EPTGolden Sun: The Lost Age Mafia Djinn Edition - Page 45
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
geript
10024 Posts
| ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On May 21 2014 12:30 Holyflare wrote: hapa can you elaborate on your cephiro thing now? Very similar thoughts to what you said. Cephrio just started a very awkward conversation with bunnies, and is reading far too much into seemingly reasonable and mundane replies. | ||
|
mattisfoolish
United States76 Posts
Now I started reading the thread just now and realized that there was a big block in my head. There are a lot of posts and meh, I could read them in order but what fun would that be? I believe there's some popular expression about only have one life or something and innovation won't come unless you're willing to step away from the norm. As a result, I'm just going to passively read the thread whenever I find time (i.e. never) and I'll just read filters. Here's how this is going to work. 1) If you are a reputable townie* and are getting a bad feeling about another player X** type in the thread: ##Foolishness Read: Person X 2) I will then commence reading that person's filter and analyzing them. This may include but is not limited to: interactions with other players in the game, town/mafia oriented posts, comparison to previous games, and final thoughts about the player. 3) I will return to the thread and post my findings along with any other pertinent information. Notes: *Only reputable town's will have their filter requests fulfilled. Examples of non-reputable towns are: players who I've filter read and am suspicious of, players who are excessively flaming/cursing or not being friendly, and BloodyC0bbler. **If Person X's name equals marvellosity, HolyFlare or WaveOfShadow your request will be ignored. Of course, I'll be watching the thread to see if anyone requests me to read a filter. Please be understanding if I take a while especially if there are multiple requests. I also reserve the right to be as detailed or broad in my analysis as I want. | ||
|
Cavalinho
United States946 Posts
On May 21 2014 12:27 Holyflare wrote: go to filter and the post you want click the # in top right of post and then just copy the url Awesome. Guess WoS doesn't need to do it then. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/449782-yuma-mini-mafia?page=16#306 Here you go WoS, my meta read from last game. As for this one, there are a bunch of factions and scum can scumhunt so HF's meta probably won't be super useful until later on down the line. He made good, clean posts this game thus far so he's probably town, but if town takes control and he starts trying to pocket people's votes then we lynch him. It's a really roundabout way of calling him town but I have no real experience with multifaction games. | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
| ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
On May 21 2014 11:55 Cephiro wrote: How is not considering the possibility of someone voting on you being scum completely wild? She literally ignores the possibility of me being scum voting on her, as proved by her own thought process. They were my first posts in the game and I instantly pressured/attacked her. And she didn't even think of the possibility of me being scum. Like literally, all her responses screamed that I was town to her. There is no way she could be that sure I am town by just exchanging a post or two with her by that stage. Care to elaborate on your reasoning why it's a completely wild assumption and debunks the whole case? Her posts are logically consistent and represent a reasonable approach to the game particularly for a new player - not wanting to call people scum before you are confident or have had enough time to make an argument that is worth consideration by others. Her tone is generally good and her posting is on the productive side as far as the thread goes. However Your point that she does not consider that you are scum voting for her is significant. She immediately talks to you as if she thinks you are town which is not the typical reaction to being voted for. The interpreting your vote as a mafia read could just be how ninja uses language but it also suggests guilt. And that is my opinion on you case. Pls shoot people that post like austin's hula stuff, it's tempting to go with gut scum reads but town kp is our only way to effectively deal with that crap and in large games the tone of the thread and proportion of inactives and shitposters has a ridiculous impact. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 21 2014 12:30 Tehpoofter wrote: I don't think that yellow is oats. I also just like interacting with oats and think I can read him alright.