Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 24

Author Topic: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Scumteam Wins!)  (Read 45847 times)

RangerCado

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #105 on: April 14, 2013, 11:56:45 pm »

scratch that, i'm beat. Will post more tomorrow. Also, can someone remind me of the deadline? If its monday night we may need an extension.
Logged
The best ship is the one where one of them is literally allergic to the other~
Quote from: NakaTeleeli
"A room ain't messy less you can't find nothin!"
[/quote]

Scelly9

  • Bay Watcher
  • That crazy long-haired queer liberal communist
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #106 on: April 14, 2013, 11:58:55 pm »

Day will end at 16/04/2013 (DD/MM/YYYY) at 18:00 GMT.
Logged
You taste the jug! It is ceramic.
Quote from: Loud Whispers
SUPPORT THE COMMUNIST GAY MOVEMENT!

Nerjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • A photo is worth 1,000 words... all: Guilty!
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #107 on: April 15, 2013, 12:00:10 am »

Extend

I need more time before I feel comfortable with an actual vote. Sorry but I just need time.
Logged
The demon code prevents me from declining a rock-off challenge.

Is the admiral of the SS Lapidot.

Griffionday

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #108 on: April 15, 2013, 12:21:30 am »

Mod: Can we get pokes on Deathsword and Okami?
Logged

Scelly9

  • Bay Watcher
  • That crazy long-haired queer liberal communist
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #109 on: April 15, 2013, 12:33:14 am »

Deathsword has been poked.
Logged
You taste the jug! It is ceramic.
Quote from: Loud Whispers
SUPPORT THE COMMUNIST GAY MOVEMENT!

borno

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #110 on: April 15, 2013, 03:19:00 am »

Griffionday:
No, you were building a case on how my case was trash.
It was ill put together and referenced materials you obviously hadn't read in a while; so yeah it was.  What should I have treated it as?  I react very poorly to people who seem to be being deliberately stupid, such as building a case that was awful.  So yeah I over-reacted to it; that is something that I need to work on, both here and in real life.  But please for the love of all that you hold dear, don't present me a case that is just plain idiotic (like you did with your opening pressure vote).  I will add though, your current case is a much better built one, and a far more interesting conversation to have; so thank you for that.
Yeah, well that's because it was a pressure vote. I had just thrown something together to see how you would react. It was definitely NOT a lynching vote, otherwise I would have put far more attention to it. And if you find people deliberately being stupid bad, well that happens a lot here. Mafia and its gambits and all.
Are you really saying that you can instantly find out who is the mafia from RVS questions?
I'm saying thoughtful questions are more likely to provoke answers that will reflect the mindsets of the players than questions that are all the same.  So you don't have to go to the top of the list again when trying to get reads on people.
That's not what I asked. What I asked is are you saying that these thoughtful questions instantly make you find scum?
This isn't Mafiascum you realise?
I've never played a game there, and that is the wiki that is referenced for noobs to brush up on the lingo.  Also here seems to echo that definition; and even our very own Imperial Guardsman shares that definition.  Could you please tell me where you're finding that OMGUS = Over reacting?  (Yes they're both scum tells, probably around equal weight really, but they are not the same.)

While you're at it, could you describe what you meant by tunneling being suspicious?  Thanks.
It's right there in the manual. Here.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also, tunnelling is suspicious when done in excess. Focusing on one person and one person alone over the course of a day or two is suspicious, however short-term tunnelling is useful in getting mafia to crack.
RangerCado:
Borno: The quoting in your previous post looks like it got butchered. Please try to avoid that, my head was spinning. Also, why is tunneling suspicious? It can be unhelpful in the long run, but it can also get you a good read on a possible scum. Weighing the pros and cons as it were.
Sorry. Anyway, I agree with your views on tunnelling, as said above.
UNVOTE Not a lot for me too go on here, except for Borno. He seems to be overreacting in his butchered quote post (please use the preview button guys) bordering on the line of anger or just sheer annoyance. And why the mafiascum reference? Mafia lingo can be applied from any source as long as the majority understand the meaning. And sugesting that someone can find all of the scum from RVS seems ridiculous to me. (it should have been worded better really)
Overeacting? I'm pushing him to see if he'll crack.
Why the Mafiascum reference? Because all forum mafias are different in at least one way. Similar to how we have RQS instead of RVS, some of our lingo is different as well.
Suggesting how someone can find all the scum from RVS? You're getting your people mixed up. Griffionday seems to be doing that, not me.

