|
USA5860 Posts
alright to finish that thought, antitown shit follow by terrible idea for medic claiming for no reason.
LSB seems to get himself standing on two feet again after that shit cools down and he discusses medic statistics of saves and self protection.
Then he starts again being against the meeple lynch which is just weird.
On September 24 2010 07:50 LSB wrote:I am against the Meeple lynch Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 16:24 Incognito wrote:On September 23 2010 10:59 meeple wrote:
odd choice for mafia... people seem to have a grudge against them
Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town. Wow. This coming from you is hillarious. As if you're trying to downplay the fact that Ace was suspicious of you. Its not an "odd" choice for you to kill the team that agreed with the scumminess of YOUR team and Team 1. I'm 100% positive you didn't miss the part where Ace accused you. Notice how meeple says "Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town", while doing nothing to analyze them. Analyzing a dead person's post is easy. Meeple, however, doesn't want to do this because he has no interest in exposing the fact that Ace agreed with my reads. Meeple is not walking the talk. This should raise red flags for everyone. I don’t believe you gave him that much time. Meeple did do analysis of Ace, after your post. He possibly could be busy and needed to do something else. So I dug through the posts where Ace mentioned Yellowink and Meeple And I found a post + Show Spoiler + On September 22 2010 09:33 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 06:43 YellowInk wrote:
At this point I believe that the mafia are among teams 1, 3, 5, and 6. I do not know precisely who, but at this stage of the day, hanging team 1 still makes sense. Ace, I was getting the same feeling initially about the bandwagoning onto team 1, but then I looked carefully at who was and wasn't on board with the team 1 vote and realized that just about everyone who was on the team 1 vote I already had a feeling of being pro town. The most suspect people have pushed the no lynch.
The recent argument made against no lynch was under the assumption of no medic saves. Consider what occurs if you have 1 medic save: we gain an entire day! In a typical game, a single medic save does not gain us a day. Using the no lynch here would lose us the day that a medic save could gain us.
No lynch is for endgame situations only. Hang team 1. No it isn't. This post is blatantly misleading. No lynching is for when you can't conclude someone is scummy enough to lynch. Like I've said, the town does not have to lynch every day. So most of the time it's in your best bet to No lynch unless you are in a situation where there is clearly going to be a benefit. Being in the end game does not matter for a No lynch, all it means is that you're decision has a more immediate consequence but it's also easier. Towards the end of the game it is actually much rarer to have a No lynch. Remember what I said? It's in your best bet to avoid a lynch when you aren't sure someone is scum or there is no clear benefit. At the end of the game you have so much information between votes, player interaction, the knowledge of what roles have been revealed and your own ties to players that it's really not often you'll be No lynching then. In a typical game a single medic save gaining you a day is false. Saving a player and them possibly being confirmed innocent is a pretty big deal don't you think? It may not directly add more days to your win condition but adding more players to the likely pro-town pool, that TWO players know about is pretty heartbreaking for scum once it's revealed. Using a No Lynch now would actually be the best bet...if this were 10 hours ago and this was a normal setup with infinite No Lynches. Clearly though, LSB has been posting god knows what and well I'm a little intrigued by this post of yours. I thought you were a good player so how could you actually believe this nonsense you just posted? The only thing worrying me is that Incognito seems to have pegged both your teams also which shows his scumdar is operating on great batteries like mine, or he's just good at picking off easy townies. So I'm going to ask you this one time: Let's assume you were a detective. What team would you investigate tonight and why? I don’t see an accusation of scummyness from Ace, all I see is say ridiculing YellowInk for being a “bad player” Ace said he was unsure on whether or not Incog was right. Ace didn’t agree with Incog yet. Show nested quote +
Killing Ace/BM is convenient if Team 1 and Team 7 are mafia. Mafia killing Ace/BM is equal to killing a less vocal and aggressive version of me/Infundibulum. It eliminates the only Team who agreed with me that Team 1 and 7 are scum right now. Which means I lose a supporter and need to work even harder to try to accomplish my goals. I think everyone would agree that I would be more likely to receive a medic prot than Ace. I'm guessing mafia took this into consideration and decided it was easier and safer to effectively cripple my steamrolling machine by sniping the quieter supporter. Now I have to find yet another vote to help me get them lynched. Real convenient, huh?
Team 7 is mafia. Analysis coming up in a few.
Again, you assume that Ace agreed with you. What Ace said is that either 1) Incog is good at finding mafia. Or 2) Incog is mafia and good at killing townies, by painting them as scum from a 'slipup' Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 18:52 Incognito wrote:A few posts back, I noted Pyrr's defense of YellowInk: On September 22 2010 05:52 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On September 22 2010 05:39 Incognito wrote:This post is interesting. YI wants to avoid a situation where town is divided with votes? That's interesting, since usually town gains more information from close votes...note how he splits his vote from his own team mate. I think he is worried because if the votes are split between two teams it is likely the mafia will be able to save the guilty one, if one of the two are guilty. My original post states that YellowInk's behavior is "interesting". My comment also implies that this "interesting" behavior is suspicious. In this post, Pyrr is being apologetic about YellowInk's behavior and is trying to justify it. Why is this weird? First of all, Pyrr hasn't really been directly defending people other than himself. In this post, he defends YellowInk directly, theorizing why YI would behave in such a way. Pyrr hasn't been defending anyone directly (although he has been saying we should give people time to respond before accusing aggressively (which in essence is its own type of defense)), yet pops up out of the blue to defend YellowInk. The most plausible reason why Pyrr did this is because YI is his other mafia teammate. Furthermore, in my original post, I merely stated that YI's behavior was "interesting". But Pyrr feels a need to defend YI preemptively. The are other possible reasons why Pyrr did this (like, he wanted to clarify a possibility), but these possibilities are improbable. Pyrr hasn't really been the clarifying type this game. He has had a far greater role raising questions about other teams: namely, Teams 2 and 6, and all of a sudden he pops up to clarify what someone was thinking? This is an out of place defense and certainly warrants heavy suspicion. Finally, the circumstances under which Pyrr defended YellowInk are out of place. Look at the posts of Pyrr and YellowInk and their relation to one another. On page 17, YellowInk says that he agrees with what people (presumably me?) had to say about Team 1's scumminess. He follows that with a vote on Team 1. He never changes that vote. Two pages later is Pyrr's post defending YellowInk. Pyrr is defending YellowInk even though YellowInk is voting for him. Now just think about that for a moment. Why would you defend someone who has voted for you? It doesn't make sense to defend someone who voted for you if you were a townie. The only reason why you would do that is if BOTH PLAYERS ARE MAFIA. Pyrr's defense of YellowInk confirms my suspicion that YellowInk didn't really want to lynch Pyrr and used meeple's no-lynch to effectively neutralize his vote. Pyrr wants to support YellowInk but overlooks the fact that YellowInk voted for him. Oh well, I'm happy with two easy mafia. [Vote]Team 7Main Point: 1) Pyrr slipped up. He defended someone out of the blue when there was no direct attack involved. He defended someone who voted for him. 2) Team 1 is mafia3) Team 7 is mafia Um that’s not a defense. That’s a possible explanation. Pyrr explained it quite well + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2010 20:19 Divinek wrote:
totally buy the argument. Especially for team 7, what else is there to say other than it makes overwhelming sense. There's all kind of WIFOM shit people can throw into this but that slip up is pretty LOL. Cause i know i hate people that vote for me, or even attack me ie LSB, and so on so it's quite easy reasoning to follow
baa baaa
##vote team 7
Bandwagoning?
YI/Meeple has been playing mafia and there is really no incentive for these guys to be protected. It just seems painfully obvious mafia helping painfully obvious mafia. But I digress!
Summary
LSB acting shady not really contributing gets EXTREMELY defensive about an accusation then counter accuses someone, doesn't get behind the lynch of a very likely mafia candidate. Partner also acts suspicious (will get into in a minute)
Verdict=mafia
Pyrrhuloxia
He only ever starts contributing when LSB is accused in that hardcore post by infundi, before that its complete fluff and zero content
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.
This is the first. An attempt at redirection towards team 6 when defending LSB, not horrendous but it adds up with LSB's shit.
On September 22 2010 01:56 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
Eesh. Looks like Penalty Mafia all over again. The last few games I started out placing blame all over the place and I was way off. This game I try to be more careful and be more accurate about how suspicious something is and I am "just pointing the finger" and "not taking a stance on anything." Whatever dudes.
As for my partner, he was wrong to get locked in to team 2 when he thought bumatlarge was acting pro-town. I don't know why that mistake is so suspicious but the world will never make sense to me. Going forward you should all try to avoid this mistake and go after teams that are acting in concerted ways (3,4,5,6,8).
vote no lynch
A little more redirection and admitting some wrongdoing, I have played with pyrr and I know hes good and I feel like he was forced to defend LSB here and draw himself out.