@bunnies READ YELLOW is that how he plays as town? anyone else that saw that newbie game he was just in. Was a he someone who kinda threw out nudges of someone being mafia/scummy? He felt more laid back to me but I didn't read the whole thread. It seems super scummy to me. Austin: You had the ABBA like read on Oats last game I'm getting a tingly sensation about Yellow can you comment on that? As far as yellow, I kinda of liked the initial response to BH. Wasn't "RNG dum", but was like..."okay, so you have this idea, but why not do another thing instead?" It's not the laziest response, it's not calling him scum, it's not really doing anything other than what seems like trying to figure something out. Bueno. Lighthearted all caps sarcasm = lynch post. HOWEVER HE DIDN'T WANT TO LYNCH OTHER PEOPLE WHO USED SARCASM. VERY CONTRADICTORY. MZ OR SOMEONE EVEN POSTED A THING WITH /S AND HE DIDN'T WANT TO LYNCH THEM. Anyway, that's fine. Actually read mtam's post. I gave people townpoints for this. He answered my question fine. Knew what ceph was saying, knows why he thinks it's invalid, it's a good putting pieces together thing about something in thread. Again, putting pieces together good. Overall, fine with yellow. It's not an oats-read, and I hate the way I read people as town in multifaction games, but I'm town on him for now. | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
On May 21 2014 12:32 mattisfoolish wrote: Mattchew is essentially out of commission for the next week. Apparently he fails really hard at scheduling his life. So for all intensive purposes this is Foolishness playing. Now I started reading the thread just now and realized that there was a big block in my head. There are a lot of posts and meh, I could read them in order but what fun would that be? I believe there's some popular expression about only have one life or something and innovation won't come unless you're willing to step away from the norm. As a result, I'm just going to passively read the thread whenever I find time (i.e. never) and I'll just read filters. Here's how this is going to work. 1) If you are a reputable townie* and are getting a bad feeling about another player X** type in the thread: ##Foolishness Read: Person X 2) I will then commence reading that person's filter and analyzing them. This may include but is not limited to: interactions with other players in the game, town/mafia oriented posts, comparison to previous games, and final thoughts about the player. 3) I will return to the thread and post my findings along with any other pertinent information. Notes: *Only reputable town's will have their filter requests fulfilled. Examples of non-reputable towns are: players who I've filter read and am suspicious of, players who are excessively flaming/cursing or not being friendly, and BloodyC0bbler. **If Person X's name equals marvellosity, HolyFlare or WaveOfShadow your request will be ignored. Of course, I'll be watching the thread to see if anyone requests me to read a filter. Please be understanding if I take a while especially if there are multiple requests. I also reserve the right to be as detailed or broad in my analysis as I want. This interests me immensely. I can't tell if this style of yours interests me more or why I am included along with HF and marv in terms of players you refuse to analyse. Are these people unreadable for you? Skilled in any particular way (lol)? | ||
|
geript
10024 Posts
| ||
|
Steveling
Greece10806 Posts
I'm a pretty good scum, though does that count foolishness? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
Tehpoofter
United States2911 Posts
Town Hero: Tehpoofter Townies: Hapa, BlueyD, HF, Steve, Bunnies, Geript Scum: Yellow, BKQ, Valenius, layabout People Geript Should shoot: Slam People Geript Shouldn't shoot: MarvelloCity 3rd Parties: Crazy MAn who wins by screaming and passing out the most fliers to his RNG party: Blazinghand Lazy People that need to do more: Marv, Koshi + Show Spoiler + Also Austin if there is an ABBA cult I would like to submit an application regardless of how its aligned I will fight for ABBA. | ||
|
Holyflare
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I kinda of liked the initial response to BH. Wasn't "RNG dum", but was like..."okay, so you have this idea, but why not do another thing instead?" It's not the laziest response, it's not calling him scum, it's not really doing anything other than what seems like trying to figure something out. Bueno. are you ignoring the fact that he 180's later and joins BH's rng wagon? | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
On May 21 2014 12:33 Cavalinho wrote: Awesome. Guess WoS doesn't need to do it then. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/449782-yuma-mini-mafia?page=16#306 Here you go WoS, my meta read from last game. As for this one, there are a bunch of factions and scum can scumhunt so HF's meta probably won't be super useful until later on down the line. He made good, clean posts this game thus far so he's probably town, but if town takes control and he starts trying to pocket people's votes then we lynch him. It's a really roundabout way of calling him town but I have no real experience with multifaction games. Wow there may actually be something to this...now I'm kind of annoyed it was brought up so early because I know I've played games with HF where he was scum and didn't do this until later in the game. | ||
