn't lazy players use an easy to work strat? Until players in general lift the skill cap, the lurking philosophy will always be valid option for perhaps a majority of players...sigh
≠========
War baby its OK baby. I don't need you to praise my play. I agree town had this game lost due to inactivity.
Town losing so badly (I.e. flawless victory to scum) had nothing to do with bad town however, and that is the point u r missing.
Zarepath commentary at end of d3 was on the money. And all the facts were there to easily lynch sevryn throughout each cycle. Mandalors contributions were null at best as well. Ohhh and Apparently u were the only guy in game and in OBS qt to be onto me as well....
This all suggests it should have been tighter with at least one to two scum casualties.
Dance around that as much as u want due to town lurking, but the above still holds.
=====>======
As I said. I don't need the praise. I know the things I did worked. I'm actually trying to help u improve our play because this game is
not about what you know... But about what you convince others to believe
I.e. there is many good reasons sylencia was lynched. And most tie into the above.
In all seriousness his defense and no lynch vote were not as scummy as made out to be.
Good luck in future games and hopefully next time we are in the same qt
|
On February 21 2013 08:33 Mocsta wrote:
Town losing so badly (I.e. flawless victory to scum) had nothing to do with bad town however, and that is the point u r missing.
Oh, I see the point you're making and I disagree. You had such an easy time of it (town basically gave up) that I don't see how you can imply you actually played all that well. I give you much more credit for your loss in '35, when you actually played well against serious opponents. I wanted to try to lynch you so bad D3, but who would have gone with me? You and sevryn? Sylencia and Corazon thought I was scum. Everyone else was inactive until the last minute. You literally had a free ride.
I agree about your point that it's like a cheese or rush build, to the extent that neither party really showed any skill worth commenting on -- except in the rare cases of a master cheeser. And I'm explicitly saying you're not at this level yet, although this isn't even a bad thing because cheesy play sucks
I definitely look forward to playing with you again at some point, but next time I hope I get to night kill you on N3 for the easy win 
|
On February 21 2013 10:19 warbaby wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2013 08:33 Mocsta wrote:
Town losing so badly (I.e. flawless victory to scum) had nothing to do with bad town however, and that is the point u r missing.
Oh, I see the point you're making and I disagree. You had such an easy time of it (town basically gave up) that I don't see how you can imply you actually played all that well.
On February 20 2013 05:35 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 05:27 Mocsta wrote:
Gg guys.
Can understand the pain. Hurts when u think one of your own has been actively hindering your thought processes all game. :;
But yes the SK slip was bad in the con text that I knew he wasn't scum...but it was genuinely based on TS being solely focused on SK/vig
Just remember I actively lead town to each lynch.. It was by no means an easy win, I don't think if sno/zare delurked over the weekend I would have been high for suspicion and I still had war baby I could push. QFT. Scum deserved this win regardless of how difficult you perceive the game to have been for them. If you doubt it go take a look at the QT. Observe the amount of effort that was put into the game outside of this thread, and contrast it to the collective effort of town. It was by no means a landslide victory, and scum were being actively pursued most of the game. Skillful manipulation of town sentiment was the key determining factor in this game, starting with the SK debacle.
|
I read the scum QT and I was honestly not that impressed, especially compared to scum QT's I've read where the scumteam did not get a complete free ride from >50% of town.
But that's the point, Mocsta went for a cheesy scum style that relied on most of town failing to do anything for extended periods of time. It didn't work the first time he did it, but it worked this time, probably because this time half of the town decided not to play for nearly half of the game.
It's a valid strategy, and he shows some skill executing it against such incredibly meek opposition.
But to extend the metaphor, I'm still in the position of having been cannon rushed, and when I went to pull my probes and defend (eg, attack Mocsta) the probes just sat around doing nothing or attacking my nexus instead. But hey, at least I tried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