On September 22 2010 05:47 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 04:50 Infundibulum wrote:
If you guys think it's wise to use our no lynch today then I'm fine with backing off. Unless i'm mistaken, the math works out the same either way as long as we use it, right? @ Foolishness, YellowInk posted an argument of substantial length detailing why he thinks we should save No Lynch for later (it's in a spoiler in his post in case you missed it).
To team 1's credit, Pyrr is not playing the way he usually does when he is mafia - it's mostly LSB that send off alarms for me. Still I think it's weird that LSB goes "we're certain team 2 is mafia" and then Pyrr denies it. Well I agreed with him that Divinek was acting suspiciously but I didn't realize he was on team 2 when we discussed it. And I said he was acting similarly to SR; so that is how LSB got to his inaccurate statement, as far I can tell.
Same as above. Feels like a bailout.
On September 22 2010 05:52 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 05:39 Incognito wrote:This post is interesting. YI wants to avoid a situation where town is divided with votes? That's interesting, since usually town gains more information from close votes...note how he splits his vote from his own team mate. I think he is worried because if the votes are split between two teams it is likely the mafia will be able to save the guilty one, if one of the two are guilty.
I dunno how I missed this post above (referring to YI) but it was a terrible tell too, more anti town shit.
On September 22 2010 06:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
RoL has been a little more active than he usually is. He's usually hella inactive green or red. But BC is surely too quiet for my liking. Where are you James?
I thought they were maybe acting similar and blue but actually RoL is way more active than normal and BC is more inactive than normal which I don't know what to think about. RVS by BC makes me suspicious, especially when he puts it on a good player and criticizes lynching inactives while doing it. Of course that teams votes have been changed to meeple / yellowink, I believe, who Incog is now criticizing. Not sure what to think on m/yi yet, other than Incog's post did not convince me.
This shit didn't sit well at all with me. Like I said, I have played with pyrr and been in pyrr's games. He knows I am extremely active, barring like 1 where I had gotten kicked out of my house and with no internet modkilled. Just a load of BS. BC plays pretty erratically though, so he was on. It depends on his mood and whats going on in life.
Later on pyrr defends YI a little bit. Not as openly as LSB did though.
Summary Pyrr tries to just get by day one with fluff but gets dragged out because of the stuff with LSB they both act really suspicious and play it off later on. Defends YI.
Verdict=Mafia
I really think these two are mafia. I will say that the lack of resistance for LSB/Pyrr was really surprising but if you look meeple/YI weren't both aboard it which makes sense. On top of that this lynch they are defending each other. For this reason I would choose team 7 SLIGHTLY over team 1. Both behaviors were really scum however the voting feels a lot more right with this lynch.
Now I mentioned having a very minor next suspect which is Team 3 which is foolishness/Rastaban. The only thing is how inactive and Rastaban is and it seemed like he was lurking the thread for a little while there and tried avoiding really posting.
Its just a minor suspicion because its really small staff from Rastaban, add that in with the fact me and foolishness have basically posted the same shit all game and I am not convinced. Although foolishness is really good as mafia so its why it gets my attention a little more than it would for other people.
Now with that haven taken way too fucking long I am off to sleep.
|
USA5860 Posts
Sorry about the edits, it was only formatting issues for readability. I didn't change content or anything.
|
That's all really misleading... I have stated my own thoughts on a number of occasions... if we are mafia, why would we go after a team that has previously had no real suspicions put upon them by anyone else... instead of simply following the crowd and gone after someone with the heat on. There's no reason for me to make enemies, townie or red...
When I get time, and if it isn't done already by my partner YellowInk, I'll get into that more comprehensive analysis of team 6.
Simple. You think Team 6 is the most scummy team that isn't you or your scumbuddy. You have every incentive as mafia to go after a new team (Team 6), especially since the other option (Team 1) isn't so palatable from your point of view. Team 6 is pretty inactive, and you're going to have to save yourself somehow, so no reason not to vote Team 6. There are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of Team 6. The reasons just arent as good as the reasons for you or Team 1.
I'll agree that a lot of Foolishness's "analysis" is sketchy and is a stretch. But there are some good points there. To all those saying Meeple never takes any stands, check out ALL of meeple's posts in TL Mafia XXVII. Not just the first 10 or so. He definitely contributes his thoughts about lynch targets/other characters. Here's a few excerpts:
On June 15 2010 11:23 meeple wrote:
I trust Ludwig with almost no doubts... much more than moocow... and I trust them both more than some other people.
There's a slight chance of there being mafia amongst our dts... but like radfield said, its questionable whether this is a good time to start offing claimed blues.
flamewheel's willingness to undergo a check makes me hesitate to push a check on him... but it doesn't put him in the clear obviously. I would try for a redtooth alignment check tonight... or Chez...
On June 15 2010 11:33 meeple wrote:
Ludwig has been active... but he's just active at a different time... totally offset from North American time.
I never said you were suspicious... I just said that I trust Ludwig... mostly because if he was mafia there's no way he would've stepped in before. His trusting of L isn't suspicious, tons of people followed L's plan...
His reactions when Chez was shooting people was genuine I felt... he was just confused, as was I, at what the hell was going on.
I have no reason to distrust you, and for sure you're low on the list of suspects...
On June 15 2010 02:00 meeple wrote:
I'm down with RoL more than Vivi57... there's little/no case to be made for/against Vivi since he's so inactive.
On June 15 2010 02:06 meeple wrote:
Having said that and then going through his posts... RoL is pretty damn inactive too...
I'll have to think more about which one is more deserving
On June 13 2010 04:07 meeple wrote:
I don't agree with lynching Chez on the grounds of inactivity though. If I have some time to go through posts I'll come up with more suspects.
On June 17 2010 08:26 meeple wrote:
Ludwig is most definitely the roleblocker... that's the only way he can hold up his claims to be a dt...
Also... Radfield is the last mafia I beleive... too many close inexplicable ties with Ludwig then last minute trying to push away.
I trusted Ludwig because I was being impulsive about his defense of me early on and took a risk (and a rather stupid one)... but when I didn't die I thought that it kinda proved that he wasn't red... since who wouldn't take a lovely medic dangled in front of you like that. I didn't really trust Radfield... was kinda forced into it by Ludwig...
Anyways... tommorow's lynch of radfield should clinch the game for us...
Meeple states his trust, states who to rolecheck, agrees/disagrees on lynching certain targets, and gives more input on the situation with the last quote. Notice how he consistently doesn't like lynching on inactivity. Notice how that contrasts with this game, where he wants to lynch BC based on uselessness/inactivity...
Lastly,
On June 16 2010 11:28 meeple wrote:Alright so... first things first... I'm the medic... The mafia knows it by know and so should the town. Obviously I claimed watcher because there was a shitload of greens and it was simply more believable. I had been in PM contact with Ludwig a little and later claimed medic to him since he had defended me in the thread... through him I also had PM contact with Radfield, who also knew me as the medic (through Ludwig... not my decision to tell him) Now... not too long after I claimed to be watcher and had "found" the medic, Foolishness PMs me wondering why I hadn't contacted him yet and claims watcher and tells me (to prove that he's a watcher) that tree.hugger also visited Ludwig last night. Of course, I couldn't have known that, but regardless I was just so fucking elated that we had a medic/watcher pair, since now we can coordinate. Things proceed, now with me thinking I had a solid base with a watcher by my side... until I get a PM from L, asking me if Foolishness is the medic... I respond somewhat vaguely, but give him a strong indication that Foolishness is indeed the medic... knowing that if they went after him I could always protect him. Then L flips Godfather and the shit hits the fan and I knew that L would've told the rest of the reds to go after Foolishness. So tonight we schemed... I protected Foolishness, and he watched himself to see who hit him. AND IT WAS MOTHER FUCKING + Show Spoiler +The same friggin dude that I had supported and backed like a moron... Anyways... we lynch him today and we're down to 1 red...
meeple was involved in a blue roles scheme. I know we don't have as complex blue roles this game, but meeple was certainly contributing in the other game. On the other hand, meeple has zero useful contributions this game. And no thoughts on lynch targets either. Except for team 6.
|
Pandain/BrownBear have been completely inactive today. What is up?
Also RoL please vote!
|
USA5860 Posts
shit rofl
[b]Vote: Team 7, Meeple/YellowInk.
