|
+ Show Spoiler +On September 21 2010 08:56 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 07:33 BrownBear wrote:On September 21 2010 05:59 Bill Murray wrote:
I will also give justification in relation to why we should lynch vs a no lynch day 1. I am not saying "let's not ever no lynch", but that we could use it day 2 if we don't lynch scum day 1.
day 1 lynching scum:
6 v 1
night kill
day 2 5v1 <- possible win here
mislynch + night kill
day 3 3v1 (mylo) <- obvious no lynch unless 100% certainty
night kill
day 4 2v1 (LYLO)
if we DON'T mislynch now, and no lynch later, we can save it for a MyLo potentially.
That's why we need to take a chance on lynching scum today.
this is assuming we fuck up later, but we rocked on day 1. I'm not even really worried about this is Pyrrhuloxia's team #1 flip scum, which I expect them to do based upon SouthRawrEa being a newer player who is a dead giveaway. Though I am more sure of SR based upon his posting, AtA, and my not liking bumatlarge's posting earlier, I feel like they implicate team #1 through SR, and there being a vote on a slot that I find scum is enough for me to want to wagon said slot. Let's get South to post more before we make decisions. Also, we need his team to start posting as well, all of them haven't really been very helpful. As it stands, this is probably our best bet, but we have the time, might as well get the information before deciding for sure. Alright, I am going to be addressing both BM and BB with this, since this seems to be using faulty logic. BM you are arguing that we achieve the same result by no lynching day one or two, this is wrong because on Day 2 we have more information to work with PLUS we have higher percent of just randomly offing a mafia simply because there is one less team in the game. Completely faulty logic. As the game progresses our information increases so saying day 1 = day 2 no lynching is completely wrong, even if it is mathematically the same in regards to WHEN the day ends. Also BM you assume that we are rocking out day 1 and fucking up rest of the time? That's such an unlikely scenario considering as the game progresses information increases. BB inactivity is an easy mafia ploy to pull off day one claiming little to no reason or content to post, so its a given that they SHOULD be posting and if it continues it is very scummy and antitown, in the current set up I am willing to let it slide and not lynch of inactivity Day 1, but come down on it hard Day 2. Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:20 Ace wrote:Also I'm highly supportive of no lynching ONLY if those other conditions are met, because honestly having 1 shot of a No Lynch in a game this small is a very scary thing  And to make things clear for why some people generally want to lynch all the time: Chance of hitting Mafia with a lynch: some %, in this case 25% Chance of hitting Mafia with a No Lynch: 0% This is the justification that some people use in arguing for Lynching every day. Of course I don't usually support this because I'd rather lynch someone I'm highly sure is Scum than rest on a 25% chance of hitting red. Also this 25% doesn't show you that if you miss, the 75% chance of hitting a helpful player can deal more damage than the loss of one team. Losing a leading pro-town player and/or power role can have near-game ending effects. So if we are seriously going to lynch someone today, we better get some good discussion going. Which is why we I think Team 2's (LSB) accusation that Team 1 is certainly scummy needs a stronger argument. I would disagree with the we-should-lynch mentality, simply because no-lynching day 1 actually gives us an extra day. Obviously if we're 100% sure we have a scum we should lynch, but failing that we should no lynch, because then we have an extra day of analysis and a nightkill target. Get the cop (if he exists) to rolecheck team 1 or 2 tonight, and if he finds a scum, have him claim and get the medic (if HE also exists) to protect him. This obviously assumes blue roles exist, but since we have a 3/4 chance that they do, I think it's pretty safe to assume there's at least 1 blue in the game (if we get lucky, we get two!) I do agree with the fact that we need to get good discussion going, and that we need to get LSB to 'splain himself further about his accusation. This entirely reeks of shit to be blunt. It starts with kind of what I was saying but dissolves into the most retarded plan I have ever read. The whole DT CAN CHECK SOMEONE THEN SAY WHAT HE CHECKED AND THEN MEDIC PROTECTS HIM = GG is retarded. You are basing SO MUCH off of the chance its a 1/4 scenario where we lucked out and got both a medic and a DT. When deciding what to do we have to see what would benefit us the MOST in every possible scenario, which I believe is clearly day 1 no lynching (in our current predicament) Obviously if we have a strong suspect we should ALWAYS go for it, but quite simply the reasoning that you are justifying no lynch is nonsensical.