|
mtamburini
Canada506 Posts
On May 21 2014 11:45 Cephiro wrote: First up, the thoughts behind my questioning. While initially reading the thread I noticed 27ninja is a very cooperative person. Which is why I started the whole exchange with her. She takes part in the discussion a lot and actively, aiming to contribute (or look like contributing.) Her intention is to try and play as honestly as possible. Which again, is not a bad thing from a town perspective, but if you roll scum and try to play with the least amount of lies possible, it will be hard. The point of interest here is her admitting her annoyance to being called out on her play. She encourages others to share the reasons on hers, yet withholds her own for "reasons", are excused as: While I definitely agree with the logic behind it, her reasoning doesn't seem sincere. It's as if she wants to put content into the thread, but avoid (for now), making any decisions that may come to haunt her play later. Specifically: She doesn't want to be read as scum. Obviously, no town player does, but her play is (even self-admittingly) aimed at not being read as scum. Even if you are read as scum as a townie, it doesn't mean you can't manage to prove your town-ness. Surely, it's an uphill battle, but for someone putting as much effort as her in the game seems unlikely to be _that_ scared of being a misread as a town. Rather, I feel the fear comes from other players correctly reading her as scum. Analysis break: My questions, the reasons behind it, and my conclusions of her replies. The first exchange. My question here aims at finding the natural level of her thought process. It may not be the best comparison, but think about chess. What I'm aiming to find here is whether she thinks about: 1) The current move 2) The reasons behind the current move 3) The follow-up to the current move Or a multitude of the above. As you can see, she instantly jumps into an assumption that I vote her because I read her as mafia. She doesn't take her thought process further (into different possibilities), into questions such as: "Would he vote for me for a reason other than suspecting me as mafia?" Instead, she takes it for granted that I suspect her to be mafia. It fits well with her wanting to play as honestly as possible, trying not to doubt the claims of others. This I feel is a trait belonging to the person. So here I establish the fact that she doesn't think things ahead. Her thought process is not zero though, but considering the current step with the information given to her comes more naturally. (There are people who naturally start thinking multiple steps ahead.) Here is my followup. My question is intentionally aimed to hint at a possibility of thinking outside the box. As I came into the conclusion that she doesn't naturally by instinct start thinking things too many steps ahead, I wanted to see the reaction that would come after hinted towards doing such. Her response is quite interesting. She does correctly analyze on scenario, that is, if I didn't have a proper read and wanted to gain more information on her. There are many others she does not think about however. What I'm most interested in, is this crucial miss: She does not at all consider a possibility where I am scum. Ding ding, alarm bells anyone? Note how she points out that if I don't really consider her as mafia, I shouldn't be voting for her. Yet at the end of her post, she asks why I'm reading her as mafia. This means that she thinks (knows?) of me being a town player suspecting her, rather than any other possibility. Why could I not be a scum player trying to start a wagon on her? She doesn't even go through this option at all, even after being hinted to think outside the box. It's as if she knows I'm town. That's not possible unless she's scum. On to my third question: This question was mainly to confirm. I was fairly certain that she does not intentionally downplay her ability to mislead her opponent. Combined with the logical deduction of her naturally not thinking ahead, and with her honest tendency to answer questions, I have no reason to believe she'd be lying about this one either. It would be possible to downplay or not reveal your scumread to try and trap a person into a situation which essentially confirms them as scum to other players, or many shenanigans of the kind. Her response however is strictly related to her own confidence about her read. If she's sure about her read, she'll go for it (no downplaying). If she's unsure, she'll work to be able to trust her read enough to convince others. (Upping her own play.) With this I come into the conclusion