Good thing I checked back.
|
USA5860 Posts
To avoid further editing T_T
Vote: Team 7, Meeple/YellowInk
|
On September 24 2010 18:50 Incognito wrote:Show nested quote +That's all really misleading... I have stated my own thoughts on a number of occasions... if we are mafia, why would we go after a team that has previously had no real suspicions put upon them by anyone else... instead of simply following the crowd and gone after someone with the heat on. There's no reason for me to make enemies, townie or red...
When I get time, and if it isn't done already by my partner YellowInk, I'll get into that more comprehensive analysis of team 6. Simple. You think Team 6 is the most scummy team that isn't you or your scumbuddy. You have every incentive as mafia to go after a new team (Team 6), especially since the other option (Team 1) isn't so palatable from your point of view. Team 6 is pretty inactive, and you're going to have to save yourself somehow, so no reason not to vote Team 6. There are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of Team 6. The reasons just arent as good as the reasons for you or Team 1. I'll agree that a lot of Foolishness's "analysis" is sketchy and is a stretch. But there are some good points there. To all those saying Meeple never takes any stands, check out ALL of meeple's posts in TL Mafia XXVII. Not just the first 10 or so. He definitely contributes his thoughts about lynch targets/other characters. Here's a few excerpts: Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 11:23 meeple wrote:
I trust Ludwig with almost no doubts... much more than moocow... and I trust them both more than some other people.
There's a slight chance of there being mafia amongst our dts... but like radfield said, its questionable whether this is a good time to start offing claimed blues.
flamewheel's willingness to undergo a check makes me hesitate to push a check on him... but it doesn't put him in the clear obviously. I would try for a redtooth alignment check tonight... or Chez... Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 11:33 meeple wrote:
Ludwig has been active... but he's just active at a different time... totally offset from North American time.
I never said you were suspicious... I just said that I trust Ludwig... mostly because if he was mafia there's no way he would've stepped in before. His trusting of L isn't suspicious, tons of people followed L's plan...
His reactions when Chez was shooting people was genuine I felt... he was just confused, as was I, at what the hell was going on.
I have no reason to distrust you, and for sure you're low on the list of suspects... Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 02:00 meeple wrote:
I'm down with RoL more than Vivi57... there's little/no case to be made for/against Vivi since he's so inactive. Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 02:06 meeple wrote:
Having said that and then going through his posts... RoL is pretty damn inactive too...
I'll have to think more about which one is more deserving Show nested quote +On June 13 2010 04:07 meeple wrote:
I don't agree with lynching Chez on the grounds of inactivity though. If I have some time to go through posts I'll come up with more suspects. Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 08:26 meeple wrote:
Ludwig is most definitely the roleblocker... that's the only way he can hold up his claims to be a dt...
Also... Radfield is the last mafia I beleive... too many close inexplicable ties with Ludwig then last minute trying to push away.
I trusted Ludwig because I was being impulsive about his defense of me early on and took a risk (and a rather stupid one)... but when I didn't die I thought that it kinda proved that he wasn't red... since who wouldn't take a lovely medic dangled in front of you like that. I didn't really trust Radfield... was kinda forced into it by Ludwig...
Anyways... tommorow's lynch of radfield should clinch the game for us... Meeple states his trust, states who to rolecheck, agrees/disagrees on lynching certain targets, and gives more input on the situation with the last quote. Notice how he consistently doesn't like lynching on inactivity. Notice how that contrasts with this game, where he wants to lynch BC based on uselessness/inactivity... Lastly, Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 11:28 meeple wrote:Alright so... first things first... I'm the medic... The mafia knows it by know and so should the town. Obviously I claimed watcher because there was a shitload of greens and it was simply more believable. I had been in PM contact with Ludwig a little and later claimed medic to him since he had defended me in the thread... through him I also had PM contact with Radfield, who also knew me as the medic (through Ludwig... not my decision to tell him) Now... not too long after I claimed to be watcher and had "found" the medic, Foolishness PMs me wondering why I hadn't contacted him yet and claims watcher and tells me (to prove that he's a watcher) that tree.hugger also visited Ludwig last night. Of course, I couldn't have known that, but regardless I was just so fucking elated that we had a medic/watcher pair, since now we can coordinate. Things proceed, now with me thinking I had a solid base with a watcher by my side... until I get a PM from L, asking me if Foolishness is the medic... I respond somewhat vaguely, but give him a strong indication that Foolishness is indeed the medic... knowing that if they went after him I could always protect him. Then L flips Godfather and the shit hits the fan and I knew that L would've told the rest of the reds to go after Foolishness. So tonight we schemed... I protected Foolishness, and he watched himself to see who hit him. AND IT WAS MOTHER FUCKING + Show Spoiler +The same friggin dude that I had supported and backed like a moron... Anyways... we lynch him today and we're down to 1 red... meeple was involved in a blue roles scheme. I know we don't have as complex blue roles this game, but meeple was certainly contributing in the other game. On the other hand, meeple has zero useful contributions this game. And no thoughts on lynch targets either. Except for team 6.
That was an awesome game... but taken out of context you can't say that I need to act the same every game. Behavioral analysis can only go so far... I was a power role then, and as such I acted differently from when I'm a townie, as in this game.
I haven't taken stands because as far as I'm concerned there's no stands to take... I haven't been really confident yet... although one is starting to develop. You seem to have developed quite the following... when you cast a vote you have a couple buddies that nod along and sheep with you.
Are you confident enough in your analysis to say that you should be next when we flip green?
|
Yellowink
Initially in this game, Yellowink was concentrating quite heavily upon having Bill Murray prove himself to the town as he was of the accord that we should consider doing a policy lynch. This in general was a horrible idea for this game as we simply did NOT have the townies to be wasting our available lynches. I'm not quite sure if he was aware of the type of game it was at this point in time but regardless of any possible ulterior motives, this is a good chunk of his whopping total of 11 posts.
On September 21 2010 06:41 YellowInk wrote:
So there has been some good discussion occurring. As is typical, there are plenty of flaws in arguments. The key here is to figure out where people are trying to be productive (granted, a difficult task on day 1) and where people are trying to look like they're being productive or otherwise staying out of the line of fire.
I am satisfied with Incognito's further discussions.
I would like to hear more from BloodyC0bbler and RebirthOfLeGenD. BC has not had much to say, and I don't feel RoL has contributed very effectively.
What I find wrong with this post is that he avoids pointing out these so-called flaws and then assumes a position of authority where he is "SATISIFED" with Incognito and wants more posts from some other players. That's just the way it reads at least. The only problem I find as is common in scum behaviour is that they don't quite practice what they preach.
On September 21 2010 13:39 YellowInk wrote:
Alright. I'm pretty convinced. The short version: No lynch is bad. This team's posting has been either unproductive or supporting anti-town ideals.
##Vote: Team 6, BloodyC0bbler and RebirthOfLeGenD
Current thoughts on blues: If I were a medic, I'd probably cover either myself, team 4, or team 8. Not sure who I'd poke at if I were a DT yet.
Immediately in this game, he attempts a lynch at Team 6, perhaps hoping for a bandwagon. It's quite annoying however how he gives us a super short version of his reason labelled "The short version" and avoids giving a long version and begins using flowery, unexplained terms such as town ideals to make himself look pro-town.
On September 21 2010 22:44 YellowInk wrote:So I am presented here with a problem. I still find it more likely that Team 6 is mafia than Team 1, though I agree with what most people have had to say about Team 1. After my last post, it was my intention to go into greater detail about why I believe what I do about Team 6 after a few hours and got some reactions. However, it is far more important that a lynch occurs that I would be 'ok' with than a no lynch than to potentially divide the town among targets and allow a no lynch to occur. Therefore: ##Unvote Team 6
##Vote Team 1, LSB and PyrrhuloxiaWith respect to RebirthOfLeGenD's amazing rebuttal, here is why no lynch is bad. + Show Spoiler +As has been previously stated, it is critical to scum hunt, not protect innocents. On this premise alone, the default correct action is to hang. We cannot expect to make any significant informational gains from day 1 to day 2. The only hard and useful information we could gain is if a blue takes a successful action and conveys this information to the town in a convincing fashion. This assumes both that the blue exists and that the blue takes the successful action. Otherwise, the only knowledge we even get is who it is that the mafia choose to kill. This information is rarely useful in actually tracking down mafia since they will often simply choose a target because it is most ripe - one which they think is relatively unlikely to hang and relatively unlikely to be protected by a medic.
Consider as an alternative how useful it might be if we could extend day 1. Post analysis is the only way to track down scum in the beginning. The truth is that this carries on to day 2 in almost every game. As in almost any game of mafia, the town does not have the luxury of waiting until they feel super secure that team X is mafia. Unfortunately we do not have the option of extending day 1 to draw out more information, but we cannot choose to give up a lynch.