Now, to get some discussion going: What do you guys think of the possibility of having cop (if cop exists) claim day 2? Obviously he shouldnt claim now, because if he exists there's only a 1/3 chance that medic also exists and can protect his ass tonight. However, I'm assuming that since cop is more than 1 person, and this game is mostly talented players, the rolecheck tonight should turn up something good. I think it would absolutely be worth it to trade cop for 1 of the mafia.
Obvious flaw with this: If there's no cop, and mafia fakeclaims, who's gonna counterclaim?
Still, I'd love to hear other peoples' opinion.
DT should only claim if he feels a good enough reason to. Personally I think as soon as the DT confirms someone as red he should claim. Trading mafia for DT in a small game like this seems beneficial. The only reason NOT to do that is if that individual is getting lynched anyway for whatever reason, but if the vote is close I would still claim as a DT and make sure a mafia got killed.
Besides that claiming for the sake of claiming is stupid.
I disagree. If team 2 are mafia, and I get team 2 lynched, it is 100% likely on both days they will flip mafia. I don't look at it "randomly", I look at who is fucking mafia and who isn't fucking mafia. That being said, over the past couple of pages, I have been really happy with SR and Divinek. I was happy with bumatlarge until he started using really odd language.
bumatlarge, explain the ending of your most recent post, as seen here:
Main Points:
1. Laxin medic goes hippy when they make war not love
2. Incog is fear nothing happenstance benefit
3. My vote wit no apologies because apologies get me in trouble apparently
...What?
Basically, I am fine with no lynch at this point. I was pretty sure I had caught scum, but I am admittedly not so sure now.
vote: no lynch
|
USA5860 Posts
I know BM, but do you really have anyone you 100% believe to be mafia at the moment? Information adds up and if we think someone might be mafia today, we will most likely be sure they are tomorrow.
Its why I was arguing information. I honestly just don't see much to go off right now. The Pyrr/LSB shit is a little suspicious but I wouldn't mind seeing what happens during the night to make a decision on how to proceed next.
|
You're acting as if that's not what I decided on my own which I indicated through voting for no lynch. I wish that SR and Divinek, to some extent, hadn't come in and changed my perception.
|
On September 20 2010 16:44 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 16:00 Incognito wrote:On September 20 2010 09:27 Foolishness wrote:On September 20 2010 08:52 Incognito wrote:On September 20 2010 05:53 Foolishness wrote:
3) I've never seen a game where there was a medic/DT list created and the actual medic/DT followed it. This is forum mafia and let's not kid ourselves here, everyone thinks they're the best. I don't find it reasonable at all that the medic actually listen to what the town voted for. Add in the fact that each team has 2/3 players on it, which is going to lead to more disagreements about who to protect.
First of all, this is not true. For example, madnessman (DT) checked Sidesprang day 1, who was on the DT list in Mafia XX. Anyway, the publicity of a medic list is hard for the mafia to ignore, regardless of whether or not medic chooses to follow it. And that's the point. The point of the list is not to result in 100% anythings, and is certainly not to confirm people. The point is merely psychological. Mafia must be preoccupied worrying about things even if town doesn't follow through on it. This has nothing to do with town compliance. Unlike some other recent terribly formed schemes, this one doesn't really rely on town agreeing with it. As for the rest of the post...when did Korynne say medics can protect themselves? I don't remember that being stated anywhere. How do you intend to analyze the mafia without PMs and without people talking about something? Notice how people read my post and decide to respond to only a certain portion of it... I'm still going to revert back to the point of we should be hunting mafia and not worrying about who's going to be on the medic list. If a person/team seems pro-town or more innocent than anyone else, good for them. I'm not going to waste my time thinking about who's more pro-town than who. Everyone here is well versed in mafia, we can all make decisions for ourselves about who's clearly innocent. Not to mention once the numbers start to dwindle we can't afford to make a medic list, especially when we have days of information to analyze people by. But I can understand making a list today, or you doing this to see who votes for whom, as that can be pertinent information in the late game. And still, medics should save themselves anyways. Everyone in this game knows that, so a list doesn't matter to the mafia since they know the medics are saving themselves anyways. I don't think the psychological impacts on the mafia are going to be there because of this fact. I asked Korynne