Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (61 users) | |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 02 2012 20:17. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| /in, I will not be modkilled. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 04 2012 01:32. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| When is the game planned to start? |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 05 2012 06:00. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| I like the change too, GL HF everyone! |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 05 2012 07:51. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
Agreed, Blazinghand.
Given furerkip's statement about how long VE's claim was, I decided to take a look at his previous claim in MTG Mafia to compare the length.
On May 27 2012 08:04 VisceraEyes wrote:Cool. I'll be brief. I want you to lynch me if you PROMISE TO LYNCH BUGS NEXT. Everyone seems to think either Bugs or I am scum or that we both are. As such, if you guys have a handle on this outside the two of us, I prefer you just get us out of the way first so whoever is left is confirmed whatever. Please guys, no one is going to listen to anything I say at this point and I'm just a distraction. Remove it. Also I'm the Doctor, so if you don't lynch one of me or Bugs, I'm dead tonight anyway. Gg guys, sorry I allowed Bugs to mindfuck me so hard this game. 
I had a null read on VE's claim at first because of the fact that both Millers and veteran mafia players should claim miller in a game where the miller is self aware, this does slightly push the case in favor of a mafia VE, but it's still a weak case. How VE will handle himself the rest of the game is going to be a lot more important. My concern however is that he shits up the thread regardless like he did in MTG Mafia where he tunneled WBG hard as town, and did the same as Toad as mafia, meaning that him tunneling someone isn't indicative of alignment. To be frank, I'm not sure how to read him.
Why would Miller claiming be good for the person claiming?
VE as a veteran is likely to get checked by a DT. By claiming early he prevents getting checked by a DT. We already know he would check red now regardless of whether he's lying or not, so a DT check is now useless. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 05 2012 07:52. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| EBWOP: a DT check on VE* that is. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 05 2012 08:04. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
On June 05 2012 07:58 furerkip wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 07:44 Navillus wrote:
Wait what? What does 1 mislynch we can use on retarded townies mean? You should always always be lynching for scum.
On his claim I thought about the Miller knowing their role thing before the roles went out and figured that it really probably is the right play to tell town now as miller, in fact if it was most other people in this game I would take that as a pretty strong tell that he is in fact miller. But VE... Well I just actually finished a game that he was in and I hope he doesn't take offense when I say that he made a pants on head crazy claim in that game, I don't think that indicates that he's playing crazily here but of all of the players in this game he is literally the first person I would name as someone with the stones to claim miller as scum right from the start. On that line I'll say any other millers should claim now, if we have more than even 2 I would get very suspicious.
Also I think it makes sense that he's saying not to check him, if he's making this claim it's obviously because he'll flip red, whether it's because he's miller or scum, he has no reason to say it if he wouldn't so any check would be totally wasted on him.
If we lynch retarded towns who are scumslipping left and right but aren't even scum, we avoid situations on 3 way lynches where they just tunnel ANYONE or we accidentally lynch them because there is just so much evidence to kill them in a 3way lynch. Believe me, if there are retarded town, they won't die at night; mafia will keep them alive so they can have more of a chance in a lynch or lose situation because retarded towns are stupid. That's just proper game sense. If we use lynches to kill retarded town, then we avoid situations like that in the end game.
No, we should always lynch the strongest scum suspects because anything else gives scum the possibility of a free ride just riding on someone who they can prove to be retarded. By just lynching people we think are scum they have to put their hand in the fire to try and prove someone else is scum. Scum doesn't have to lie to get a retarded townie lynched; they just point out he's acting retarded. A town atmosphere where lynching bad players is acceptable is horrible for town for that very reason.
"Also I think it makes sense that he's saying not to check him, if he's making this claim it's obviously because he'll flip red, whether it's because he's miller or scum, he has no reason to say it if he wouldn't so any check would be totally wasted on him."
The real problem that this is is that he has claimed Miller and he is using correct reasoning from a STUPID premise (he is miller).
In fact, if he turns Miller upon a lynch, then wouldn't that help us? Cop's reports can be trusted to a tee.
If he flips Mafia, we just got brang down 1 mafia.