The purpose of a no lynch is for specific endgame situations. These have been outlined previously, but I will include them here for completeness. Suppose you have 3 town, 1 mafia, and no blues. Choosing no lynch here does not really hurt the town since if the town mislynches, the town loses, but on the no lynch you will be left with 2 town and 1 mafia. Now add in to the mix that the town has a blue among their 3. In this case the no lynch is very town positive. There's a chance the medic could successfully protect or the DT could find the scum. This argument can be extended out to similar endgame situations a day earlier as well.
Consider also that medic saves sometimes buy us an extra day. If we use a no lynch early (giving up a kill to the mafia 'for free'), this is like the reverse of a medic save. If we end up with an even number in the endgame because we used a no lynch in the early game, we have gained nothing from our use of no lynch.
Day 1 no lynch is very bad.
Okay there are two ways of looking at this post: 1) He is making a bandwagon. 2) He is being consistant with his Day 1 lynch argument. The only thing that really makes option one a more likely candidate is the way he says he agrees with people about team 1 but avoids actually saying anything other than the fact that he finds them suspicious.
Finally, he comes back in day 2 and starts voting team 6 again with no explanations and tells us to look to them. Yes, I've been reading there posts but there are other suspicious people as well.
After going through this, I'm unsure of team 7's actual alignment because all YellowInk has been posting about is that Team 6 is mafia and stuff about the fact we should lynch on day 1. The thing that concerns me though is that he never really explains why team 6 is mafia. He just displays a constant routine of voting for them early in the day and giving a 1 line explanation to explain why.
So obvious mafia or unhelpful townie? Either way, I'm going to humour him and look into Team 6 deeply (I got sidetracked a whole bunch today and yesterday) and see just what he's accusing them of.
|
|
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 24 2010 18:53 Incognito wrote:
Pandain/BrownBear have been completely inactive today. What is up?
Also RoL please vote!
So has your partner, my partner, and BC (I guess not 'completely inactive' but you get the point).
|
On September 24 2010 18:53 Incognito wrote:
Pandain/BrownBear have been completely inactive today. What is up?
Also RoL please vote!
Sorry, my job randomly has me working from 8 PM to 8 AM. Will post later today.
|
@Korynne Bill Murray and Ace are not permitted to vote (they are dead) and should not be on the non voter list.
|
|
|
USA5860 Posts
On September 24 2010 21:13 SouthRawrea wrote:YellowinkInitially in this game, Yellowink was concentrating quite heavily upon having Bill Murray prove himself to the town as he was of the accord that we should consider doing a policy lynch. This in general was a horrible idea for this game as we simply did NOT have the townies to be wasting our available lynches. I'm not quite sure if he was aware of the type of game it was at this point in time but regardless of any possible ulterior motives, this is a good chunk of his whopping total of 11 posts. Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:41 YellowInk wrote:
So there has been some good discussion occurring. As is typical, there are plenty of flaws in arguments. The key here is to figure out where people are trying to be productive (granted, a difficult task on day 1) and where people are trying to look like they're being productive or otherwise staying out of the line of fire.
I am satisfied with Incognito's further discussions.
I would like to hear more from BloodyC0bbler and RebirthOfLeGenD. BC has not had much to say, and I don't feel RoL has contributed very effectively. What I find wrong with this post is that he avoids pointing out these so-called flaws and then assumes a position of authority where he is "SATISIFED" with Incognito and wants more posts from some other players. That's just the way it reads at least. The only problem I find as is common in scum behaviour is that they don't quite practice what they preach. Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 13:39 YellowInk wrote:
Alright. I'm pretty convinced. The short version: No lynch is bad. This team's posting has been either unproductive or supporting anti-town ideals.
##Vote: Team 6, BloodyC0bbler and RebirthOfLeGenD
Current thoughts on blues: If I were a medic, I'd probably cover either myself, team 4, or team 8. Not sure who I'd poke at if I were a DT yet. Immediately in this game, he attempts a lynch at Team 6, perhaps hoping for a bandwagon. It's quite annoying however how he gives us a super short version of his reason labelled "The short version" and avoids giving a long version and begins using flowery, unexplained terms such as town ideals to make himself look pro-town. Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 22:44 YellowInk wrote:So I am presented here with a problem. I still find it more likely that Team 6 is mafia than Team 1, though I agree with what most people have had to say about Team 1. After my last post, it was my intention to go into greater detail about why I believe what I do about Team 6 after a few hours and got some reactions. However, it is far more important that a lynch occurs that I would be 'ok' with than a no lynch than to potentially divide the town among targets and allow a no lynch to occur. Therefore: ##Unvote Team 6
##Vote Team 1, LSB and PyrrhuloxiaWith respect to RebirthOfLeGenD's amazing rebuttal, here is why no lynch is bad. + Show Spoiler +As has been previously stated, it is critical to scum hunt, not protect innocents. On this premise alone, the default correct action is to hang. We cannot expect to make any significant informational gains from day 1 to day 2. The only hard and useful information we could gain is if a blue takes a successful action and conveys this information to the town in a convincing fashion. This assumes both that the blue exists and that the blue takes the successful action. Otherwise, the only knowledge we even get is who it is that the mafia choose to kill. This information is rarely useful in actually tracking down mafia since they will often simply choose a target because it is most ripe - one which they think is relatively unlikely to hang and relatively unlikely to be protected by a medic.
Consider as an alternative how useful it might be if we could extend day 1. Post analysis is the only way to track down scum in the beginning. The truth is that this carries on to day 2 in almost every game. As in almost any game of mafia, the town does not have the luxury of waiting until they feel super secure that team X is mafia. Unfortunately we do not have the option of extending day 1 to draw out more information, but we cannot choose to give up a lynch.
The purpose of a no lynch is for specific endgame situations. These have been outlined previously, but I will include them here for completeness. Suppose you have 3 town, 1 mafia, and no blues. Choosing no lynch here does not really hurt the town since if the town mislynches, the town loses, but on the no lynch you will be left with 2 town and 1 mafia. Now add in to the mix that the town has a blue among their 3. In this case the no lynch is very town positive. There's a chance the medic could successfully protect or the DT could find the scum. This argument can be extended out to similar endgame situations a day earlier as well.
Consider also that medic saves sometimes buy us an extra day. If we use a no lynch early (giving up a kill to the mafia 'for free'), this is like the reverse of a medic save. If we end up with an even number in the endgame because we used a no lynch in the early game, we have gained nothing from our use of no lynch.
Day 1 no lynch is very bad. Okay there are two ways of looking at this post: 1) He is making a bandwagon. 2) He is being consistant with his Day 1 lynch argument. The only thing that really makes option one a more likely candidate is the way he says he agrees with people about team 1 but avoids actually saying anything other than the fact that he finds them suspicious. Finally, he comes back in day 2 and starts voting team 6 again with no explanations and tells us to look to them. Yes, I've been reading there posts but there are other suspicious people as well. After going through this, I'm unsure of team 7's actual alignment because all YellowInk has been posting about is that Team 6 is mafia and stuff about the fact we should lynch on day 1. The thing that concerns me though is that he never really explains why team 6 is mafia. He just displays a constant routine of voting for them early in the day and giving a 1 line explanation to explain why. So obvious mafia or unhelpful townie? Either way, I'm going to humour him and look into Team 6 deeply (I got sidetracked a whole bunch today and yesterday) and see just what he's accusing them of.
I like this analysis. I feel like its where I was aiming with mine but I did it a lot more sloppy because I did it at 5am T_T
|
It would seem we are striking nerve somewhere with split votes, or else scum is refraining from voting. Serious FoS on anyone who doesnt make a lynch-relevant vote. I support the reasons on team 7, but I think team 1 has a more solid scum verdict. But to avoid splitting votes further and trusting my compadres on team 7,
##vote team 7
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 24 2010 19:22 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2010 18:50 Incognito wrote:That's all really misleading... I have stated my own thoughts on a number of occasions... if we are mafia, why would we go after a team that has previously had no real suspicions put upon them by anyone else... instead of simply following the crowd and gone after someone with the heat on. There's no reason for me to make enemies, townie or red...
When I get time, and if it isn't done already by my partner YellowInk, I'll get into that more comprehensive analysis of team 6. Simple. You think Team 6 is the most scummy team that isn't you or your scumbuddy. You have every incentive as mafia to go after a new team (Team 6), especially since the other option (Team 1) isn't so palatable from your point of view. Team 6 is pretty inactive, and you're going to have to save yourself somehow, so no reason not to vote Team 6. There are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of Team 6. The reasons just arent as good as the reasons for you or Team 1. I'll agree that a lot of Foolishness's "analysis" is sketchy and is a stretch. But there are some good points there. To all those saying Meeple never takes any stands, check out ALL of meeple's posts in TL Mafia XXVII. Not just the first 10 or so. He definitely contributes his thoughts about lynch targets/other characters. Here's a few excerpts: On June 15 2010 11:23 meeple wrote:
I trust Ludwig with almost no doubts... much more than moocow... and I trust them both more than some other people.