Where have you came up with all of this Cado? I hope that vote is just for pressure, because your case is flawed.
Logged

Griffionday

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #111 on: April 15, 2013, 04:32:50 am »

borno
Yeah, well that's because it was a pressure vote. I had just thrown something together to see how you would react. It was definitely NOT a lynching vote, otherwise I would have put far more attention to it. And if you find people deliberately being stupid bad, well that happens a lot here. Mafia and its gambits and all.
That... that... that's not how gambits work.  Gambits work because the people engaging in them are being clever, they never deliberately are stupid just for the fun of it.  They may be do it as a bluff, but that HARDLY applies to a hastily thrown together RVS phase.

That's not what I asked. What I asked is are you saying that these thoughtful questions instantly make you find scum?
No.

It's right there in the manual. Here.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Notice how Dak did not not vote for Litia, yet Litia recognises that he is still OMGUSing, and pushes him about it. Class dismissed. [sentence moved outside of the spoilers for clarity]
Okay let's refer you to the OP

Also, tunnelling is suspicious when done in excess. Focusing on one person and one person alone over the course of a day or two is suspicious, however short-term tunnelling is useful in getting mafia to crack.
A day or two real life or in game terms?

Overeacting? I'm pushing him to see if he'll crack.
Don't tell me that! It ruins the surprise!



Your last post caused me to notice a disturbing trend in your thinking; you have over the course of several posts seemed to indicate that you were not really attempting to hunt well, or that shoddy play during the hunting stage is acceptable.  For example here:
Yeah, well that's because it was a pressure vote. I had just thrown something together to see how you would react. It was definitely NOT a lynching vote, otherwise I would have put far more attention to it.
you say that you don't put any effort into your pressure, just choose a random person, apply pressure, rinse repeat.  Which is a flawed stratagy, as it weakens your pressure as the scum KNOW you don't have a bloodly clue what's going on.  In the same post you over-react to Ranger and say that his case on you is not of acceptable quality for a lynch vote, but would be fine for a pressure vote:
Where have you came up with all of this Cado? I hope that vote is just for pressure, because your case is flawed
Again, why is it acceptable to play poorly if you don't know what's going on?  Won't that just cause you to miss target and never actually figure out what's going on? 

The next one is a bit arguable either way, I still say my questions to Nerjin would be hideous pressure questions as they don't produce a feeling of being critically examined in the person bein asked.  Your opinion of course differs:
Yeah, I'll admit that I read your questions in the wrong context, as pressure questions instead of a sincere question to the IC. But using questions like that for pressure would not be soft balling. I've seen it being done before and nobody started voting the person who did it. This question is as good as any to ask in the RVS stage.

-snip-

It's the RVS stage. I had [no] strong reads, so I decided to attack you to gain some. I did misread your case, I admitted that earlier, but I sincerely did not believe that you were a mafioso and Nerjin was your obvious scum partner, nor did I really believe that you were trying to distance yourself from him.
So you decided "well, if bland questions aren't getting me anywhere, I should just randomly attack people in an obvious fashion so the scum think I'm scum-hunting.  So when I vote for THEM they'll just crack like a nut.  Oh the brilliance of my plan!"


When I decided to call your case what we both admit it was, a weak case hastily thrown together to apply "pressure" on me, rather than play the condescending older brother and "having a friendly conversation that would of helped [you] gain a better read on [me]," you raise the hew and cry of OMGUS.  This is despite the fact that all I'm doing is treating your case with contempt.  I'm not voting for you as you seem to mostly be an ignorant noob who is over-reacting to being called an idiot rather than malicious scum.  You do seem extremely confused about your terminology and what constitutes a scum-tell though, so if it's a different tell you're actually trying to accuse me of, something that doesn't require you to re-define terms for instance, there is always the list in the OP or on MafiaScum to get the terminology correct so we both know what you're saying.
Logged

borno

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #112 on: April 15, 2013, 07:04:34 am »