We don't know how many millers there are. We don't know if Mafia has a framer or not. We don't know if there's a godfather or not. In NO way is VE flipping miller on a lynch good for town.
|
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 05 2012 08:18. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
On June 05 2012 08:13 furerkip wrote:
We should be okay with our lynches if the townie in question was scumslipping like no other. It's not okay to just randomly lynch townies with an ML, only townies who are scumslipping.
If we identify those that are scumslipping and lynch them, we'll get the mafia, even if it means casualties on our side because mafia HAS to scumslip at some point, whether it be at the very end of the game or at the beginning.
That's not true at all in my experience. In my newbie mini mafia game here, two people made 'scumslips', myself and mementoss. Both were town. In TL Mafia LI, gonzaw made a 'scumslip', he was town. If anything from the games I've played town seems to be the ones making scumslips more often than scum, because they're more careful as they're hiding something. Lynch candidates are those who act anti-town by derailing the thread into pointless bickering, have obvious logical errors in their analysis, people that tunnel hard on one player without giving their opinion on current cases, and lurkers. The latter is my least favorite lynch category, but from the last game I hosted all mafia were basically lurkers, so a no lurker acceptance has to be imposed. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 05 2012 08:25. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| And now I'm off to bed. Will be back tomorrow morning or afternoon, depending on if I have time to check in during uni. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 05 2012 22:49. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
On June 05 2012 08:34 furerkip wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 08:17 Blazinghand wrote:
Lynching based on scumslips is bad. Lynching based on scum play and scumminess is good.
That doesn't make sense, they correlate exactly. Scumslips = scum play and scumminess because scumslips are evidence for scumminess and scum play. Very alien experience from where I usually play, this game I mean.
I just showed you examples of where 'scumslips' were done by townies. Perhaps you have a different experience where you play, but I'm going off by my own experience here and that has been that it's overwhelmingly been town that have made scumslips, so my opinion of them is very low.
Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 08:18 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
On June 05 2012 08:13 furerkip wrote:
We should be okay with our lynches if the townie in question was scumslipping like no other. It's not okay to just randomly lynch townies with an ML, only townies who are scumslipping.
If we identify those that are scumslipping and lynch them, we'll get the mafia, even if it means casualties on our side because mafia HAS to scumslip at some point, whether it be at the very end of the game or at the beginning.
That's not true at all in my experience. In my newbie mini mafia game here, two people made 'scumslips', myself and mementoss. Both were town. In TL Mafia LI, gonzaw made a 'scumslip', he was town. If anything from the games I've played town seems to be the ones making scumslips more often than scum, because they're more careful as they're hiding something. Lynch candidates are those who act anti-town by derailing the thread into pointless bickering, have obvious logical errors in their analysis, people that tunnel hard on one player without giving their opinion on current cases, and lurkers. The latter is my least favorite lynch category, but from the last game I hosted all mafia were basically lurkers, so a no lurker acceptance has to be imposed.
In your experience, if the mafia are lurkers, then obviously they won't scum slip... they aren't even active -___-. Also, that is entirely circumstantial and baseless evidence for why we shouldn't lynch based off scumslips. "See, people here were town, but they scum slipped!"
My point is that of all the scumslips I've seen, there have perhaps been one or two made by mafia, and the rest by town. Therefore I have seen empirical evidence that suggests scumslips are bogus. Unless you have a good argument for this not to be the case, I'm going to give no weight to said scumslips.
Okay, I have a question for all of you:
Under what evidence should we lynch people, if not for scumslips?
Illogical, contradictory play, like I said in the post you just quoted. People that continuously tunnel one player without giving their opinion on others, people that exhibit an intentional disregard of logic to make one player look scummy, and people that do not contribute to make said players contribute so we have something to go off on.
On June 05 2012 11:15 Hyaach wrote:
I would let VE live for a day unless something really scummy comes out from his play.
it takes huge balls on claim this early, be it fake/real and its not a fool proof plan imo mafia or town.
Besides, from his claim, i would put all his analysis on a magnifying glass to be dismembered and examined piece by piece.
Very strange comment, but this feels a lot like newbie town and not so much like mafia to me. I don't think this is something a newbie mafia would say because mafia wants to fit into town and this is a statement that looks somewhat hostile to town, something I don't expect a newbie mafia to do.