in a PM. It would be helpful for her to say so in the thread and/or update the rules with this fact as well, to avoid confusion in the future. Ah. It seems that we are on the same page now. Anyway, on to real business: [Vote]Team 1We don't have much time till the end of the day, and very few posts to go off, but Team 1 is playing totally out of character to me. First off, LSB. In TL Mafia XXX we saw LSB the planner. Throughout all the discussion from day 1, multiple plans get proposed and shot down. LSB participated in the discussion and tried to come up with a better plan. It turns out that the town used his plan in the end. While it was flawed, this game shows that LSB as town actively contributes to the town discussion and tries to move the game forward/improve the town's situation. In PYP2, LSB didn't take such a pronounced role in the town, but still supported Radfield's plan/stated why it was fairly solid even though there could be some flaws. LSB ended up picking traitor that game, but since he was town before the role picks it cannot be assumed that he was playing the game with a mafia mindset. In this game, LSB's activity is way down. Looking at his first substantial post, he speculates on why South could have been put on divinek/bum's team. The second post is more telling. First sentence he immediately casts doubt upon my proposal. Really, that first sentence isn't a problem with my plan, as I have addressed the non-existence of a DT/medic already. The sentence in itself doesn't necessarily say anything about alignment. Once I point out this erroneous logic however, he says he really did read my post and switches what he claims is the "main problem". This time, instead of pointing to the non-existence of DT/medic, he says blue actions will be wasted and that DT/medic won't follow the plan so its all circular logic and won't work. A valid criticism, but different from the previous criticism. In both of these posts, what does LSB propose to fix these? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. In both posts, he criticizes the plan and expresses his "concern" for the flaws. This is definitely not typical LSB behavior. LSB asks if I have an example game where this idea has been used. Relevance? I think there's none. LSB is just trying to stir the pot here. Another interesting post is when LSB states the two accusations that have been made and then says he doesn't like either of them. Its a neutral statement that says nothing. Very uncharacteristic for someone who often gives input and opinion when innocent. Next is Pyrr. Pyrr echoes Foolishness. Doesn't tell us much. Second post is neutral/ambiguous and implies a threat against BM/Ace but otherwise says nothing. Stating that he has no suspicions is somewhat suspicious to me though. Pyrr is normally active, aggressive, and accusatory. Here, he just sits on the fence. Claiming he is trying to encourage certain behavior, when really there is little point in encouraging that at this point. Pyrr's post is meaningless and looks like fluff post. Isn't really solid evidence either way, but this behavior doesn't make me want to think Pyrr is innocent AT ALL. Given a strong case against LSB and some unconvincing behavior from Pyrr, I believe Team 1 is today's best choice for lynch. Unless you (Foolishness) or someone else comes up with a better target. Given your attention to behavior analysis, if I could have found something, I'm sure you could have too. Looking forward to see what you think of Team 1, or any other teams. Main Points: 1) LSB is suspicious, acting out of character, and is being wishy washy. 2) Pyrr has done nothing spectacularly pro-town. 3) Team 1 is the most scummy team right now. 4) Vote for Team 1 for lynch LSB's plan was based on coordinating blues - we might not have a single blue this game. We can't really confirm anything because for the few roles we have... we don't even know how they work. LSB had a plan in one game - a plan that was started by Bill Murray and then edited by Pandain and then picked up by LSB. So LSB is suspicious because he hasn't posted a plan yet? I suppose the Medic plan would be an okay idea if it got us talking, but another problem I have is that I don't know who I would vote for other than LSB and I. If the medic can prot themselves, that would be their best option. The deterrence factor could be a good reason for it so we might as well do it. My post wasn't meaningless - you asked me why I made it and I told you. Not only has BM been quieter than usual, so has Ace, who is certainly more known for plans than LSB. He usually doesn't show up and ask for an explanation unless he is subbing in and he usually tries to browbeat the town into doing something when town (same with BM who doesn't mind making crazy plans and FoSing anyone who criticizes them). Also, I don't know BC to usually use this "RVS" tactic - it is usually a Bill Murray move. Any bandwagoning in a game this small is dangerous so if their vote sits tight under bad circumstances I will be onto them.