There's a slight chance of there being mafia amongst our dts... but like radfield said, its questionable whether this is a good time to start offing claimed blues.
flamewheel's willingness to undergo a check makes me hesitate to push a check on him... but it doesn't put him in the clear obviously. I would try for a redtooth alignment check tonight... or Chez... On June 15 2010 11:33 meeple wrote:
Ludwig has been active... but he's just active at a different time... totally offset from North American time.
I never said you were suspicious... I just said that I trust Ludwig... mostly because if he was mafia there's no way he would've stepped in before. His trusting of L isn't suspicious, tons of people followed L's plan...
His reactions when Chez was shooting people was genuine I felt... he was just confused, as was I, at what the hell was going on.
I have no reason to distrust you, and for sure you're low on the list of suspects... On June 15 2010 02:00 meeple wrote:
I'm down with RoL more than Vivi57... there's little/no case to be made for/against Vivi since he's so inactive. On June 15 2010 02:06 meeple wrote:
Having said that and then going through his posts... RoL is pretty damn inactive too...
I'll have to think more about which one is more deserving On June 13 2010 04:07 meeple wrote:
I don't agree with lynching Chez on the grounds of inactivity though. If I have some time to go through posts I'll come up with more suspects. On June 17 2010 08:26 meeple wrote:
Ludwig is most definitely the roleblocker... that's the only way he can hold up his claims to be a dt...
Also... Radfield is the last mafia I beleive... too many close inexplicable ties with Ludwig then last minute trying to push away.
I trusted Ludwig because I was being impulsive about his defense of me early on and took a risk (and a rather stupid one)... but when I didn't die I thought that it kinda proved that he wasn't red... since who wouldn't take a lovely medic dangled in front of you like that. I didn't really trust Radfield... was kinda forced into it by Ludwig...
Anyways... tommorow's lynch of radfield should clinch the game for us... Meeple states his trust, states who to rolecheck, agrees/disagrees on lynching certain targets, and gives more input on the situation with the last quote. Notice how he consistently doesn't like lynching on inactivity. Notice how that contrasts with this game, where he wants to lynch BC based on uselessness/inactivity... Lastly, On June 16 2010 11:28 meeple wrote:Alright so... first things first... I'm the medic... The mafia knows it by know and so should the town. Obviously I claimed watcher because there was a shitload of greens and it was simply more believable. I had been in PM contact with Ludwig a little and later claimed medic to him since he had defended me in the thread... through him I also had PM contact with Radfield, who also knew me as the medic (through Ludwig... not my decision to tell him) Now... not too long after I claimed to be watcher and had "found" the medic, Foolishness PMs me wondering why I hadn't contacted him yet and claims watcher and tells me (to prove that he's a watcher) that tree.hugger also visited Ludwig last night. Of course, I couldn't have known that, but regardless I was just so fucking elated that we had a medic/watcher pair, since now we can coordinate. Things proceed, now with me thinking I had a solid base with a watcher by my side... until I get a PM from L, asking me if Foolishness is the medic... I respond somewhat vaguely, but give him a strong indication that Foolishness is indeed the medic... knowing that if they went after him I could always protect him. Then L flips Godfather and the shit hits the fan and I knew that L would've told the rest of the reds to go after Foolishness. So tonight we schemed... I protected Foolishness, and he watched himself to see who hit him. AND IT WAS MOTHER FUCKING + Show Spoiler +The same friggin dude that I had supported and backed like a moron... Anyways... we lynch him today and we're down to 1 red... meeple was involved in a blue roles scheme. I know we don't have as complex blue roles this game, but meeple was certainly contributing in the other game. On the other hand, meeple has zero useful contributions this game. And no thoughts on lynch targets either. Except for team 6. That was an awesome game... but taken out of context you can't say that I need to act the same every game. Behavioral analysis can only go so far... I was a power role then, and as such I acted differently from when I'm a townie, as in this game. I haven't taken stands because as far as I'm concerned there's no stands to take... I haven't been really confident yet... although one is starting to develop. You seem to have developed quite the following... when you cast a vote you have a couple buddies that nod along and sheep with you. Are you confident enough in your analysis to say that you should be next when we flip green?
I'm definitely pushing team 8 if you flip green.
|
The problem with the vote on my team is that the logic is fundamentally flawed. Very similar arguments point much more heavily at T1. It would make much more sense to hang T1 then give T7 a much harder look should they flip red.
Should we hang, we will come up vanilla town. There will be little information gained since the arguments are backwards.
It really makes me wonder what is going on in Incog's head. He struck me with a town vibe mid to late day 1, but then presented the backwards argument to hang T7 before T1 on day 2. This just doesn't make sense to me. It makes sense to me if T1 and T8 are mafia. Then Pyrr can freely back me up on hanging T6 and defend me since either hang is good for them. Also in this case it means T6 just sucks. Maybe BC didn't really have time to play, idk.
I would also advise people to go back through every post that has attempted to accuse me (personally). Note how deeply my words and intent has been twisted in particular cases. This, in the end, is what puts me on the T1/8 track more than the T6/?? track.
Also note that this final switch back to T1 is putting my neck on the line since driving for a T6 kill would have been more likely to save me. I just hope that if we do hang that in future days the town will look and analyze for themselves rather than continue playing this super passive game. Better yet, hang T1 and we'll go from there.
##unvote
##Vote: Team 1, LSB and Pyrrhuloxia
|
An Analysis of Meeple: A Panda Inspector's Story
Summary:
Meeple is townie. He has contributed, but it seems to me he's being accused for not contributing ENOUGH. But, he's contributed more than others. For example, Team 2, BC, and even about the same as Foolishness, who accused him. All in all, I cannot vote for him as he does simply not show scum to my eyes. I will be making future posts analyzing his play as mafia and town, and try to see any correlations, but as of now I urge everyone not to vote for him.
My fellow Panda BrownBear will be analyzing YI, but while I was initially suscipsious of him pure inactivity is not a good enough reason as of now, especially after reviewing meeple. Keep in mind YI has said he wouldn't be able to post that much this game, and while that cannot and should not be a ultimate defense, it is something to keep in mind.
His Posts this game:
On September 19 2010 11:40 meeple wrote:
So... any plans on rooting out red?
I'm wondering if Korynne would put Southrawrea into a group of reds... I don't think she picked that group by random and also wondering if having a group of three is more or less "powerful" than having a group of 2. Personally I'm leaning to weaker, seeing as now its three people who have to play the part of a single role. More chances for discrepancies and tells...
Speculation on the roles setup in this game. Now, from rereading the first Team Melee Mafia, this isn't neccesarily bad at all. In fact, for at least a good 2 pages it was just people speculating on the match up of teams and thoughts on the make up of each team. Now, this post has some content, and while not as much as some other posts this game(*cough* RoL's essay *cough*) it is full of content. Sure, we may have decided it may be irrelevant but its not neccesarily bad(keep in mind it was at the begining of the game.)
On September 19 2010 12:38 meeple wrote:
You're assuming they're green, and I'm thinking about what if they're red?
If they're green, then you're right its harder to convince them to vote a certain way, more resistant to mafia corruption. But isn't it weaker if they're red?
A response to Ace's post regarding the same subject, it's just more content. Again, this does not strike me as mafia as of now. He concedes some points, doesn't stick to one point, and again note he isn't accusing that team of being red, he's saying if they were, would they be weaker or stronger? And once we know more additional info about the setup, that may help us.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 21 2010 01:23 meeple wrote:Making a medic list at this point is useless other than just to play mindgames with the mafia, since they don't know if the medic will actually follow it or not... I agree though that they should be protecting the most active people... since even if that person ends up being mafia, the papertrail will be huge. @BM Why the vote? Can you explain...other than just fluff posting... I doubt that the quote is actually a slipup, but if it was that's clever. @Incog Can you really characterize a person's play by a single game... I know myself I played very differently my first game than my second, usually you're really excited the first game eager to contribute but that calms down after a while. I'm sure it's hard for you to remember your first game :p I do agree that neither have been really pro-town but that's a common characteristic Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 16:04 Incognito wrote:Also Korynne, as a good host you really should answer reasonable questions and be consistent in your answers. As much as its cute to answer in story mode, its just a headache if you don't tell people the rules. Not to mention unfair. Especially if you are clarifying rules in PM land. On September 20 2010 09:35 Pandain wrote:
P.S. in addition, I'd like Korynne to confirm medics can protect themselves. Also the no-lynch thing: A no-lynch should be allowed. Depriving the town of that option is pro-mafia and is nonsensical especially in a small game. In 30 player games, a single lynch doesn't hurt all too much, but being forced to lynch in an 8 person game is brutal. Especially since you have to lynch when there are an odd number of players left. Last edit: 2010-09-20 16:07:20 Why the edit?? And after all that high talk about what a good game host should do... tsk Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 16:08 Ace wrote:
I was pretty much out of it all day. What did I miss? Cmon I know you can do better than that... Vote: Team 6BC's only real post is this: Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 05:06 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Ok as this is a super super super small style of game. Team game so technically very few players in terms of lynches we have to be extremely careful. To start with we need to generate discussion and yes I have seen some of this going on already woo we need to sit down and seriously think things through.