On June 05 2012 12:58 VisceraEyes wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I'm trying to decide if kips motivation is coming from a scum standpoint. On the one hand the suggestion that getting rid of "retarded townies" is somehow beneficial to town is blatantly anti-town and at worst indicative of furerkip pushing a mafia agenda. However, newer players get it in their mind somehow that the actions of townies can damage town somehow worse than the very real consequence of their death, which is shortening the game. Town's aim needs to be lengthening the game, not shortening it. That's why we aim for scum every single lynch, because every scum lynch increases the number of days the game lasts. What gets me the most about furerkip is the fact that he is operating under the assumption that we're clear to "kill a retarded townie" under the assumption that we have "1 Mislynch we can work with". It's in this post...
On June 05 2012 07:37 furerkip wrote:
On another note as to why I think VisceraEyes should be lynched, is because if there are 4 mafia, and 12 players, then we have 1 Mislynch we can work with, which is fine to use on retarded townies. That's just my belief when I play though. Anyone want to add anything?
...I don't understand the motivation behind this post. Like, as a townie, I'm not thinking in terms of how many townies we can kill before it's game over. I'm thinking in terms of killing scum. I aim for killing scum with the lynch, and so the number of townies "we can safely kill before LYLO" isn't even a concern to me because that number increases every lynch by my expectation, not decreases. However, all of that being said, I can see him being a newer town not really knowing what's best for town, yet acting like he does to try and establish his innocence, which IS a mark in his favor where I'm concerned. Also it doesn't make sense for scum to be so brashly antagonistic so early in the game, though I am NOT ruling it out. Ultimately, I'd be interested to see what furerkip has to say about people other than me before coming to a conclusion about where I think he's coming from. Obviously my view is skewed of him right now because his only act in the game has been attacking me.
What does everyone else think about furerkip? His stance on my claim is a pretty good one to discuss, what are your thoughts on his interpretation of my claim?
I agree with the idea that he's probably newbie town. I don't feel like what he's posted is indicative of a scum agenda and it feels more like a townie going off on what he thinks is mafia. He's also agreed to let it go for now and not tunnel which I believe is a pro town thing to do.
On June 05 2012 15:20 VisceraEyes wrote:
Also I'm going to suggest we policy-lynch Katina if she doesn't prove her worth to town by providing us with some sort of content to be held accountable for if we are unable to find a suitable scummy candidate. Her meta shows that she's going to lurk regardless of her alignment, so I'd really rather just lynch her now before she becomes dangerous late-game (ya I know ur dangerous late-game suck it) if she's scum.
Many of you have played with her before and know how frustrating not being able to determine her alignment can be. I submit Katina as our fall-back lynch unless she's able to satisfactorily contribute to today's discussion.
@Katina
Don't look at it as me trying to kill you. Look at it as me trying to get you to post. But keep in mind that I will try and kill you if you don't. ^^
She'll get the same treatment from me as other lurkers do; Post or risk getting lynched. I expect her posting quality to be of a higher standard than a lot of the other lurkers though.
On June 05 2012 22:31 ghost_403 wrote:
I buy VE's claim. His play doesn't make that much sense from a scum perspective. By claiming miller so early, you put yourself under a lot of scrutiny, and for what? So that the eventual DT check, which might not even be here (can someone point me to the role counts?) is void? Too much pressure for too little reward at this stage in the game. Of course, I've misread VE in something like 110% of the games I've played with him.
Furerkips posting has been remarkably anti-town up to this point. I still haven't decided what to make of that quite yet. Shraft points out that this could just be him acclimating to TLMafia environment, so I'll give him a bit more time before I start pushing for his lynch.
I appreciate VE pressuring Katina to chime in, but I think we all know that she will contribute on her own schedule. I'm not going to lynch her for that. I'm want to hear her thoughts on Furerkip.
I disagree, there's a lot of reason for VE to claim Miller if he's mafia, and he isn't a godfather + there isn't a framer in play. He's very likely to get checked in the duration of this game, and this way he assures that he won't be checked. There is plenty of reason for a scum VE to claim this and therefore I don't believe this claim to be indicative of any alignment.