It's right there in the manual. Here.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Notice how Dak did not not vote for Litia, yet Litia recognises that he is still OMGUSing, and pushes him about it. Class dismissed. [sentence moved outside of the spoilers for clarity]
Okay let's refer you to the OP
Thanks for helping my case.
borno
Yeah, well that's because it was a pressure vote. I had just thrown something together to see how you would react. It was definitely NOT a lynching vote, otherwise I would have put far more attention to it. And if you find people deliberately being stupid bad, well that happens a lot here. Mafia and its gambits and all.
That... that... that's not how gambits work.  Gambits work because the people engaging in them are being clever, they never deliberately are stupid just for the fun of it.  They may be do it as a bluff, but that HARDLY applies to a hastily thrown together RVS phase.
They're not being stupid for the fun of it, they're stupid to get scum to slip up. And I don't see what you're saying, RVS is the best time to do it, since it's the time where there are no reads
Also, tunnelling is suspicious when done in excess. Focusing on one person and one person alone over the course of a day or two is suspicious, however short-term tunnelling is useful in getting mafia to crack.
A day or two real life or in game terms?
In game.
Overeacting? I'm pushing him to see if he'll crack.
Don't tell me that! It ruins the surprise!
I... wasn't talking to you, I was talking to RangerCado.
Your last post caused me to notice a disturbing trend in your thinking; you have over the course of several posts seemed to indicate that you were not really attempting to hunt well, or that shoddy play during the hunting stage is acceptable.  For example here:
Yeah, well that's because it was a pressure vote. I had just thrown something together to see how you would react. It was definitely NOT a lynching vote, otherwise I would have put far more attention to it.
you say that you don't put any effort into your pressure, just choose a random person, apply pressure, rinse repeat.  Which is a flawed stratagy, as it weakens your pressure as the scum KNOW you don't have a bloodly clue what's going on.  In the same post you over-react to Ranger and say that his case on you is not of acceptable quality for a lynch vote, but would be fine for a pressure vote:
Where have you came up with all of this Cado? I hope that vote is just for pressure, because your case is flawed
Again, why is it acceptable to play poorly if you don't know what's going on?  Won't that just cause you to miss target and never actually figure out what's going on? 
No, I'm not attempting to hunt badly, I just can't hunt well. Obviously when it comes down to the lynching I'll have refined my case and made sure everything was in order.
The next one is a bit arguable either way, I still say my questions to Nerjin would be hideous pressure questions as they don't produce a feeling of being critically examined in the person bein asked.  Your opinion of course differs:
Yeah, I'll admit that I read your questions in the wrong context, as pressure questions instead of a sincere question to the IC. But using questions like that for pressure would not be soft balling. I've seen it being done before and nobody started voting the person who did it. This question is as good as any to ask in the RVS stage.

-snip-

It's the RVS stage. I had [no] strong reads, so I decided to attack you to gain some. I did misread your case, I admitted that earlier, but I sincerely did not believe that you were a mafioso and Nerjin was your obvious scum partner, nor did I really believe that you were trying to distance yourself from him.
So you decided "well, if bland questions aren't getting me anywhere, I should just randomly attack people in an obvious fashion so the scum think I'm scum-hunting.  So when I vote for THEM they'll just crack like a nut.  Oh the brilliance of my plan!"
It would be though. I really don't see the difference between 'if you were cop N1 who would you choose' and 'why exactly do you choose to ask everyone questions instead of just one person' in terms of pressure. Add a vote onto that and just like that it's become one of the most pressuring questions in the game.

And neither am I sure how 'what do you think about changing cop with jailer', 'what do you think the most epic scumplay here was' and  'what's the most informative part of finding scum' are better than my RVS questions, which you seem to be implying heavily.

One last thing, you assume too much. I attack someone, if something is revealed, I continue my attack. If someone else more scummy pops up, I switch my focus to them, while still maintaining conversation with my original target. No strings attached.
When I decided to call your case what we both admit it was, a weak case hastily thrown together to apply "pressure" on me, rather than play the condescending older brother and "having a friendly conversation that would of helped [you] gain a better read on [me]," you raise the hew and cry of OMGUS.  This is despite the fact that all I'm doing is treating your case with contempt.  I'm not voting for you as you seem to mostly be an ignorant noob who is over-reacting to being called an idiot rather than malicious scum.  You do seem extremely confused about your terminology and what constitutes a scum-tell though, so if it's a different tell you're actually trying to accuse me of, something that doesn't require you to re-define terms for instance, there is always the list in the OP or on MafiaScum to get the terminology correct so we both know what you're saying.
Hahaha no.
Firstly, yup, I agree it was originally a weak case. No, I don't agree with your other points.
Secondly, are you saying you're treating me with contempt instead of actually engaging in civilised conversation with me? Wow.
Thirdly, overeacting? I think you're missing the point of RVS. Actually, I'll spell it out for you, since you can't seem to comprehend it yourself. In RVS, you have no reads on anyone. In RVS, you jump on any chance you have to gain reads on someone. In RVS, calling someone out for voting badly is wrong because RVS stands for RANDOM vote stage. My case against you at the start was barely anything. That's because I HAD barely anything. I hope I cleared a few things up for you.
And about me confusing my terminology, there's no-one confused here about terminology but yourself. I think that you should probably read it yourself before you give it to people and further incriminate yourself.
Logged