Lynching based off inactivity remember kills a team not just one specific member but the team itself. IF an entire team is inactive maybe we can opt for them. Opting on inactivity lynches based solely off one player in a team however seems like a bad idea, especially for the trio we have.
As for a general start past this
RVS [vote] rastaban/foolishness
Both are normally fairly active players and outside of one spam post, both are afkish. Plus no one decent to vote for.
For a verteran player, this says absolutely nothing... I mean he says lynching off inactivity is bad, and makes a RVS vote, saying repeatedly that its a nothing vote and he doesn't want to be held accountable for it... As for RoL, we find the same lack of commitment except he adds in some fluff about whether or not there is medics in this game... Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 15:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
lol wow I just caught up and that SR post is retarded.
Well a couple of things I saw. Foolishness Medic lists are useful because of the psychological implications of it. Will a medic follow it, will a medic protect themselves, etc. I am really wondering if a medic protects an ENTIRE team or just one of the individuals on it, that will definitely show how strong a medic is. Since this is basically everything x2 I would assume most roles are the same and have entire team implications. IE: DT check effects both members of a team (since no reason it shouldn't) therefore a medic protection should cover an entire team.
Although if that is the case, I sincerely doubt medics can protect themselves. It will be really OP if a medic could just hoard protections on themselves all game since the mafia couldn't possibly kill them. On the other hand if they can only protect half a person they are a useless role. So medics either suck, are OP or aren't in the game. I'd lean towards not being in this set up especially since Korynne remained vague on the answer. I assume the logic is the same as when one of the mafia games had 6 variations of detectives but only 4 were authentic. The point in that was to add more to think about and take into consideration, but in reality it wasn't practical at all because it would break the game.
On that note, I will just go with my team mate and vote for Rasta/Foolishness for picking at incognitos post and ignoring the validity of medic protection list (even though I think medics probably aren't in this game, or at LEAST can't protect themselves)
To summarize because I like Incognito's idea about that.
1. For the moment I am leading towards foolishness/Rasta just because we have nothing better to go on.
2. Really doubt there is a medic role since it seems like it would be really OP, or really shitty depending on how Korynne decided to balance it, and her unwillingness to clarify in thread makes me think its not important.
3. Vote for Foolishness/Rasta just to make it clear.
Its day one though, so I reserve my right to completely change my mind for little to no reason :D
Spoilered for reading conviencance, in this post we see some valuable information. First off he talks about whether or not to make a medic list, and comes to the point I agree with: No. He then offers evidence, saying there are several things wrong with that idea, including fallibility of people following the plan and follws up by saying medic should protect active players. Now, this portion seems very pro town in my eyes. Note he makes a stand, backs up with reasons, and in my eyes make a pro town choice. In my humble expierence(and please input with your own knowledge on this), mafia will either tend to:
1. Stay in the shadows, and let town kill each other.
2.Try to ruin town by leading them astray(aka false lynches)
3.Make town do anti town things.
So far, Meeple has done none of these. Later one he defends LSB and Pyrr in regards to their different playstyle. While noting they haven't been pro town, he says(truthfully) that people can change, as of I with my first game of spam spam spam(still do =D).
Now, he's defended LSB and Pyrr in two regards, but he only negates the silly accusations(notably the "slip up", albeit he says it could be, but he doubts. The second one I noted above.) A person could say "AHA! You are helping the mafia!"(If LSB and Pyrr are mafia, as I believe), but delving deeper reveals the truth noted.
The one suscipious thing is voting for BC and RoL already, and does give a reason(namely inactivity.) While RoL has proved otherwise, BC is a valid concern. So this vote is questionable, but not neccesarily scum-indicative. Still, something to look out.
On September 21 2010 05:08 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:49 BrownBear wrote:On September 21 2010 04:43 SouthRawrea wrote:
So you're saying I'm posting nothing when really what I'm doing is making a post that shows that there is really no plan that we can come up with? Then pray, tell me what sort of content-filled posts you can make this early in the game? @Pyrr When you read the thread, it should become obvious what is content and what isn't. What you post isn't content. What Incognito posts is. It's like night and day. Also, [Vote]No Lynchrasta and LSB have very good points, so I'll stick with this plan for now. I know it's a reversal of my earlier position, but I believe their logic is sound. We only get a single "No Lynch" if I understand correctly... you really think we should waste it on the first day?
May sound accusatory to some, and truthfully he doesn't really give reasons why not. Albeit he could just be asking whether he thinks we should use it today. So, suscipsious, but really as of now not that much.
On September 22 2010 04:33 meeple wrote:
Well... even though I'm hesitant to use our only no-lynch this early... in a game this small we will need every scrap of information we can get... that bandwagon on team 1 seems interesting too...
unvote Team 6
vote: No lynch
Possibly contradictory to the above post. Again though, it's not a blatant contradiction like one LSB makes(see later for more!) If anything, it may just be he changed his mind. People can change their minds.
On September 22 2010 05:06 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 04:52 Infundibulum wrote:
Actually an addendum:
YellowInk has a point that it would be stupid to use our no lynch today, when we don't need to, when we could potentially end up in a missed lynch = loss situation later in the game. I think this is the strongest argument against lynching Day 1. Is there something amiss with this logic that i'm not grasping? I think the general thoughts are that: Pros: - Prevents a somewhat uneducated decision, hoping for some better information tommorow Cons: - We only have one, we waste it now and we're screwed later - We go into Day 2 with just a little less information than we would if we lynched and found out someone's alignment. I think normally most people would go with the lynching day 1, if not only to get the info... but with such a small game every mislynch is a huge blow.
Sums up the thoughts of everyone. Again, some people may say that this is scum like as he is not adding anything groundbreaking, but realize who he's responding to and in what context. He's telling Infun basically what everyone is thinking. This isn't just a new post, its one clarifying. Therefore, that reasoning(he's not adding anything=scum indicative) must be taken with consideration.
This post always clarifies his earlier part contradiction, as it points out that most people would go with lynching, but we should realize the penalties of mislynching. So it negates the above, too.
On September 22 2010 05:32 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 05:08 SouthRawrea wrote:
Oops I meant to bold the very last part and finish my train of though. All other scenarios are quite even but in the situation where we get no medic saves and choose to NL on day 1, we miss out on 1 potential lynch even though we survive for an equal amount of days. We have a maximum of 3 lynches in any scenario except no save + no lynch in which we have only 2. (This is of course assuming that our medic isn't a godly one. Hold on... so we only get 2 lynches if we have a no lynch and no save scenario... balls to the walls... wait... Assuming we use our no lynch now and assuming that we have no medic saves... Today:_______________6 v 2 Tommorow____________5 v 2 Day 3:_______3 v 2______or_______4 v 1 Day 4:__town lose or 2 v 1____2 v 1 or town win Day 5: town win or town lose in both cases What am I missing... this gives a 50% chance of town win, based on total randomness and no saves.
Apparently someone posted the gist of this before(Foolishness???). But again, not neccesarily bad.
On September 22 2010 05:34 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 05:30 Foolishness wrote:On September 22 2010 05:06 meeple wrote:
Pros:
- Prevents a somewhat uneducated decision, hoping for some better information tommorow
Cons:
- We only have one, we waste it now and we're screwed later
- We go into Day 2 with just a little less information than we would if we lynched and found out someone's alignment.
Give me a scenario where we use No Lynch today and we end up screwed later. Remember no medic saves. Well... technically can't we use a No lynch in a 3 v 1 scenario to prolong the game into a 2 v 1 with a higher chance of catching the last guy...
Brings up a good point. I'd like to also point out that he's been contributing to this whole general discussion(important one too.) he's not derailing discussion, he's thinking about both sides yet not being wishy washy(he has a clear view.) Definitely not the typical scum.