Though I agree that Furer has been somewhat anti-town, is there anything about his behaviour that you'd attribute more to being scum rather than newbie town? If so, can you point it out?
To everyone that hasn't posted yet: I'd like your opinions on VE and Furer. Especially from Katina. I'd also like to hear more about Furer from Blazinghand.
|
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 06 2012 03:02. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
On June 05 2012 23:11 ghost_403 wrote:
@artanis: That's just not true; VE always dies in the first 72 hours of the game. No way he'll get checked.
As far as Furer, there was a post or two of his that looked scummy rather than newbie town. I'll go back and find them in a bit.
I don't like your reasons for buying VE's claim. I don't see how you expecting him to live 72 hours at most effects VE claims, especially when you check his history. In fact, if he never expects to live more than 72 hours he probably wouldn't sign up to the game to begin with, but he did so I'm assuming he wants to win the game regardless of alignment, and this is a good move both as town and mafia for reasons I've stated before. You've also promised reasons why Furer is scum and haven't given them yet despite there barely being any posts in the game so far. Can't imagine that'd take very long, so until then: ##FoS: ghost_403
To Pandain: Expecting VE not to bring attention to himself regardless of his role is like expecting Kenpachi to make a post consisting of more than 2 lines. It's not going to happen, that's the kind of game he plays. I like your reasoning on Furer though and agree with it. I find it unlikely he is mafia for the time being.
I agree that MrZentor has been wishy washy. I haven't played any previous games with him though so I don't know where to put him at. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 06 2012 03:21. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| Just in LI, where although he was inactive he did make accurate analysis on my inactivity compared to my newbie game, showing me he does his homework. If he did his homework here too he'd have known that you tend to claim both as mafia and as townie in the last two games. This discrepancy strikes me as odd. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 06 2012 08:36. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
@Shraft I really like your case on Navillus. I also noticed the disconnect between his accusation of MrZentor and his actual vote on Hyaach, which I find the most convincing of any case at this point in time. I'm still not happy with Ghost not pointing out what parts of furerkip's posting history he found mafialike though.
##Vote: Navillus |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 06 2012 18:51. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
I just caught up on everything, but I'm at school and should be working so I don't want to spend too much time on the post and will expand on this later, but I think Pandain's case currently is the best we have. My main gripe with him is that there was a good scumhunting atmosphere in the town with people focussing on player analysis, and out of nowhere Pandain thinks it's a good idea to throw in that A) He's a Vigilante and B) It's a great time to have a discussion about Masons. Neither of these help us in hunting scum but they do help a mafia agenda of keeping attention away from scumhunting.
@VE I'm still not statisfied with Ghost, but I found Navillus a better target since I felt his post disconnect was bigger than that of Ghost. Whereas Ghost could've just been lazy/sarcastic, Navillus' post attacked one person, yet voted on another, which is classic scum in my textbook, since it's something he could fall back on at any time. Though these two definitely aren't cleared, I feel Pandain is the biggest scum suspect out of the three for the reasons mentioned above, and would be most happy with his head today.
##Unvote
##Vote: Pandain |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 07 2012 06:44. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| Pandain, you can't blame us for lynching you this day. We were analyzing players based on posts and then you came in saying "oh hey guys I'm vigilante also if there's masons they should claim because it's great for town. Can we talk about that instead of doing actual scumhunting please?" If for some reason you are in fact town, then you've played an anti-town game as you broke a good town atmosphere. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 07 2012 06:57. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
On June 07 2012 06:51 Pandain wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 06:44 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
Pandain, you can't blame us for lynching you this day. We were analyzing players based on posts and then you came in saying "oh hey guys I'm vigilante also if there's masons they should claim because it's great for town. Can we talk about that instead of doing actual scumhunting please?" If for some reason you are in fact town, then you've played an anti-town game as you broke a good town atmosphere.