Teneb

  • Bay Watcher
  • (they/them) Penguin rebellion
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #113 on: April 15, 2013, 09:06:05 am »

Mod: Can we get pokes on Deathsword and Okami?
Weekends do not count as far as game time goes. I am currently busy, I'l post when I am not.
Logged
Monstrous Manual: D&D in DF
Quote from: Tack
What if “slammed in the ass by dead philosophers” is actually the thing which will progress our culture to the next step?

RangerCado

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #114 on: April 15, 2013, 11:55:39 am »

I vote for an Extension. Will post more in a couple hours. School is killer.
Logged
The best ship is the one where one of them is literally allergic to the other~
Quote from: NakaTeleeli
"A room ain't messy less you can't find nothin!"
[/quote]

Griffionday

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #115 on: April 15, 2013, 12:08:37 pm »

Thanks for helping my case.
How am I applying pressure to you again?

They're not being stupid for the fun of it, they're stupid to get scum to slip up. And I don't see what you're saying, RVS is the best time to do it, since it's the time where there are no reads
Could you give me an example of where being stupid has successfully caught a scum?

No, I'm not attempting to hunt badly, I just can't hunt well. Obviously when it comes down to the lynching I'll have refined my case and made sure everything was in order.
This could be a difference in play-style type thing, and this is actually a part of the game I've very little experience with, but shouldn't your pressure argument evolve into your lynch argument and not require a complete reworking?


The next one is a bit arguable either way, I still say my questions to Nerjin would be hideous pressure questions as they don't produce a feeling of being critically examined in the person bein asked.  Your opinion of course differs:
Yeah, I'll admit that I read your questions in the wrong context, as pressure questions instead of a sincere question to the IC. But using questions like that for pressure would not be soft balling. I've seen it being done before and nobody started voting the person who did it. This question is as good as any to ask in the RVS stage.

-snip-

It's the RVS stage. I had [no] strong reads, so I decided to attack you to gain some. I did misread your case, I admitted that earlier, but I sincerely did not believe that you were a mafioso and Nerjin was your obvious scum partner, nor did I really believe that you were trying to distance yourself from him.
So you decided "well, if bland questions aren't getting me anywhere, I should just randomly attack people in an obvious fashion so the scum think I'm scum-hunting.  So when I vote for THEM they'll just crack like a nut.  Oh the brilliance of my plan!"
It would be though. I really don't see the difference between 'if you were cop N1 who would you choose' and 'why exactly do you choose to ask everyone questions instead of just one person' in terms of pressure. Add a vote onto that and just like that it's become one of the most pressuring questions in the game.

And neither am I sure how 'what do you think about changing cop with jailer', 'what do you think the most epic scumplay here was' and  'what's the most informative part of finding scum' are better than my RVS questions, which you seem to be implying heavily.
Fair enough; my thinking behind the questions was a s follows: the question to DS was to get a read on how he perceives the relative value of the roles in the game; if there was a substantial difference with how I perceived the roles I would have continued the line of inquiry.  The question to Spectr was to see if he'd taken the time to read and enjoy several of the mafia games, and what sort of skill level he'd be coming in with.  What was the thinking behind your questions?

One last thing, you assume too much. I attack someone, if something is revealed, I continue my attack. If someone else more scummy pops up, I switch my focus to them, while still maintaining conversation with my original target. No strings attached.
The only problem is the probability of tunnel syndrome, but that is the essence of all our town plays.