On September 22 2010 05:51 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 05:39 Incognito wrote:This post is interesting. YI wants to avoid a situation where town is divided with votes? That's interesting, since usually town gains more information from close votes...note how he splits his vote from his own team mate. Like Pandain, the only weird votes I see are coming from Divinek and YI. Otherwise its just two teams voting for Team 1. On September 22 2010 04:33 meeple wrote:
Well... even though I'm hesitant to use our only no-lynch this early... in a game this small we will need every scrap of information we can get... that bandwagon on team 1 seems interesting too...
unvote Team 6
vote: No lynch If town, meeple and YI should be coordinating votes. While both voted for team 6 previously, one switched to Team 1 while one switched to no lynch. No real reason to split your votes if you're town...this 1-1 split vote makes it interesting because meeple effectively negates YI's vote. The thing is, why is this bandwagon interesting? I don't see anything interesting about it except what your partner voted. Meeple, how are we screwed later if we "waste" our no lynch today? The only reason I can see is if a medic makes a save. And that is a terrible reason. On September 22 2010 04:41 Foolishness wrote:On September 19 2010 18:44 Incognito wrote:
I'm going to count on Team 3 and 6 for some strong analysis within the next 24 hours. Please do not disappoint.
On September 21 2010 17:43 Incognito wrote:
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. So let's see, I'm running through all my past mafia games, and counting the number of mafia I nailed because they said things like this. I'm at 3 so far. I'm very excited to see you be the fourth. Aww, this is disappointing. You only start fishing for info now? Pretty pathetic, I might say. *** I get why people want to no lynch. In a 1 KP game town always wants to lynch when there are an odd number of townies and don't want to lynch when theres an even number. The reason why we probably won't get any information from this lynch is because of the nolynch. Not that hard for anyone to policy no lynch when theres an even number of townies. There's nothing fishy about this lynch. The general apathy in this game is astonishing in its ability to do that. I'd rather there be something fishy about this lynch, but apparently we won't be graced with that information. Eh you're right, me and YI aren't really coordinating that much... probably should be. I never agreed with a Team 1 vote... About the wasting our no lynch... I was just summarizing the reservations I picked up... could've been misinterpreted though. I thought that saving our No lynch could possibly avoid a situation where we are forced to lynch but don't have a good target and as a result we lose. In any case, I don't mind using it now, since we don't really have alot of evidence or solid leads.
Doesn't really say much, the most important thing being clarifying the statement "wasting our no lynch." It's a valid concern, and I'd like to point out he's not doing any of the things I really feel indicate a mafia, which again are:
1. Stay in the shadows, and let town kill each other.
2.Try to ruin town by leading them astray(aka false lynches)
3.Make town do anti town things.
On September 23 2010 10:59 meeple wrote:
odd choice for mafia... people seem to have a grudge against them
Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town.
Albeit the post makes me sad(as he really doesn't do anything to help), he does say we should analyze. But again, he should be doing it himself too! So, not the best townie, but not "OMG SCUM" either.
But then he comes along and does it! Yay!!!!
+ Show Spoiler +On September 24 2010 03:57 meeple wrote:Alright, the analysis... yeah its delayed and I roasted for not posting it earlier... BM:+ Show Spoiler +On September 20 2010 19:39 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 15:30 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
That's all SR ever posts. I don't think he posts any better when townie. I think he thinks he is contributing a lot but... he just manages to state the obvious and make it mind bangingly esoteric. Very unnerving. @pyrrexcuse me? are you admitting he is your scumbuddy? @everyone else If pyrrhuloxia is mafia, southrawrea could be as well. It might be null, but I feel like that could be a slip. I am liking pro-town discussion of Incognito and Foolishness, and are not really suspicious of teams 8 and 3 as a result. Incognito is capable of spotlighting as scum, so I'm not saying he is cleared, but I have played with him where he is scum, and this does not feel quite the same. Due to meta, and his amazingly pro-town play, I would definitely not be ok with his lynch at this juncture. I am not fully convinced Pyrrhuloxia's team is a mafia slot, though, and am going to reserve my vote for the moment as such a small setup can be volatile. I would be happier with a lynch on team 2, as I found SouthRawrEas post to be all fluff and no content. @mod votecount please ##vote: team 2 Expresses doubt about South's greenness due to fluff posting... says that he enjoys Incog and Foolishness's analysis, but adds a caveat about Incog's ability to spotlight as red. + Show Spoiler +On September 21 2010 05:59 Bill Murray wrote:LSB's admission is only icing on the cake@LSB: how would you be so CERTAIN they're scum? You have a scumlist, buddy? Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:43 SouthRawrea wrote:
So you're saying I'm posting nothing when really what I'm doing is making a post that shows that there is really no plan that we can come up with? Then pray, tell me what sort of content-filled posts you can make this early in the game? @Pyrr This makes me confident in my earlier read he is appealing to pyrr's authority. Scummy, scummy, scummy. @meeple: I find it funny you ask me to justify my vote when I voted SR on fluff, then make a secondary reason as for voting being fluff yourself. I also dislike you speculating that I was 100% pyrr/SR are the scumteam.... if that was the case, I would have been putting a second vote on Pyrr's team. I didn't. I'm voting SR because I am unsure if Pyrr actually made a slip. The way SR is acting now, though, in the above post, makes me believe that my initial reaction to who I'm voting is actually wrong. I needed to stack on pyrr because his team is way more important as I'm feeling both SR's team #2 with bumatlarge and divinek are scum with Pyrrhuloxia's team #1. My reasoning and justification are how SR is acting towards pyrrhuloxia. 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. ##unvote: pyrrhuloxia/LSB
##vote: SR, bumatlarge, and divinek States that SR is a new player and a scum giveaway and they implicate team 1. + Show Spoiler +On September 21 2010 17:06 Bill Murray wrote:+ 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: Show nested quote +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 Expresses doubts about his previous convictions and changes his vote to no lynch + Show Spoiler +On September 21 2010 19:28 Bill Murray wrote:
Foolishness trendily lurks until D2
too bad if he doesnt die N1 he is likely mafia, as he likes to lurk D1 as mafia just like he does as townie or blue so that is very, very, very null from him. I cannot emphasize this more. The funny thing is, though, mafia could choose to not hit him and use it as an argument. "Foolishness didn't die, he is mafia, get him" on day 2. That's the problem with his high level of play if it goes unchecked, it makes all arguments pretty WIFOMy which is why I like to pressure people who lurk
I like to do that more on day 2, or forward, though.
I like a lynch on D1 vs a No Lynch, so I am tempted to wagon. If I wagon, would you guys take it the wrong way? I like wagons as town these days, but I don't like mislynches, and I haven't seen anything glaring at me saying "this player is scummy as fuck" like I had originally thought I had.
It's funny everyone is dead set on a team I initially thought was scum. The minute I back off, people start believing. The world works in mysterious ways.
I am going to vote simply to consolidate my vote with my partner's, and
Vote: Team 1
Tomorrow we can pressure people based around their posts, and our general suspicions on teams 7 and 2 if they flip red. If they flip townie, then I'll have to look at a couple certain teams, too, so I'm actually happier with this lynch than teams 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and possibly even 2. Votes Team 1 to with Ace, and still expresses concerns about teams 2 and now 7 Ace:+ Show Spoiler +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. On September 21 2010 18:40 Ace wrote:
actually I dont think your case by itself is really that strong, it just seems convenient.
LSB's accusation of Team 2 and his weak explanation, which didn't even seem to answer my concern is still my prime motive for leaning towards them.
I'll rethink this again later for sure but for now ## vote Team 1 States suspicions about LSB and votes for him + Show Spoiler +On September 22 2010 03:03 Ace wrote:
this is such a terrible lynch. Just way too many easy voters. Bill Murray unvote them, this lynch just doesn't seem legit at all.
##unvote Team 1 Gets anxious about the easy votes and unvotes Team 1 + Show Spoiler +On September 22 2010 09:33 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 06:43 YellowInk wrote:
At this point I believe that the mafia are among teams 1, 3, 5, and 6. I do not know precisely who, but at this stage of the day, hanging team 1 still makes sense. Ace, I was getting the same feeling initially about the bandwagoning onto team 1, but then I looked carefully at who was and wasn't on board with the team 1 vote and realized that just about everyone who was on the team 1 vote I already had a feeling of being pro town. The most suspect people have pushed the no lynch.
The recent argument made against no lynch was under the assumption of no medic saves. Consider what occurs if you have 1 medic save: we gain an entire day! In a typical game, a single medic save does not gain us a day. Using the no lynch here would lose us the day that a medic save could gain us.