No you weren't. I was the one who stopped you guys from being suspicious of Kips when he was obviously town. I tried to direct the discussion, and when I needed to I claimed. And don't talk about the mason discussion derailing town, that's a retarded argument. Scum don't actively derail town discussion. In fact, they don't often at all. Instead they just let bad discussion go onwards. They don't put themselves in the spotlight. That's an incredibly important point for you guys to realize. Lynching me because I "derailed town" is both subjective, false, and weak as an argument.
Wait, you needed to claim? What made you need to claim exactly? And no, scum don't want lynch discussion even if people are being wrongly accused because discussion generates information. Scum does not want town to have information. It is in scum's best interest to not talk about lynches at all times because it means there will be less reads available. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 07 2012 07:05. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| Fuck. I thought about switching too sfdfsdf |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 08 2012 03:02. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| I have some thoughts on the matter that I'll post once it's past 11PM, VE. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 08 2012 03:09. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
| 11PM isn't the time when people die. 12PM is. There's an hour of discussion time where people can't change their night actions anymore, but day doesn't come into effect yet. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 08 2012 06:33. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
I wanted to comment on Katina's case since it seemed very ill construed to me.
On June 07 2012 07:16 Katina wrote:Mr. VisceraEyes Let's take a look at one of his first posts.
Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:
Attention! I have a very important announcement for everyone in town!
I am a Miller!
What does this mean? First and most importantly, it means that I am a "townie" and win with Town. I'm not a "traitor" who wins with scum, or a "survivor" who wins with whomever, I'm a Miller and despite what our DTs may tell us later, I win with Town. Now, I don't expect you to just take my word for it: I expect you to keep a very close eye on me and lynch the FUCK out of me if it looks like I'm pushing Mafia objectives…but I don't expect that to be a problem because I'm going to be very actively pushing TOWN objectives.
However, what I propose is that we do NOT waste DT checks on me. Why? Because all it will do is confirm what I've told you just now - that a DT check will return a guilty result. What I propose you do is hold me to a higher standard than others when considering my lynch. Not an impossible standard - I DO want to live long enough to help find some scum…but a higher standard than others you consider for lynch in regard to content and clarity.
In return, I promise to be as open and honest with my reads and thoughts as possible, while simultaneously trying to consolidate my own posts for maximum thread readability.
So there you have it! I'm a Miller! What do you think about THAT, town? I'm actually a little excited because finally I don't have a freaking BLUE role to ruin. ^^
Here he opens with claiming that he is a Miller. He makes this big post about how he is all for the town and don't bother with a DT check because he will come back red. He says to keep a close eye on him and if it looks as if he is pushing a Mafia agenda then to lynch him. He uses capitals to emphasize his points and what NOT <--- to do. He comes out of nowhere with this post because he knows that people love to kill him and/or check him night 1. This is an attempt to divert suspicion from him and to ignore any evidence suggesting otherwise because he made it known early on. So when someone brings up suspicion he can just say "No. I told you early on I was a miller blah blah blah"
I don't see how you make this out as his intention. I'm also confused as to what you see in his capitalization; it seems very minor and the case seems to be made out of thin threads. He never said he expects people to say he's clean. Both the town and the scum explanation check out, making it a null read and I don't see the scum in it.
This is proven in his next post when he recieves a vote
Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 07:40 VisceraEyes wrote:
On June 05 2012 07:33 furerkip wrote:
On June 05 2012 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:
Attention! I have a very important announcement for everyone in town!
I am a Miller!
What does this mean? First and most importantly, it means that I am a "townie" and win with Town. I'm not a "traitor" who wins with scum, or a "survivor" who wins with whomever, I'm a Miller and despite what our DTs may tell us later, I win with Town. Now, I don't expect you to just take my word for it: I expect you to keep a very close eye on me and lynch the FUCK out of me if it looks like I'm pushing Mafia objectives…but I don't expect that to be a problem because I'm going to be very actively pushing TOWN objectives.
However, what I propose is that we do NOT waste DT checks on me. Why? Because all it will do is confirm what I've told you just now - that a DT check will return a guilty result. What I propose you do is hold me to a higher standard than others when considering my lynch. Not an impossible standard - I DO want to live long enough to help find some scum…but a higher standard than others you consider for lynch in regard to content and clarity.
In return, I promise to be as open and honest with my reads and thoughts as possible, while simultaneously trying to consolidate my own posts for maximum thread readability.