Its not just his actions, its his mindset. If you read over LSB's posts, all his posts are neutral and he never takes a stand. Its not easy for anyone to pinpoint what LSB supports because he doesn't support anything. And that's the point. Mafia don't want to take an active stance because then they have to defend it. Mafia would like to sit on the fence so that nobody can hold them responsible for their actions while subtly working to subvert town goals. Town has nothing to lose by taking sides. Now looking at LSB's past games, he takes sides as town. He is decisive and actively contributes to the town while openly attempting to convince others of his view. On the other hand, this game LSB does not take sides. He is not decisive, and only points out flaws. Is he attempting to convince others to follow his point of view? No, he doesn't have one. LSB is not interested in the town's welfare. He wants to create the appearance of pro-town activity by pointing out the flaws in my plan while using neutral language and doing nothing to help town.
This post attempts to derail the focus on LSB's scumminess by setting up straw men and refusing to directly refute my accusations. LSB says he didn't make a plan because the game setup is not exploitable. While this may be true, this does not address the motives behind LSB's actions. LSB is refuting the planning aspect of his play. I am attacking the motives behind his play, namely that as town he takes stances and tries to work for the town's benefit.
The erroneous logic is in the "oh no what happens if a DT/medic doesn't exist" question, not the no lynch issue. Stop trying to appear all innocent and beating around the bush.
Since when have I proposed fixes for broken plans? There are no fixes, we junk the plan and move on.
If there are no fixes, you junk the plan an move on. Valid. But you didn't move on. You junked the plan, and promptly disappeared. The most plausible reason why you did that is because you are mafia.
To say those posts were serious accusations that deserved input would be flat out lies
Again, I'm not saying your statement was a lie. I'm saying that the motiviations for your post are shaky. Everyone reading this post should be looking at the subjective question of why LSB is posting the way he is. Reading LSB's posts at face value isn't going to get us anywhere. Its not a matter of lie or truth. Its a matter of what seems realistic given the mindset of the poster.
LSB's recent "analysis" on Team 2 cannot be considered a natural pro-town sign since he only posted it under pressure from 3 people. So don't use this as an excuse for why you're town. It won't work.
At this point, LSB is certainly scum in my book. I'll be voting for him and I suggest everyone else does too. We need this lynch for the information. At this many people are voting no-lynch, which is just terrible for information gathering purposes.
By the way, Team 7 is also mafia. We will lynch them tomorrow after we lynch Team 1 today.
Main Points:
1) LSB's defense is ineffective because superficially addresses his "normal" behavior.
2) LSB's current "abnormal" behavior is just icing on the cake. The real point is the mindset behind this behavior switch.
3) Lynch Team 1 today
|
Why did I ever suggest that Korynne allow a no-lynch...I'm so sad now.
|
Ah damn I was somewhat supporting your post until you said We need this lynch for information.
What information are we getting from a lynch besides his alignment flip?
LSB is still the scummiest person so far in my book though.
|
At this point we have enough information to lynch. I believe that all the mafia are out there in the open.
Foolishness needs to analyze the information we have now instead of rotting away while insisting we need more time to get information before lynch. There is plenty information out there. Anyone claiming otherwise is just too lazy to read the information here. There is no reason to wait.
|
USA5860 Posts
On September 21 2010 17:35 Bill Murray wrote:
You're acting as if that's not what I decided on my own which I indicated through voting for no lynch. I wish that SR and Divinek, to some extent, hadn't come in and changed my perception.
I was just saying how I acknowledged what you were saying and I had thought of it.
|
On September 21 2010 17:40 Ace wrote:
Ah damn I was somewhat supporting your post until you said We need this lynch for information.
What information are we getting from a lynch besides his alignment flip?
LSB is still the scummiest person so far in my book though.
We get tons of information besides his flip. I'm saying we need this lynch to force people to act. At this point, the mounds of no-lynch running around isn't forcing the mafia to do anything it doesn't want to do. And you know that.
|
Ok, it's good to clarify, a lot of my problems in the past from mafia have been when I've simply been misunderstood. Let us not slip into idle one lined banter which scum can easily hide amongst.
|
On September 21 2010 17:38 Incognito wrote:
Why did I ever suggest that Korynne allow a no-lynch...I'm so sad now.
You're stupid. xP
Side note, it makes sense for 1 no-lynch I think, balanced out the parity for town's worst case scenario.
|
On September 21 2010 17:48 Korynne wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 17:38 Incognito wrote:
Why did I ever suggest that Korynne allow a no-lynch...I'm so sad now. You're stupid. xP Side note, it makes sense for 1 no-lynch I think, balanced out the parity for town's worst case scenario.