No lynch is for endgame situations only. Hang team 1. No it isn't. This post is blatantly misleading. No lynching is for when you can't conclude someone is scummy enough to lynch. Like I've said, the town does not have to lynch every day. So most of the time it's in your best bet to No lynch unless you are in a situation where there is clearly going to be a benefit. Being in the end game does not matter for a No lynch, all it means is that you're decision has a more immediate consequence but it's also easier. Towards the end of the game it is actually much rarer to have a No lynch. Remember what I said? It's in your best bet to avoid a lynch when you aren't sure someone is scum or there is no clear benefit. At the end of the game you have so much information between votes, player interaction, the knowledge of what roles have been revealed and your own ties to players that it's really not often you'll be No lynching then. In a typical game a single medic save gaining you a day is false. Saving a player and them possibly being confirmed innocent is a pretty big deal don't you think? It may not directly add more days to your win condition but adding more players to the likely pro-town pool, that TWO players know about is pretty heartbreaking for scum once it's revealed. Using a No Lynch now would actually be the best bet...if this were 10 hours ago and this was a normal setup with infinite No Lynches. Clearly though, LSB has been posting god knows what and well I'm a little intrigued by this post of yours. I thought you were a good player so how could you actually believe this nonsense you just posted? The only thing worrying me is that Incognito seems to have pegged both your teams also which shows his scumdar is operating on great batteries like mine, or he's just good at picking off easy townies. So I'm going to ask you this one time: Let's assume you were a detective. What team would you investigate tonight and why? Accuses Yellowink (Team 7)
Now lets see... Amongst the people that are included in the "easy votes" on Team 1 are: bumatlarge Divinek Infundibulum YellowInk SouthRawrea Incognito Also the people that accused BM/Ace YellowInk - albeit halfheartedly + Show Spoiler +On September 19 2010 14:22 YellowInk wrote:
I think we should hang Ace and Bill Murray. LSB + Show Spoiler +On September 22 2010 08:20 LSB wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 17:36 Incognito wrote:
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. As for the things I'm supporting 1) No lynch. 2) Bum's medic plan Show nested quote +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 thing is, if I was mafia, I would be supporting an erronous plan, trying to get the town to take part of a plan that is easily exploitable. A great way to do that is to support your plan! Your plan has problems. Strangely you haven't address these problems. Right now you are saying, "LSB seems skummy, so therefore I don't need to worry about the holes in my plan". That isn't logic, that's misdirection. Show nested quote +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. I'll repeat myself: We should use the DT and the Medic in the places where they will be most effective. The Medic should focus on making sure that someone doesn't die. And the DT should be used to try to investigate targets. I don't like the list idea, since it tells the mafia what to stay out of. Again, please address this problem. Tell me why I am wrong, don't just make a long post on why I'm supposed mafia to distract others from seeing that your plan has a problem. Show nested quote +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.
I don't have this list of possible plans in my pocket and try to use them. If I think of something, I'll use it sure. I moved on of course, chiefly no lynch once we figured out that it could be used. Show nested quote +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. What I am saying is that your accusations twist my words. You admit that you can't read my posts at face value because if you do, you'll find that I'm a townie. You now are relying on the fact that I haven't taken any positions? What positions are you accusing me of not taking on? Planning: You claim that I haven't made a plan. Therefore I am Mafia. Thats just silly. I'm not going to make a plan unless I think of one. Ace/BM is scumYou said that I didn't give enough input into the Ace/BM lynch. Well, I don't feel like I should. Because I think there're town Rastaban/Foolishness is scum: You said that I didn't give enough input into the Rastaban/Foolishness lynch. Well, I don't feel like I should. So you expect me to 1) Pull out plans or die, or 2) Accuse random people. <sarcasm>Sounds townie to me </sarcasm> Show nested quote +
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.
I would have liked more time to see what Bum would do, and how SR would play this game. But like you said, people wanted me to post. So I did, and I said that I didn't really think that they were mafia since new posts didn't fit with my general theory. Conclusions: I think we should examine some of the players that bandwagoned on Team 1... especially Team 2 since we know BM had some serious concerns about them.
Spoilered for your conviencance. Its an alright analysis, and my previewing of it doesn't show any concerns. I note that he includes the accusations of his teammate YellowInk by Ace, and puts YI down as "Who should be examined" on the basis of that. For a while I thought he might use BM's posts to suggest that SR, Divinek, and Bum are mafia, but he also notes that Ace and BM expressed doubts and changed their votes.
His lasts 3 posts are just his defense, so I can't really analyze that(unless he makes a huge slip up in those, which I've read and didn't see.) So, read those in addition to my conclusion.
Other People:
I am with those who think LSB and Pyrr are mafia, and I find him a much better, and safer choice to vote for. In addition, I'd like to point something out from LSB:
On September 21 2010 10:14 LSB wrote:
Overview: The entire Divinek/Southrawrea/Bumatalarge team was incredibly unhelpful. This isn’t like Zeks, who just lurks all the time. Divinek, Southrawrea, and Bumatalarge usually at least make the effort to help. It’s strange why none of them are doing that right now.
Addon: Bumatalarge’s second post is actually pretty helpful.
Conclusion: Not as sure as before, before I was going off of the "This can't be a coincidence. Once is a accidence, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action".
This could just be South and Divinek. If Bum didn't make his second post, I would have immediatly voted for him.
NOTE THE BOLDED SECTION. Now, what he's saying here is that he would have voted for Bum except for the post Bum wrote after a post LSB made:
On September 21 2010 04:16 LSB wrote:
Okay, I believe it is essential to use the No Lynch.
The No Lynch will give the Mafia another kill. But at the same time, it gives us another DT check, it gives us another Medic protection. (Assuming they exist).
And it won’t actually shorten lylo date. With or without No lynch, we have 2 mislynchs till we lose. It doesn’t change
I’m not saying we have to use it now. I’m just saying, if we don’t use it today, we should use it tomorrow. That way we can take advantage of the No-Lynch benefits.
So, he was going to vote for Team 2 even after this, if not for a post? Wtf is this? You're fadoodling my mind here.
|
On September 25 2010 04:05 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
I like this analysis. I feel like its where I was aiming with mine but I did it a lot more sloppy because I did it at 5am T_T
Yeah I woke up at 7:30 and did this before I headed off to school. I half-expected there to be mistakes because I kinda rushed it. I'm actually going to go through a whole re-read instead of just team 6's posts. I've got time to spare before I have to go somewhere and I'm not willing to trust the vibes I'm getting from people just yet.
On September 25 2010 04:41 YellowInk wrote:
The problem with the vote on my team is that the logic is fundamentally flawed. Very similar arguments point much more heavily at T1. It would make much more sense to hang T1 then give T7 a much harder look should they flip red.
I could continue my point about how you should elaborate about such things especially since you find this so important but I'll let that slide for now just because it's getting much too repetitive for my liking so I'm going to ignore this claim.
Should we hang, we will come up vanilla town. There will be little information gained since the arguments are backwards.
It really makes me wonder what is going on in Incog's head. He struck me with a town vibe mid to late day 1, but then presented the backwards argument to hang T7 before T1 on day 2. This just doesn't make sense to me. It makes sense to me if T1 and T8 are mafia. Then Pyrr can freely back me up on hanging T6 and defend me since either hang is good for them. Also in this case it means T6 just sucks. Maybe BC didn't really have time to play, idk.
The second bit isn't quite important but Incog did say that you were mafia mid day 1. Now I'm not saying Incognito is to be trusted and he could very well be manipulating all of the town in which case he's doing extremely well but he's been posting very proactively and being pro-town. I have no idea where you got the idea that he struck you with a town vibe mid-late day 1.
I would also advise people to go back through every post that has attempted to accuse me (personally). Note how deeply my words and intent has been twisted in particular cases. This, in the end, is what puts me on the T1/8 track more than the T6/?? track.
Okay so what's the point of not posting any explicit information? Your posts are basically your opinions with no analysis of any sort to back them up. I'm not saying that your opinions are wrong but at least make an effort to show that they have some substance behind them.
Also note that this final switch back to T1 is putting my neck on the line since driving for a T6 kill would have been more likely to save me. I just hope that if we do hang that in future days the town will look and analyze for themselves rather than continue playing this super passive game. Better yet, hang T1 and we'll go from there.
[red] At first this seems okay but then you realize that if the mafia team was T7, T6 that his vote on T1 would make alot more sense if you consider a scenario where he's mafia.
##unvote
##Vote: Team 1, LSB and Pyrrhuloxia
Just as a response to this because I feel that it is partially aimed towards me, I put my comments in red. Now, enough getting distracted! I've gotta review the entire game up until this point.
|
EBWOP:
LSB's contradiction isn't so criminalizing anymore as I now note he said "we don't have to use no lynch today. " so still suscipsious, but keep that in mind.
Also,
##Vote Team One
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