Hahaha no.
Firstly, yup, I agree it was originally a weak case. No, I don't agree with your other points.
Secondly, are you saying you're treating me with contempt instead of actually engaging in civilised conversation with me? Wow.
Thirdly, overeacting? I think you're missing the point of RVS. Actually, I'll spell it out for you, since you can't seem to comprehend it yourself. In RVS, you have no reads on anyone. In RVS, you jump on any chance you have to gain reads on someone. In RVS, calling someone out for voting badly is wrong because RVS stands for RANDOM vote stage. My case against you at the start was barely anything. That's because I HAD barely anything. I hope I cleared a few things up for you.
To your first point: yeah, so how did you expect me to react to it?  I in part took offence because you

To your second point: I'm admitting that I did precisely that for the first post.  Like I mentioned before your case on me is much better now, and I'm actually sort of enjoying this in a weird way.  It's an interesting perspective to be on the wrong side of a pressure campaign. 

To your third point, I leave the following without further comment:
Unvote
RangerCado:

Is that all you have for RVS? A single question which was someone else's turned around? Seems like lazy mafia to me. Anyway, I would probably kill the lurker in this situation, as trying to discern who is mafia through the NKs in complete WIFOM and is discouraged by the ICs.

And about me confusing my terminology, there's no-one confused here about terminology but yourself. I think that you should probably read it yourself before you give it to people and further incriminate yourself.
Nope, still pretty sure I'm less confused about the terminology than you, although that's a petty fight we really should have asked the IC's about ages ago.


Nerjin & Deathsword
In the terminology of this forum, would calling someone's case in a post against you idiotic while taking the time to go through their post point by point be OMGUSing?

Please note, I'm trying to favor borno's view so that we can agree that the question pertains to the current situation.
Logged

RangerCado

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #116 on: April 15, 2013, 01:28:32 pm »

Griff: I believe OMGUSing is only when you give no good reason other than they voted you so explaining it point by point is not OMGUSing.

Borno: I know from practice there is always a flaw with my logic. I've found however, that this flaw can usually help me get a better read or reaction from someone. You've been taking this whole thing a bit too seriously with Griff, all i see is you getting more and more annoyed about Griff's answers, despite the fact that they seem to be accurate and truthful to me. If you can give me solid evidence here of Griff being scummy, or you not, i may remove my vote but for now it seems that all your doing is taking a shot in the dark without any results.
Logged
The best ship is the one where one of them is literally allergic to the other~
Quote from: NakaTeleeli
"A room ain't messy less you can't find nothin!"
[/quote]

Scelly9

  • Bay Watcher
  • That crazy long-haired queer liberal communist
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #117 on: April 15, 2013, 06:53:12 pm »

2/3 players voted for extension.
Logged
You taste the jug! It is ceramic.
Quote from: Loud Whispers
SUPPORT THE COMMUNIST GAY MOVEMENT!

swordsmith04

  • Bay Watcher
  • Communist Gnome
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #118 on: April 15, 2013, 06:59:51 pm »

My advice is to try to be your level best and not mention that it's your first game, learn from where you're not doing so great and do better on your next game.

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind.



SwordSmith: Lurking to fly under the radar... You'll be under it until someone notices, then they'll be questioning you extensively until you state some reads. Why do you think lurking helps you go unnoticed?

Out of sight, out of mind. If a player isn't posting much or at all, most people generally tend to forget about them. A lurker also has less material to examine, so there's less to get a read off of. Seems like a fairly good early game tactic for RVS, if you can shake the suspicion later on.



Imperial Guardsman: You're a vanilla townie on day 3 and everyone else has roleclaimed. No one has claimed a town power-role. One scum is still in play; the lynched scum had no role. What do you claim to be? What if someone had claimed cop? (Explain your choices, please.)

RangerCado, same scenario as IG's, but you're the solitary scum, instead. What would you claim? How would being a roleblocker or godfather affect your decision?

Fakedit: I'll vote for that Extension as well, then.

Scelly9

  • Bay Watcher
  • That crazy long-haired queer liberal communist
    • View Profile
Re: BM XL: Miner's Mafia (Full)
« Reply #119 on: April 15, 2013, 07:07:29 pm »

Day will end at 18/04/2013 (DD/MM/YYYY) at 18:00 GMT. You have 66 hours left
Logged
You taste the jug! It is ceramic.
Quote from: Loud Whispers
SUPPORT THE COMMUNIST GAY MOVEMENT!
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 24