that she is not downplaying her abilities when responding to others, or in any questions that she replied to me. This is exactly why I consider the 2nd question where she does NOT EVEN CONSIDER ME AS POSSIBLE SCUM extremely alarming. Also take in consideration how interested in she is in the reasons why I suspect her to be mafia. She doesn't just ignore and wait for me to actually provide something, but she actively asks for it again and again. If not combined with the above, I would see this as a townie trait, but I feel she is trying to get to know her mistakes/flaws in early play so she doesn't make the same mistakes later on. TLDR: 1) Is afraid of being seen as scum 2) Extremely co-operative due to not wanting to be looked upon badly, refer to point 1. 3) Ignores the possibility of the player questioning her being scum. 4) When suspected, wants to know the flaws in her play to not repeat the mistake later Like literally, for one moment she doesn't think I could be scum trying to push her for mislynch. 27ninjabunnies is mafia, and needs to be lynched. My vote stays where it is. Opinions? Goddamn bunnies back to scummy now, I need you to pretend your formaled and defend yourself. He brings up all the points I wanted to kill yellow in other game. Do I need to claim Bird Jesus again and say im going to shoot you and see if I get roleblocked? | ||
|
27ninjabunnies
United States2486 Posts
In our previous game, yell0w contradicted himself, much like he did this game, and I called him out for it. I pushed on him, which is how I got my read on him. Yell0w seems to be joking a bit towards the beginning, such as his preferring a "alive cat to a dead cat" and pretty relaxed. I haven't played a game with him as mafia, but it seems like a town play to me. I do agree that his switching to go with BH on the odin lynch is a bit weird, especially since he disagreed with it earlier, but it may just be him reassessing the game there. He also hasn't posted much for me to get more of a read, but I'm leaning more town here. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On May 21 2014 12:38 Holyflare wrote: Yes. I don't care about the 180 at all.austin dafuk man are you ignoring the fact that he 180's later and joins BH's rng wagon? I care that the initial post looks like he's thinking about something and trying to work through it. Unless you can point out a scummy reason to do a 180 on RNG at that time. Cuz I don't see why pulling a 180 there is GOOD for anything except making yourself look slightly funky. | ||
|
mtamburini
Canada506 Posts
Dislike this ALOT. You cannot be taught to be town you just are. Mafia has to try and act town. | ||
|
Cephiro
Finland1934 Posts
On May 21 2014 12:17 27ninjabunnies wrote: I figured the calling me mafia was where you were going with this post. I was interested in seeing what you posted, and I have to say, I'm quite impressed. However, there are many things you are wrong within this point. Allow me to point them out. I'll also give some feedback here and there, so if my explanations seems a bit out of order, I apologize. 1) Yes, I am a cooperative person. I'm not going to be completely BM towards a person or fight over things within this forum. I don't find that productive in finding mafia. What is odd to me is why you would start an exchange with me based on me being "cooperative". 1) So this is clearly a correct assumption made by me. I started an exchange with you because since I had my suspicions on you, I knew I would be able to interact with you in the way I wanted to. If you suddenly turned extremely uncooperative to my questions, it would make you look really bad in contrast to your earlier play, and you have pointed out you don't want to be read as scum very clearly. Basically, you were forced by yourself to answer my questions, so I decided to make the best out of it. 2) They say honesty is the best policy. I agree, being scum it is hard to be completely honest, actually impossible! I wasn't admitting annoyance to being called out on a play, I said I was annoyed by his play, specifically him claiming I was avoiding what he was asking, which in my opinion, I don't think I was avoiding. I ended up giing my reasons and reads anyway, so people bringing this up makes little sense to me. 2) It is actually not true, you never followed up with your reasons for Steveling/WaveOfShadow/Thepoofter. You quickly changed to agree that Steve is likely town on based what others posted. Nothing on Wave/Thepoofter, so this is a flat-out lie. You didn't give your reasons for thinking they are scum yet. I would be fine if you were "still looking for more to be certain", but claiming you gave reasons when you didn't? That's a flat-out lie, and you're scum for it. Still makes no sense why people bring it up? 3) No one wants to be read as scum. If I'm read as town, that's less likely there will be a mislynch on me, and actual mafia could be found. If there are any suspicions on me because of a certain read I made that made no sense, then that takes town off the agenda of finding mafia and having to discern whether or not I am town. 3) Certainly true. However, is it more important to a) Find scum or b) Not like like scum. You show great interest in contributing and trying to find scum when you really haven't done anything to show us that's the case, whereas you constantly go on about how you don't want to be read as scum. Certainly, defending yourself is important, but it won't be enough alone to just try and fend off pressure from yourself. Find a more preferable lynch target if you don't want to be on the block. 