So there you have it! I'm a Miller! What do you think about THAT, town? I'm actually a little excited because finally I don't have a freaking BLUE role to ruin. ^^
Wait, are you serious? You just claimed Miller and said that DT shouldn't check on you because you are Miller... Judging from your ending, you said you've played this game before. To me, that strikes me as a really odd way to just spout out "I'm miller, and you'll get a guilty on me if you check me, so don't check me, OH and by the way, I'd like to make sure you guys realize that my opinion is more important than anyone else's because I'm officially a clear because I just claimed so. And also, I'm not claiming BLUE, just as reminder, I'm a Miller so investigating me will always turn up as a negative result for you." If you were really a Miller and had game experience, why wouldn't you just make yourself seem more of a townie? If anything, with gameplay experience, you should be able to have seen games were Millers play correctly and don't scream "I'm a Miller." I would have called this a dumbtell, since I sincerely doubt Mafia would just do this. But fact is, your whole post is made to seem like you are a Miller, and a simple "I claim Miller" would have sufficed. But you went above and beyond that: you wanted to have town not even try to examine you unless, as you said, "I expect you to keep a very close eye on me and lynch the FUCK out of me if it looks like I'm pushing Mafia objectives…", which can be translated to "not at all" because Mafia will never try to make it obvious that they are Mafia. ##Vote VisceraEyes
Pushing mafia objectives =/= being obvious scum friend, I don't know where you've been playing. Town should be keeping a super-close eye on me regardless of what I'm doing, exactly because of this claim. I'm not trying to "avoid examination", I'm trying to make the most of our DT checks. Are you saying that it would be beneficial to town somehow to "confirm" my claim by checking me only to lynch me later for me to flip exactly what I said I would? Is that what you're trying to achieve here? Having DT's actually check me? Because it seems like an awful waste to me, especially since your first reaction to the claim was "KILL IT!!!"...like, if all it's going to take is an off word or two to send me through the shredder, then why the hell WOULD a DT check me? Anyway, I'm open to suggestions as to how to handle it - I gave my suggestion.
Enough said.
He once again emphasizes that people should not take his posts for granted as town, and he should be scrutinized. I'm very confused as to what you're getting at here.
Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 07:45 VisceraEyes wrote:
On June 05 2012 07:43 Blazinghand wrote:
Ah where would we be without a hilarious/bad VE claim?
On a more serious note, given that he's either lying scum OR actually a miller, there's no reason for a DT to check him-- whether he's lying or telling the truth the result is the same.
Thank you. So which camp are you in BH? Hilarious or Bad? Because I think this is probably the best way to handle Miller right now.
Here we see that VE can get away with just about anything because people just brush it off as typical VE play. I refuse to just brush all the derpness that comes out of VE's mouth as just typical VE play.
Wut. He made a joke.
Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 09:15 VisceraEyes wrote:Now, Katina, tell me it surprises you. Go on, I could use a good laugh. ^^ I say it every game - my vote is a tool. People react to pressure, and my vote helps to lend that telling pressure. Do you think it's scummy? Because I couldn't help but notice that you left that out of your astute analysis of my votes. 
This was his post that he made in defense of his voting on three different people. As you can see it's not much.... Again he uses the "My vote is a tool" excuse. He is really playing up his "I'm VE I vote on the whole town in a day and people will just nod and smile" I'm not buying it.
But I HAVE seen him use his vote as a tool in previous games. In MTG mafia he kept changing targets too depending on who he thought he could lynch and he was townie in that game. Changing votes is a horrible reason to think someone is mafia and this case just makes me suspect you.
This is also interesting
Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:17 VisceraEyes wrote:
Yeah, I'm sold. Like, his style isn't generally regarded as good for town, so I could understand if he were trying to switch it up or something, but he's not trying to find scum either so I can't accept that as a response even if he says that's the case. We're halfway through D1 so people should have some pretty firm opinions about someone...BH hasn't displayed any opinions of anyone.
##Unvote: ghost_403
##Vote: Blazinghand
Note how he is sold on BH and ready to lynch. Then what does silly VE do?
Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 10:58 VisceraEyes wrote:
I'm not interested in lynching BH today.
He posts this later on. I thought he was sold?
You don't think BH's massively more helpful posts than before that had anything to do with it?
Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 11:53 VisceraEyes wrote:
I'm ready to lynch Pandain.
lolwut?
Who's with me?
This post followed after. He makes a silly post that he is ready to lynch Pandian. Okay, well he was playing oddly I will give him that then he proceeds to make this case:
Still fine with this.
Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 12:36 VisceraEyes wrote:Also this leads well into my thesis: "BULLSHIT!"An observation of the logical fallacy "too scummy to be scum" and it's effect on this game. I think that Furerkip is scum. He's been looking at the game in a very limited way: removing bad townies so that scum are easier to find. However, as it's been observed numerous times in the past and what has become the town consensus is that this is a terrible way to play the game because there's no benefit to killing townies. This is where the logical fallacy is rooted. In my post here
On June 05 2012 12:58 VisceraEyes wrote:I'm trying to decide if kips motivation is coming from a scum standpoint. On the one hand the suggestion that getting rid of "retarded townies" is somehow beneficial to town is blatantly anti-town and at worst indicative of furerkip pushing a mafia agenda. However, newer players get it in their mind somehow that the actions of townies can damage town somehow worse than the very real consequence of their death, which is shortening the game. Town's aim needs to be lengthening the game, not shortening it. That's why we aim for scum every single lynch, because every scum lynch increases the number of days the game lasts. What gets me the most about furerkip is the fact that he is operating under the assumption that we're clear to "kill a retarded townie" under the assumption that we have "1 Mislynch we can work with". It's in this post...
On June 05 2012 07:37 furerkip wrote:
On another note as to why I think VisceraEyes should be lynched, is because if there are 4 mafia, and 12 players, then we have 1 Mislynch we can work with, which is fine to use on retarded townies. That's just my belief when I play though. Anyone want to add anything?
...I don't understand the motivation behind this post. Like, as a townie, I'm not thinking in terms of how many townies we can kill before it's game over. I'm thinking in terms of killing scum. I aim for killing scum with the lynch, and so the number of townies "we can safely kill before LYLO" isn't even a concern to me because that number increases every lynch by my expectation, not decreases. However, all of that being said, I can see him being a newer town not really knowing what's best for town, yet acting like he does to try and establish his innocence, which IS a mark in his favor where I'm concerned. Also it doesn't make sense for scum to be so brashly antagonistic so early in the game, though I am NOT ruling it out. Ultimately, I'd be interested to see what furerkip has to say about people other than me before coming to a conclusion about where I think he's coming from. Obviously my view is skewed of him right now because his only act in the game has been attacking me.
What does everyone else think about furerkip? His stance on my claim is a pretty good one to discuss, what are your thoughts on his interpretation of my claim?
I point out both why I'm suspicious of Furerkip and also why I could be mistaken about my read. I'm conflicted, because I'm suspicious, but I feel he could be town, so I employ town to look for me and give me the "second opinion" I desire. The responses were almost unanimously in favor of "newb-town" because of how aggressively he attacks me and how anti-town his posting is. However, the first point about his aggressiveness is null because not only does he backpedal before he leaves (in spite of leaving his vote on me) in this post:
On June 05 2012 08:07 furerkip wrote:
On June 05 2012 08:00 Blazinghand wrote:
On June 05 2012 07:58 furerkip wrote:
In fact, if he turns Miller upon a lynch, then wouldn't that help us? Cop's reports can be trusted to a tee.
1) no, if he turns miller on a lynch, we just lynched a townie, which is bad. 2)
On June 02 2012 06:23 wherebugsgo wrote:Godfather+ Show Spoiler [possible role PM] + Over the years, you've gone by a number of different names. Al Capone, Dick Cheney, Julius Caesar, Elmo, and Martha Stewart all come to mind. Now, however, you want to just retire. In order to do so, though, you must first kill everyone who is not part of your family, because you are highly allergic to non-related people. They make you sick. At your disposal is your uncanny ability to appear as anything you wish. As such you can choose to appear "innocent" to all investigations, if you so wish. By night one you must decide whether you want to mask yourself to investigations. You may also communicate privately with your family member(s) name(s) here in any manner you wish. A QT has been provided at (link here) for your convenience. blahblahblah standard scum fluff here you win when you outnumber town your teammates are here and you have a QT here, you may target one person per night, causing them to display the opposite alignment to any cops who choose to investigate them for that night only. You may not target yourself. You crazy. And probably illiterate. You like feet.