It makes more sense for infinite no lynches I think. No real logical reason why town shouldn't be able to control its own KP weapon?
|
USA5860 Posts
Incog, I agree with a LOT of what you said, but we only get alignment right now, I don't really see a reason to push off our NL, your evidence looks good and one more day of it surely wouldn't hurt. Its not like this would affect KP atm anyway. Although looking more closely at pyrrhuloxia as well should give us a good idea. The good thing about this set up is having to analyze two people to determine someones alignment gives a more definitive answer, since its harder to just chalk two people acting dumb up to coincidence.
|
USA5860 Posts
On September 21 2010 17:45 Incognito wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 17:40 Ace wrote:
Ah damn I was somewhat supporting your post until you said We need this lynch for information.
What information are we getting from a lynch besides his alignment flip?
LSB is still the scummiest person so far in my book though. We get tons of information besides his flip. I'm saying we need this lynch to force people to act. At this point, the mounds of no-lynch running around isn't forcing the mafia to do anything it doesn't want to do. And you know that.
Just wondering what information you think we get? I mean if we go to lynch them right now we can see who opposes the lynch and try to crucify them for it if pyrr/LSB flip red however that can lead us down a bad path, especially if the lynch isn't fully supported. I personally have no problem with the lynch, but I don't really see the incentive to rush it, if anything waiting on the lynch would give us more information then executing it now in my opinion. The other thing I am kind of wary about is how late this is coming, I am not sure if we could give a whole bunch of evidence and convince the entire town to lynch them, the issue is I think some people might not see the information in time which leaves a bad taste, especially if they flip green. I think you are innocent judging by the posting I have seen and I don't wanna see people rallying behind some stupid idea like INCOGNITO PUSHED A LYNCH ON A GREEN, AS OPPOSED TO NO LYNCH and get head the next day for it. It offsets the town a lot.
On September 21 2010 17:46 Bill Murray wrote:
Ok, it's good to clarify, a lot of my problems in the past from mafia have been when I've simply been misunderstood. Let us not slip into idle one lined banter which scum can easily hide amongst.
I agree, I didn't feel like leaving any hostility there because chaos helps the mafia. Remember that game where there was literally like 20 pages of Ace and L just yelling at each other? If I remember right, neither of them ended up being mafia.
|
USA5860 Posts
EBWOP: Can someone tell me how long is left in the day, or can Korynne post when the day ends? I am curious. There can't be more then like 12 hours left.
To avoid an unnecessary triple post, the day should end in around 16 hours, which is 11pm EST.
|
On September 21 2010 17:51 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
Incog, I agree with a LOT of what you said, but we only get alignment right now, I don't really see a reason to push off our NL, your evidence looks good and one more day of it surely wouldn't hurt. Its not like this would affect KP atm anyway. Although looking more closely at pyrrhuloxia as well should give us a good idea. The good thing about this set up is having to analyze two people to determine someones alignment gives a more definitive answer, since its harder to just chalk two people acting dumb up to coincidence.
What other information do you think will come about if we had an extra 72 hours? Team 1 is already under pressure. Any "helpful" analysis on their part must be taken with a grain of salt. Without the pressure of being offed today, mafia have extra time to come up with a strategy. If we give them 72 extra hours to respond, they just pretend to be inactive and stretch out their defense over 72 hours, giving them more room to proofread for blatant mistakes. On the other hand, if we give them only 18 hours to respond, they will have to respond in a shorter amount of time. This builds up the pressure. Its hard for me to see how we gain anything by waiting. The only reason why I could think of waiting is that you aren't convinced by my post and need time to think. Which is valid. But I also think my case is very strong at this point. Pressuring Team 1 to respond right away will give them a sense of urgency which is likely to yield more slipups than giving them more time.
|
Oh BTW if we have a DT I suggest that they rolecheck Team 7.
|
Incog and RoL, please don't edit. I know it's just outside of game stuff, but if you really need to, get someone outside the game to post those, or seriously just quote yourself and double post.
The day ends in 16 hours, I'm apparently crazy.
|
Are we allowed to edit our posts or not? This is getting out of hand.
|
EBWOP: Guys, quit taking advantage of the mod.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