4) Just because I didn't post so in my posts, doesn't mean I am not thinking ahead. It was obvious from your initial post on me that you were reading me as scum. I wanted your reasons as to why. You hop in this thread with many other questioning going on, and single me out, and I figured you must have a reason to do so, thinking I am mafia. I did consider that you didn't have agood read from me from what I had posted within the forum in previous pages, but usually when someone votes you, you think, oh this person must think I'm mafia. What is he seeing that I nor others are seeing? You asked specifically 2 questions. And I answered those two questions. Just because I didn't answer beyond "the box" of what you wanted me to does not mean I am not thinking ahead or means I am mafia. I just refused to give you further information until you gave me information, which you did not until your huge post. 4) My last question already proved my point of you not being a player that downplays themselves. If you had thought as far ahead, you would've shown that in your posts. We already talked about you being honest. Also fits within your nature to not downplay yourself -> show what your honestly capable of. Again, I don't think you are scum for not thinking ahead. It was just a step I needed to figure so I could analyse your following responses based on if you are able to do that or not. All the questions support each other to the extent I have no reason to believe that you downplayed and were actually thinking far ahead of the scope of the situation we're currently in. So again, I do not think you're mafia for not thinking ahead, I think you are mafia for answering the way you did. (As pointed out in my case). 5) I don't question whether you are scum here yet because of these reasons: if you were scum, why would you single me out out of many other people who could lead harder on you or your partners? I admit I'm not leading town in any direction, nor pushing an agenda. I speak out where I feel is necessary and give reads on which I think is necessary. It's also only early in day 1, and if I have a better scum read, I could push elsewhere, as I stated in my response to you. I also specifically said I didn't know what your alignment was. Your alignment is yet to be determined. 5) You can say things all you want, but all your posts clearly pointed towards reading me as town. As you already said yourself, I have very little reason to do this to you if I was scum. So basically what you're saying is that you agree that the play I did is very likely to come from town? (Which wouldn't necessarily be the case.) 6) I am a good mafia player because I am confident in my reads. Because I push an agenda when I feel I have one. If I don't have a good read on anyone or any certainty, why would I push on a read and mislead town? Its counterproductive. I also asked for your read on me again and again, because you kept saying you would provide it, but then continue to ask me questions. I honestly don't care why you read me as scum. I care why you think I am scum. If you have good reads behind it, then so be it. But you don't. You are basing your entire read on our interactions, and not my interactions, reads, and plays I have made in previous pages of this forum. 6) Pushing on a read even if it's an uncertain one doesn't mean it's misleading town. I could be wrong on you, but I believe I am not. In that small chance of you being town, there is a lot of productive discussion to come from my push on you, do you not agree? I based most of my read on our interactions since that is exactly where I aimed to gain the affirmative thoughts of whether you are mafia or not. Turns out that they point towards you being one. If I thought you were town after those, there wouldn't be a case like this on you right now. Your previous reads and plays are basically nonexistant, like I proved in my point 2. You still haven't followed up on the reads you were asked to tell about, yet claim you have. This is a lie, and does not fit with your honest playstyle. You're a caught scum. My replies in bolded. Read, she's still scum. Flat out lying in some of her statements, and some of her points just agree with mine, rather than contradicting them. | ||
| ||