Since it doesn't matter what I tell you, just kill everything. You win if you live and no one else does.
You can choose to appear innocent to all checks or have the ability to survive one KP once. You can kill one person every night, but you don't have to.
That didn't make any sense, Serial Killers and Godfathers choose to be innocent; if he's a mafia he'll be framer or goon. Lynching townies is game ending on lynch or lose situations. Lynching bad townies on ML is actually okay in my experience. Makes for better 3-way lynches. As for the framer part, you have a good point. Anyways, it seems no one agrees with me, which makes me feel like I'm tunneling, but my FoS is still VE. I'll leave it at that, and won't press it, until I see another scumslip from him.
...but he hasn't been back in the thread to continue his "brashly aggressive" style against anyone else in the game. Just parks his vote on me. And the second point of how anti-town his motivation is - is based entirely upon the logical fallacy "too scummy to be scum". There's no such thing as too scummy to be scum. For these reasons, I remain suspicious of Furerkip and anyone who has been pushing the notion that he's auto-town because of his responses deserves instant FoS, which happens to include Mr. Pandain.
He makes this case on Furerkip and just briefly mentions Pandian at the end. I thought he was ready to lynch Pandian. Why make a post against another player instead of making your case on Pandian to ensure his lynch?
Now this is the one good point you make in the entire case that I feel is scummy of VE. If Pandain is your main lynch target at that point, your post should be about Pandain, not furerkip. I don't like it and although the excuse of Emotional VE could be used (see MTG mafia for how VE can flip off). I don't think that's the case here at all just by getting accused from a newbie mafia. So VE, why did you make a massive case on furer then vote on Pandain?
Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 13:05 VisceraEyes wrote:
I'll make a case later Pandain. Suffice to say that I feel like you've been playing a scummy game all game, and it has only now become clear why.
What? Don't most people make their cases then cast their votes instead of waiting for later? I'm not sure why VE would need to wait until later to make his case. It really makes no sense. VE has been all over the place day 1. He goes after several people. He votes on one person then goes and makes accusations and cases against someone else. His play is incredibly inconsistent. He is using his "Typical Play" card to do whatever he wants. He is doing nothing but casting doubt around the town. His focus is on throwing around accusations to try and appear like he's scumhunting. He appears to be pushing a Mafia agenda. VE made his miller claim early on so no one will suspect him because he "warned" us. His play has been completely ridiculous. He shouldn't be allowed to live through the night let alone another day. VisceraEyes is Mafia. Don't let his excuses that he's VE fool you into overlooking his scummyness. He is not helping the town at all. This needs to stop. VE is over emphasizing his Millerness. It reminds me of Bill Murray in jubjub where he got checked before the mafia converted him, and he just kept emphasizing that he was innocent cause he got checked.
I feel like you're tunneling VE just over his first post here and it makes you see everything he posted in a scum light, whereas I can see a townie reasoning for every post other than that where he accused Pandain after making a long post on furer. That however is far from enough to chalk someone up as red for me. As for you Katina, I have you on a thin shade of red after this weak case, though I can see it being a case of tunneling.
Also we should kill blazinghand.
After my recent F5, let's not unless the death count is weird on N2. |
| |
|
| Artanis[Xp] Netherlands. June 08 2012 06:44. Posts 3451 | Profile Blog # |
@VisceraEyes: I'll have to go back through your posting history for that and right now I want to use the last 15 min to read up on some other people that I actually have more of a scumread on.
@Katina Going through loops to paint someone as scum who isn't exhibiting scum traits is scummy, Katina. But you also missed something: VE voted along with me on Ghost very rapidly after my case. A quick bandwagon, if you will. I'd imagine that would fit into your case and I'm curious how come you didn't notice it or emitted it out of your case.
|
| |
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
